Tuesday, March 24, 2009

[no sex please] we're british

Graphic image of a sexual act - cover the children's eyes.


The problems of inserting sex into a novel. I wasn't going to post this but not having anything else ready - well, why not?



Liz Hinds had sexual troubles recently, both in her novel and with her George who decided to mount a rottweiler.

Of the different aspects of this novel of mine, I’d give my handling of them the following scorecard, out of ten:

Action, chases, killings etc.: 7

The problem with action is the use of the staccato technique and the economy of shortish words required. No section kills speed faster than a misplaced comma or misspelt word and this requires close attention.

Suspense, tension, thrill: 5

Rather than keep the tension bubbling, I prefer to allay fears and lull you into a false sense of security, then when you’re not expecting it, in comes a horror, which I describe mundanely, in the way the perpetrator might. Overall, you remain uneasy, knowing it could come at any time.

Realistic dialogue: 7 to 9

Pathos: 4 [but I’m working on it]

Sex: 7

This is really tough to handle well and I’ve had to rewrite and adjust it over and over. For a start, one’s own sexuality must never intrude because that would turn anyone off. Once you’re clear it’s characteristic of the protagonist only and true to form, then it’s the better for it.

References to genitalia can only be used outside the sexual scenes. For example, someone will refer to vaginal politics at some point in an asexual philosophical discussion but when it comes to the actual lovemaking, these words are mysteriously absent.

These sorts of scenes make you realize just what a genius Nabokov was. How do you have a sex scene [and one of main character Emma’s, in the third book, goes for two chapters in real time] and not refer to body parts? The answer is – with a heck of a lot of editing.

How do you avoid the other end of the scale – the classic French cut to the crashing waves on the shore which is, quite frankly, cheating the reader? How do you make it suggestive without the reader feeling short-changed?

For example, it might go: ‘Sophie had just withdrawn her hand when Laurence walked into the hut …’ Laurence is an upright military type.

There was no reference anywhere to anything sexual having happened before this scene but in the context of the three people now in that room, knowing the two characters, both women, knowing their relationship and knowing that the only possible venue was the bed in that room [from a reference two chapters earlier when they were building the hut], then it’s pretty clear what had been going on. The shock and horror which now follows confirms it, still with no anatomical reference nor any name for the act.

It needs to come form nowhere, it seems to me and not be mentioned again for some time.

The scene I’m most pleased with is where one character gets some alternative passage action in but you only know it was happening from a third party prude who accidentally sees the two of them together in a rock pool and now she rushes to tell others, in the euphemistic terms you’d expect a prude to use.

The problem with this technique is that you can become too opaque, you rely too much on the reader interpreting it correctly. It also brings in the problem that if you keep the description of the physical aspect mundane, how do you build sexual tension?

The only way is to leave little alternative. If there’s a lead up to it, if a reference is made to fingers and if you distract the reader at this point, coming back to the recovery scene straight after the thing is done and describe that in detail instead, then the reader can fill in the blanks.

Gratuitousness

Nothing kills sexuality in a book and turns the reader’s attention back to the author more than a scene being misplaced, in the context of the sub-plot. If there was hardly likely to be sex there, then why have it?

I’ve tried to delay it actually. When you were expecting it, it doesn’t happen – they’re called away, something gets blown up or whatever. Eventually, when it does happen and you say, ‘At long bloody last,’ it goes for two chapters and you can bathe in it.

In one series of scenes on the run in northern England, the middle-aged ‘protector’ is thrown together with a 23 year old and the reader thinks, ‘Oh yeah, I know where this leads.’ Actually, it never does. There’s more sex which doesn’t happen than sex which does and you’re the one with the naughty mind who thought it was going to.

Never mention group sex


Sexual prowess

This is another killer. In a Mary-Sue novel, the lead man has near-magical powers and the girl is always voluptuous and gagging for it.

You have to avoid this like the plague.

If one of the three lead characters [and there are always three or four at any one time] is middle-aged, then he’s not going to excite his thirtyish partner and certain plot paths can accrue from this, for example when she does meet a younger stud. Yet she has to be happy enough in their relations overall or else she wouldn’t hang around.

These things are not easy to write. You also have to have sexual scenes between other characters, almost as closely written as with the leads but not quite because you don’t want to fragment the storyline. This takes a lot of rewriting and editing.

Finally, why is your fellow blogger, a supposed moral champion, including this sort of thing in a book anyway? Actually, I’d like to see how Cherie, Andrew Allison, Ubermouth or dearieme would include such a thing.

Perhaps they could write a short story each and we could see for ourselves.


UPDATE Wednesday

Uber has taken up the challenge - now what about you others?

Monday, March 23, 2009

[sonus] understanding issues: part 4

In Part 4, Sonus gets down to the nitty-gritty of who is to blame for this mess. An auspicious day for America today.

Part 3 of the series can be read here.




Before going into detail concerning the almost global conspiracy on the part of Fiat currency holders to suppress the price of Gold, it is important to understand the depths of insecurity that Fiat owners exist under. Many millions, probable billions of taxpayers funds have been expended over the years, to this end. This is outright theft. It has no legal mandate.

But it does show the fundamental weakness of Fiat, particularly towards the end of its life-cycle, when administrations are increasingly forced to manipulate every damn economic read-out monitor to convince the electorate of their security.

The senior political class, the MSM, and professional economists become nothing more than bare faced liars.

Greenspan spoke honestly about the characteristics of Gold before he took the Chair of the Federal Reserve Board.

And this article speaks of the total conversion of Greenspan, from an Austrian/von Mises disciple, to a Fiat currency fool whose main tool was verbosity and deception, hidden by increasing levels of debt, off-shoring, manipulated economic statistics, excessive leverage, and manipulated markets. A totally failed economic formula.

The previous two articles show the entire change of mindset that a genuine economist must go through in order to administer the fraudulent Fiat Federal Reserve system.

They must become totally subverted.

However, it is claimed that Greenspan had a motive. It involved his ego. But can an ego really subvert years of intellectual study that had obviously convinced Greenspan of the futility, fragility, and unworkability of a Fiat financial system.

I think not.

Here is a quote:

“But Greenspan was and is a member of the “Council of Foreign Relations”. He was corrupted!!

Greenspan had written a scathing article in the Sixties which attacked the kind of policies the Federal Reserve used to manipulate the economy. That he became Chairman of an institution he so despised put him in position to radically change the financial world. So, it seemed the facts fit the case of an "inside job" on the system to drive it to a state from which it ultimately would crash and splinter to pieces, making it possible to rebuild it in a better way. A truly radical scheme, it seemed, to destroy the Phoenix and then reincarnate it in Greenspan's own image.

But, despite the fact that the anticipated scenario has been playing out on a grand scale, a simpler explanation has come to light now and it makes more sense than the one we had been postulating. The answer comes from Ian Gordon. He writes in “Longwave Analyst:

My deceased friend, Teddy Butler-Henderson, met Alan Greenspan in the 1960's. They apparently discussed the Kondratieff Cycle. According to Teddy, Alan Greenspan confided that he hoped he could be Federal Reserve Chairman at the onset of a Kondratieff winter, because he felt he could defeat winter by substantially increasing the money supply and reducing interest rates to near zero. He had his wish and effected those actions following the 2000 stock market peak.

This effectively put winter on hold but massively compounded already excessive credit to the extent that people who should never have had access to loans were willingly given them. Now the credit bubble that Alan Greenspan initiated is beginning to unwind. The process will be horrific and cannot be reversed. Incidentally, Mr. Greenspan told Teddy during that same conversation that if he failed to thwart the Kondratieff winter, it would make what followed 1929 look like a `Sunday school picnic.' This is what we have to expect.

The above was written almost two years ago. And, we now have a depression greater than that of the Thirties, which is why we call it the Greater Depression. Greenspan had a goal---to eliminate the Kondratieff Winter. But, Alan Greenspan has likely completely destroyed the fabric of the world economic system by trying to avert a Kondratieff winter. His mistake was in assuming that bankers would remain as prudent as they had been in the past, rather than being mesmerized by the new money paradigm Greenspan created.

With interest rates set to zero and money flowing in an endless cascade, all a banker had to do to earn an instant fee was to make a loan to any body warmer than room temperature regardless of income documentation, then securitise the loan to get it off the bank's books. That meant instant gratification and no long term obligation to the banker himself. Greenspan should have realized that bankers are not rational, or even intelligent, creatures. He should have seen them for what they are---lab rats who could be taught to run mazes via cheezy rewards, without any thought to the ultimate consequences of this conditioned response.

This led to the current systemic breakdown we are experiencing today.

Instead of averting a normal Kondratieff winter, Greenspan created a Kondratieff "Ice Age." We will be lucky if this depression ends before 2027. The last depression lasted from 1929-1949, so we may have that long to endure this downturn. But, if the estimate that this is going to be worse than the last one proves correct, that 2027 date may be too optimistic. Of course, in the last depression, the stock market hit bottom less than three years after the depression started and trended higher from 1932, so we won't have to wait until 2027 for the stock market to bottom.”

The author of that quote makes an interesting case, but he forgets that under Greenspan a series of bubbles were blown, and Greenspan always maintained that it was not the job of the Fed to deflate bubbles, after all it was difficult enough to diagnose bubbles before they burst, but the job was to pick up the pieces afterwards.

This main change in Greenspans methods came shortly after his “irrational exuberance” speech, in 1996, after a visit by Mr Rubin. One wonders what was said at their meeting.

After several of these bubbles it must have been obvious, despite Greenspans ego, and outside pressure, to a skilled economist and Fed banker, that serial bubbles were not the answer, and a reversion to intelligent economics would have been the policy. This obviously did not happen, in fact, Greenspan became a cheer-leader for the securitisation of debt and its sale around the globe. He had obviously been corrupted!!

Concerning the details of the developed corruption resulting from free “money”, Karl Denninger speaks his mind.

Well said, Karl.

Let me make the point a little stronger.

As Chairman of the Fed, Greenspan had oversight responsibility for the banks. They were obviously dealing in OTC derivatives of various types. These were totally opaque and unregulated. Banks, allegedly, are regulated bodies, and were thus in breach of their charter. Greenspan not only failed in oversight responsibilities, he was the cheer-leader for their advancement, globally, and as a reasonably intelligent economist would have been perfectly aware of the consequences of a completely derivative based shadow banking system, that is now imploding, and is sucking the REAL WORLD into an economic/financial black hole. J P Morgan balance sheet has $88 Trillion of derivatives, of various types. European clearing banks have a £16.3 Trillion POTENTIAL LOSS, that no-one dare own-up to. Bernanke, as new Fed chairman also has oversight responsibilities. He has also failed to fulfil those responsibilities, by not preventing banks from participating in these instruments.

WHY?

Bernanke was appointed because of his previous published papers concerning central bank actions to get out of, or avoid, a great depression. The current debacle was known, anticipated, years ago! But more, - the current debacle was PLANNED and EXECUTED years ago!

Who are the AIG counter-parties?


Karl Denninger wades in as usual with well made points.

Before the Sub-Prime broke, the XAU, as a proxy for gold miners, was systematically taken down, month after month, when the price of gold was rising rapidly, and the share prices of other non-gold miners was also rising. A completely counter intuitive move.

It was done to counter the anticipated rise in the share price of miners, in a repeat of the late 1970s, (and other actions were taken against Gold), that the upcoming financial collapse would create. Someone had prior knowledge of these events.

Intrepid Rob Kirby explains.

Who could afford to do this? Who would benefit?

Who wanted to avoid the public judgement that the Gold Price delivers on failing Fiat currencies? Logic says it is the “owners” of the Fiat system.

Early in the life of nulab, Chancellor Brown sold off a significant part of the UK gold reserves, deliberately advertising the fact globally, which served to depress the world price further. Significantly, this was round about the time of LTCM troubles, and the Eddie George comment! He currently defends the action as all simpletons do, by asserting that he would do it again, thereby confirming suspicions concerning the logic of his reasoning processes, and his devotion to the Fiat. He was “Bought” very early into his bout as Chancellor!!

Blair now works as a “consultant” for J P Morgan!

Recently Bear Stearns was “taken over” by JPM, with a subsidy from the Fed, of some $30B. During fractious negotiations, which involved the Fed, Geithner, and a few other familiar names, someone omitted to inform Bear that 24 hours later the Fed would be opening a window that would have allowed Bear, an investment bank to borrow from the Fed. Well, hoodathunkit?

Bear was assassinated, because they were long gold. Significantly long. The cancellation of Bear's long, and increased shorting took gold down significantly, another counter intuitive move at a time of financial upheaval.

Once again, Rob Kirby takes up the story.

Understand that JPM is a tool of the Fed. Here is a direct quote:

“The tag team of JP Morgan as the monster and Goldman Sachs as its harlot represent a powerful pair that is more responsible for destroying the entire US financial system than 95% of the American public has any awareness. The colossus of JP Morgan is a monster, a predator, nurtured by pond scum. It has gobbled up Chase Manhattan, Manufacturers Hanover, Chemical Bank, Bank One, and more over the past two decades. Their profound presence in keeping the US Treasury Bond yields down can never be understated. They do so by managing 85% of the credit derivatives on the planet. They distorted usury prices, as in price of borrowed money, thus aggravating the LIBOR (London Inter Bank Offered Rate) market in a very visible manner. The oblong usury prices have contributed mightily to the destruction of the US Economy itself, created bubbles, killed jobs, and wrecked savings.

The ugliest hidden activity for the JP Morgan monster is to manage the Bank of Baghdad, where they manipulate the crude oil price, where drug trafficking money is funnelled from Afghan sales, under management by the US Military aegis (guys with no uniform stripes or markings). Maybe such illicit money offsets Credit Default Swap losses, making America strong for freedom and liberty. Goldman Sachs is clearly the investment banking agent for the US Govt, given the privilege of insider trading in unspeakable proportions. They manage the Plunge Protection Team efforts to intervene in financial markets, making America strong for freedom and liberty. The new kid on the block is the FDIC. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp is steering fresh meat into the corralled JP Morgan stockyards for slaughterhouse feeding. The label of harlot might be too kind, especially from the perspective of senior bond holders. But JP Morgan requires fresh meat (capital) periodically, thus making America strong for freedom and liberty. Never mind the fires caused after its hearty meals and flatulence.”

“The maze of unscrupulous, devious, and insidious fraudulent business units of JP Morgan is worthy of a 500-page chapter in the US financial history treatise, someday to be written. See the complete distortion of usury costs (interest rates kept low) by JPM, with such a volume of Interest Rate Swaps that was sufficient to run the Bond Vigilantes out of town. Skewed cost of money is the foundation for speculative bubbles. See the management of US Treasury Bonds by JPM on behalf of the Federal Reserve, along with the $2.2 trillion that they sold above and beyond the officially stated US Govt issuance of US Treasury Bonds. That is called counterfeit evidence, the records for which were lost in the third building at the World Trade Centre. See the management by JPM of the Bank of Baghdad. Twice as much money is missing from the Iraq Reconstruction Fund than was stolen by Bernie Madoff, up to $100 billion being estimated. And never overlook the financial tentacles that extend from Afghan operations on the contraband side, to the Bank of Baghdad as the clearing house.”

And speaking of JPM derivatives …

Recently J.P.Morgan announced profits of $5 Billion, on the trading of derivatives of $87 Trillion.

There is no justification for a commercial bank, with regulated depositors' funds insured by the government, to be speculating on a level this great. 
One also has to wonder who actually 'lost' in those derivatives bets that JP Morgan made, who the counterparties were. How many losses were taken by AIG, Bear Stearns, and Lehman? 
Who is really being bailed out here? Aren't we paying for JP Morgan's "winnings?" 
 
If they speculate and lose, who pays for that? The tax payer. 
 
What is a bank doing gambling in unregulated over-the-counter derivatives involving commodities and financial instruments worth $89 Trillion?

This figure dwarfs the GDP of the entire world. 
Getting paid by the public whether they win or lose it appears. 
 
When a single player with deep pockets and government guarantees is placing bets in markets on a scale, that is the very definition of moral hazard. 
 
Until the Obama Administration takes strong steps to bring back Glass-Steagall, and put hard limits on the banks there will be no reform and no recovery. 
 
The US is 60 ish days into the Obama Administration. There is little or no systemic reform. Just a continuation of crony capitalism under Bernanke, Summers and Geithner.

To return to the main topic, - Notice also that HSBC is the other main holder of derivatives.

And HSBC is a Market Making Member of LBMA, along with a few other familiar names.

The London Bullion Market Association sets the Gold price twice per day, and it is a completely private setting, not open to public sight.

Is the LBMA twice daily setting of the Gold price also deliberately depressed by shorting or central bank selling via Bullion Banks?

Who knows, only the LBMA.

And that is wrong!

Rob Kirby goes further in this link and examines the activities of central banks leasing arrangements. Central banks lease out bullion as a way to suppress the price, knowing that the gold will probably be sold. They would only be confident in doing that if they were confident that the gold could be re-purchased for a lesser price in the future, and returned to them. This arrangement can be lucrative for banks struggling for profitability.

I'll hand over to Rob.


“Gold price suppression is not simply a “paper game” where relentless amounts of price suppressive “futures” can be sold forever; the price suppression scheme also requires that the price riggers expend some physical gold too – to make the ponzi-esque selling of futures “believable.” The physical gold which is mobilized to accomplish this is typically sovereign gold that is “leased” from Central Banks.

Leasing is preferred to outright sales because you can only outright sell something “once” – and it is gone. By leasing, the physical gold leaves the vault to be sold in the open market but Central Banks replace the missing physical gold with an I.O.U - for accounting purposes – and claim that they still posses the same amount of physical bullion! So, by leasing gold instead of “outright sales,” Central Banks can and do double count [cheat] – a la Enron – their gold stocks!”

Yes, they do double count leased out Gold, BUT THE RULES OF THE IMF AND BIS ALLOW IT.

Strange, don't you think?

Is it designed to mislead researchers?

Hyper inflation is a CURRENCY event and moves from deflation where there is a sudden loss of confidence in the currency creating a sudden loss of value, via the exit door., as in Iceland recently.

Eric de Carbonnel is a fine blogger who we will visit shortly, however Rob picks up a problem in one of his blogs.

Interesting, ain't it?

This is a chart to look at regularly, it is the price of Gold over three days. Regularly viewing this chart shows in which market the manipulation is taking place.

Finally for Rob.

Here Eric de Carbonnel speaks about the dangers of Gold ETFs. Many hold no gold, and are secured by Gold derivatives, thus there is a counter part risk.

Note that the providers mentioned, JPM, and Barclays, are members of LBMA, as is HSBC Bank, USA, and as we have seen, JPM and HSBC also deal heavily in Gold derivatives on the short side.

Seems very risky to me. At some point the Banks will probably blow. What then?

The only Gold to hold for investment purposes, is PHYSICAL GOLD.

Take a simple example.

You live in Iceland.

You go to bed on D day, minus one, with your left hand holding 100 units of currency, and your right hand holding gold to the value of 100 units of Icelandic currency.

You wake the following morning, D day.

In your left hand your 100 units of Icelandic currency can only now purchase 20 units of yesterdays Icelandic currency imports.

Your right hand can still purchase 100 units of yesterdays Icelandic imports.
However, your right hand is now worth 5 times yesterdays Icelandic units of currency, and can purchase 5 times yesterdays value of home produced Icelandic goods.

Join the EU for safety, and you lose your only industry to foreign fishing fleets.

Pity no-one thought of owning Gold!

When, not if, devaluation comes to the UK, caused by Browns stupidity, the above scenario will play out. The degree of change will vary, the principle of devaluation, happening slowly now, remains.

GATA is an American action group that has campaigned for a decade against the obvious institutional suppression of the Gold Price. In a recent series of articles they cover the entire Gold suppression scenario, with an explanation that involves corruption at the highest levels of the US administration.

Upon appointment, Clinton was disturbed that bond holders would be rewarded by higher interest rates, which would in turn add costs to his democratic voter base. Robert Rubin advised that they should allow the leasing of Gold by the Central Banks to the Bullion Banks, who would then either use them as backing to short paper Gold, or use it for outright Gold sales. This would have the advantage of depressing the price of Gold, and, since the Bullion Banks would use the profits from shorting, or the receipts from the sale of Gold to invest in Government Bonds, it would also suppress interest rates, so benefiting the Clinton voter base.

The GATA link is here.

And here.

Certain analysts realised three years ago that the leasing and disposal of Central Bank Gold Reserves had been going on for over a decade, and the remaining Central Bank Stocks must be heavily depleted, thus creating a future scarcity of Gold, as they considered that Central Banks would be loath to sell off the remain Gold stocks, thus altering the Global supply paradigm. A future price increase in Gold was therefore anticipated.

Their report is here.

Eric de Carbonnel has been doing some more digging, and seems to have found interesting evidence that the US has no stocks of Gold remaining other than that melted down in the 1930s from confiscated bullion and coins, and is now engaged in bullion swaps with European Central banks, for US gold “in deep storage”, which is assumed to be gold not yet mined but contracted for with US miners on US soil.

Here is the link.

On the face of it, if true, this is political dynamite. National Gold Reserves are regarded as the property of the entire population. There was a loud outcry when Brown last sold part of the UK Gold reserves, in very dubious circumstances for very dubious motives, and against professional advice.

In the current”hunt the banker” atmosphere, if Brown has sold any more Gold reserves, and it can be seen that evil banks have benefited from this sale......... I seriously doubt there will be upcoming audits, just more spin. Nevertheless, the public would also ultimately blame Brown for further Gold mistakes.

(Just as an aside, it's a bit rich that Brown should be chasing and spinning on Bank executive pensions, when he is the one person most credited with the National Destruction of pension schemes by his pension-grab when first elected. And that figure now runs into many £ billions.) And also his total debasement of State Pensions by indexing them to blatantly fraudulent inflation indices.

Paul Volker, (Chair, Group of Thirty) who was responsible for beating inflation in the early eighties is on record as saying that his one regret concerning that era was that he failed to take the measures to cap the price of gold. Gold had jumped to $800/ounce at that time ($2,000 inflation adjusted now). Coincidently, it was Volkers economics that started the massive shift of wealth to the top 1% of the top 10% of the US population, and destroyed the wealth of the US Middles Class over the following years, requiring the increasing levels of credit (debt) that we now see, in an effort to maintain standards of consumption.

The global financial system is far more precarious right now, so we could say that the capping has been successful, but the intended, and unintended consequences of that act have contributed to the ultimate demise of the entire planet.

Tinkering by fools may work in the short term, but in the long term basic forces reassert themselves with a vengeance.

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration.

"How long can the US government protect the dollar’s value by leasing its gold to bullion dealers who sell it, thereby holding down the gold price? Given the incompetence in Washington and on Wall Street, our best hope is that the rest of the world is even less competent and in even deeper trouble. In this event, the US dollar might survive as the least valueless of the world’s fiat currencies."

Adrian Douglas is a professional markets analyst who writes regularly, and has just completed a major TV interview for Russian Television concerning the Fiat owners suppression of the price of Gold. (I mentioned earlier the Russian Gold deposited in western banks seemed to have vanished, sold or leased away in exchange for an Fiat IOU that is about to be devalued if presented in currency terms).

He has his own website, subscription for professionals, but among the free tempters, he offers are some very interesting PDFs.

One

Two

Three

The interview on Russian TV has not yet been screened, I will try to get a link, or copy of the transcript.

Here it is - not as detailed as I thought it would be.

I find it interesting and depressing that this entire episode of fraud on a global scale goes totally unreported in the western MSM, and where the subject of monetary metals is raised, it is banal reporting matched only by the ignorance/self interest of the interviewees, yet Russian TV is prepared to film in-depth analysis. A real pity they chose not to show more!

Signs of the times!

The prices of the monetary metals, despite assertions to the contrary by the Fiat owners, are a central part of the global monetary/financial/economic system. Their manipulation by the Fiat owners, in order to also affect other system monitoring alarm bells, has played a significant role in the destabilisation of the entire global financial system.

As the Fiat system entered a more dangerous final stage, the suppression of gold and the resultant investment in bonds proved inadequate to hide the alarm bells describing the fiat collapse. Thus the growth of Derivatives, encouraged by Fed support, and its global seeding of financial destruction! 


Is California really Blue? Refreshment Break.

Halcyon Days. 
 
 


Part 5 of the series can be read here.


It says 'written by James Higham' below. Actually, it was written by Sonus but I can't reformat the author in my template.

Sunday, March 22, 2009

[vlad says] always take your dog with you

[early mist] and the borderline of reality


Glancing outside the window at 05:04 on Thursday, it was a real Holmes scene – mist enveloping the street lamps, dull yellow glow on the pavement below [wish it were cobblestoned and a first hansom cab would clatter by].

Between two views, one of the sea and one of the street, lies an old brick building with the glow of far off street lamps silhouetting the cobblepot chimneys above wet slate roofs.

This is the England of the storybooks.

Appropriate scene to write of the people behind the coming troubles. It doesn’t matter what I write or Sonus or any blogger, if the reader has a mindset which precludes belief.

My mate is a good case in point.

He’s read most of what I’ve written politically and interprets it in terms of his background reading and intuition, which is quite pragmatic and worldly. His visiting would comprise DK, Theo, Wat Tyler and so on. So when I start writing of banking cabals and the Bilderbergers or of Christianity, he tunes out.

Somewhere inside, he tells himself we can’t know, therefore best not to worry about it and I can’t blame him for that. With an uncanny grasp of the issues of day to day life, seeing a system, for example and able to foresee, quite accurately, future problems in that system, his is a hands-on world and he excels in that world. He thinks laterally and finds solutions; his is a different slant.

Mine has been a long journey, part of it in the metaphysical, which is no less real once you’ve been there and so my eyes see it a bit differently, taking on board his views, with which I concur but also others as well.

When you put absolutely no chains on what you’re prepared to consider might have elements of truth to it, you start to develop a filtration system as well, a kookiness control which, in the end, filters out the true nutters and catches, like a receiving dish, small nuances hidden within the static. Then you yourself appear, to others, to be off the planet but actually what you are doing is investigating, investigating, investigating, travelling down paths many don’t wish to go, all in the interests of finding out.

This is the scientific method – considering any statement, however outrageous, whoever made it and testing it for corroboration, reading the debunking first to get one’s bearings and then looking at the argument.

In this, my mate actually agrees. He asks me if I know why he’s against the death penalty. Answer – because we can’t definitely know the guilt or innocence of the person on that specific crime, however bad he is in general terms.

So, in a similar spirit, I consider the following statements about Them:


[They] have SIX branches of learning, and the spiritual (where the
sacrifices are done) is only ONE part of what they do. I was in Sciences, and
used to make fun of people who specialized in spiritual. Yes, everyone has to go
to spiritual rituals during certain high days, but I tried to stay as far from
it as I could …

The Celtic branch of spiritual believes that power is
passed at the moment between life and death … Opening portals and dimensions: I
know, this sounds like stuff from a sci-fi film, but these people really believe
that there are other spiritual dimensions, and that to pass into them, first a
major sacrifice is done to "open a portal" …

We occasionally had to "put
down" these training failures, by using a lethal injection of air, or insulin.
The person was then set up in a "fatal crash" or "fire" to dispose of the body.

Any failures are heavily punished, to say the least. One of my jobs was
teaching younger trainers the masking effects of hypnotic drug combinations, and
how to recognize subtle clues of distress.

The Phoenix is one of their
highest military and spiritual symbols. If you see a German eagle, too, this is
a huge sign. Certain companies will use a phoenix as their logo, especially red
on black, or the reverse, this is a huge sign … The Star of David, believe it or
not, is one of the highest … symbols, with a circle around it. Called "the great
seal of Solomon" it is used at the highest ceremonies … Earth, water, and fire
are used in a lot of ceremonies … "The Fifth Element" movie was based on it.

Stopping pornography and child prostitution and drug smuggling and gun
running would take a huge chunk out of their profits … Why isn't child
pornography stopped? We have the evidence, law enforcement knows it exists, yet
it is a multi-billion dollar industry. HOW do these people "hide" from justice
and capture? Why don't the police stop them? Because these people aren't stupid.
They work under secrecy. They change locations frequently, and kill those who
talk to law enforcement. Bribes and other means are used to cover their tracks,
and they hire excellent lawyers.

There are children as young as three
and four being used in pornographic films, beaten black and blue if they refuse
to comply. To see a slightly older child with an electric dog collar around its
neck, shocked when it tries to "escape" and treated as an animal, to the
laughter of the adults and older children around it, these are the pictures that
any survivor … holds in his heart …

My younger sister remembers being
tied up on a stone altar at the age of 3, with a gag in her mouth, and being
raped. She also remembers our paternal grandmother taking her to friends, who
used her sexually at the ages of 3 to 5. She became an alcoholic at age 13,
after trying to commit suicide 7 times by age 12. My older brother has NO
memories of ANYTHING AT ALL before age 20, his life is a complete blank. He does
believe that our father was a perverse and strange man.

I am a
professional writer in the medical field, was a registered nurse for 18+ years,
and currently work as an ESL teacher, health educator, and freelance author

Now I didn’t say I believed any of that. I just said that I considered it, as I would anything else you cared to offer evidence for. If you write on your blog that there are wormholes, portals, that there is such a thing as nanobot technology – well, it needs to be considered. If you say that cloning a human embryo is possible, well, why not? Why would there not be? Because my mind can’t encompass it? Not a good enough reason in my book.

If you take the six branches of learning mentioned in the quote, then Sonus’s articles fall into the economic branch and explain, quite cogently, what is actually happening in the world of money, the nuts and bolts of it, so to speak. That is as far as most people, within their area of expertise, are prepared to go. Fair enough. Brown and Obama fit into that scenario and the crimes of the former are mindboggling in their audacity and in the British public’s failure to see them, despite the fiskings by many fine bloggers.

Staying for a moment in the world most people can mentally handle, what of Common Purpose? Why would the ODPM be setting up, through an appalling person, Julia Middleton, a network of people who were ‘prepared for leadership’ within their regions? Now even CP admits that that is what they’ve been doing, pan-Europe.

Why? Why the need to place these people within regional assemblies? Even the average Brit remembers the regional assembly attempt.

Why the need? What sort of ‘leadership’ are they actually preparing for? It’s a simple enough question. Why the cloak and dagger? Why don’t they come out and state what they teach at their schools?

My mate suddenly says and Wolfie would surely concur, that these people will not succeed because they can’t even agree amongst themselves. Wolfie says I’m paranoid. My mate says that they’re all jockeying for prime position in this brave new world and there is ample evidence that he’s right. Just look at Merkel’s positioning of Germany and France’s refusal to let Germany become ascendant, e.g. in Airbus.

My mate continues that the recruiting in the past decade, in this new world of worthless degrees and NVQs, even to be a street sweeper, has meant that overqualified mediocrities with no hands-on ability are occupying all the key echelons.

I add the corollary … hence the data losses, the government department bungling, the gravy trains, the marginalization of people who actually do have the experience and talent.

Perhaps that’s just sour grapes on my part though. LOL.

Saturday, March 21, 2009

[hats] don't leave home without one



Nobody should leave home without a hat. They define us, protect us, keep the rain off us but which to choose? You could start downmarket, with a leather cap:

... or try an Akubra, Brit style:

Failing that, you can try it Aussie style:

... or American. For some people, the hat is them:

You don't even need a hat - Tess sports her own 'non-hat' design here:

... and this scruff, Nureyev, opts for the beanie or toque which has seen better days:

Of course, the trilby and its cousins are a step up in the right direction:

... but to really cut a dash, the bowler with traditional uniform:

... and not so traditional might be your thing.

Please don't wear the apple to the front though. It's meant to hang elegantly from the rear brim:

Some prefer the historic touch:

... or the dashing sheikh:

... but all black, I'm afraid, is strictly non-u:

Wide-brimmed hats are always fashionable either for him:

... her:

... or for the French, where line of vision is not a primary consideration:

If you're the outgoing type, you can adorn it with Moulin Rouge plumes:

Or just sport the plumes on their own. Let's face it, some people just cannot wear headgear:

... and for some, the hairstyle itself is the trademark:

It's hard to see the Banksy face mask going together with a hat:

When all is said and done, it's your choice. My personal favourite is the little number below:


[flight dynamics] twist, dihedral and wingtips

Great article on 2 December 2001, at aerospacewebdotorg, by Doug Jackson.

In answer to the question, ‘Why does an aeroplane’s wing twist?’ he addresses two issues: twist and the dihedral. Perhaps he should also address ‘angle of attack’.

Flight theory

If you look at a wing, as in the diagram below, you see a flat base and a curved top. As the air flows faster over the curved section, this creates low pressure and the difference from the high pressure base creates lift.

After that comes the Lift/Drag ratio and that depends on a number of things. Suffice to say that the higher the ratio, the more effective is the power.

If the base of an aeroplane’s wing is horizontal to the ground, the plane’s not going to take off; in a not dissimilar way, a sailboat will not go directly upwind. So the whole wing needs angling upwards towards the leading edge and this is angle of attack.



Twist

Doug Jackson writes:

In most aircraft, the airfoil twists down as we move along the wing further from the fuselage. This is referred to as "washout." Twist is applied to wings so that the outboard section of the wing does not stall first.

When an aircraft is pitching nose up and increasing its angle of attack, the airflow over the wing eventually reaches a point where it becomes turbulent, causing a loss in lift. By twisting the outboard portion of the wing down, the stall is delayed in that area, simply because the angle of attack is lower in that region.

Why is the outboard portion of the wing so important? It is because that is where the ailerons are located. By maintaining lift on the outboard portion of the wing, the pilot is still able to maintain roll control of the aircraft in the event of a stall.

This phenomenon of twist is well known in the sailing world too and is one reason why the solid wing boats, even Cogito:




… will not replace the soft wing:




… that reason being the capability of a soft sail to twist at the top. Cogito, in the top pic, was able, at great expense, to create twist and thus was untouchable on the race course. It’s the world champion.

Back to aeroplanes.

Dihedral

Dihedral is the upward angle of the wing from the vertical when seen from the front, or nose of the aircraft. If each wing is angled 5° up from the horizontal, then the wing is said to have 5° of dihedral.

Here is an example of dihedral:




The opposite of dihedral is called anhedral, and, of course, refers to a wing that is angled down. A good example of an aircraft with geometric anhedral is the Sea Harrier:




Effective dihedral is a little different:

Many aspects of an aircraft's configuration can effect its effective dihedral, but two major components are wing sweep and the wing location with respect to the fuselage (such as a low wing or high wing). As a rough estimation, 10° of sweepback on a wing provides about 1° of effective dihedral, while a high wing configuration can provide about 5° of effective dihedral over a low wing configuration.

All this talk of anhedral and dihedral leads to the question of why one would want use either of these on an aircraft. The simple answer is they provide lateral (roll) stability. Let's consider an aircraft rolling to the right. As it does so, the right wing produces more lift than left wing, causing the rolling motion. At the same time, however, this increased lift creates an increased drag, which causes the aircraft to yaw to the left, an effect known as adverse yaw. This is why pilots need to apply rudder in the direction of the turn.

Now let's consider the advantages of dihedral. When an aircraft with dihedral is yawing to the left, the dihedral causes the left wing to experience a greater angle of attack, which increases lift. This increased lift tends to cause the aircraft to then return to level flight. I know this is very confusing in words, but if you stick your arms out in the air and recreate all of these motions, it should make sense.

The end result of all of this is that dihedral tends to make an aircraft more stable.

For some aircraft, like fighters, stability really isn't a good thing. A slight instability in an aircraft leads to increased maneuverability, which is highly desirable in fighter and attack aircraft. This is why most aerobatic planes and military fighters utilize some amount of anhedral.

I know the Spitfire used dihedral:




… and was a fighter but almost all modern fighters use anhedral, e.g. the F18:




Large transports have both a high wing and a considerable amount of wing sweep, both of which create a large amount of effective dihedral. To counteract this large amount of dihedral, some geometric anhedral is required. Otherwise the aircraft would be overly stable, making turns extremely difficult, and an aircraft that can only fly in one direction isn't much use to anyone.

Anhedral applies to bombers as well.

Wingtips

It’s been shown in both the aeronautical world and in the aquanautical, that if you put perpendicular or angled tips on the ends of the wings [foils], you increase their efficiency.

This is because of the theory of flight. Those unbalanced pressures above and below the wing [or to windward and leeward in a yacht], cause air to try to make its way around the tip to the other side, creating vortices and drag.

To avoid this, rivet a vertical panel on the end of the wing and you’ve instantly increased the wing’s efficiency. This especially applies to yacht keels and was the centre of the controversy over Australia II’s victory in the America’s Cup in 1983.

So, you either know all this already or now you’ll look more closely at wings next time you’re near them.