Thursday, 10 June 2021

A Dangerous Conflation, Socialism = Communism, Divide and Rule! #Socialism #Communism #Capitalism #Anarchism #Schumacher #G7Summit #TropesandMemes #CryptoCurrencies #Emergence #Economics #LoS


Mount Recycle-more

"Two days until the G7 summit begins in the seaside village of Carbis Bay, and in this corner of Cornwall – a holiday idyll fast resembling a military Green Zone – rumours are rife.

One doing the rounds suggests surface-to-air missiles are to be installed somewhere behind the local cricket club. Another has it that American warships will soon join the British naval vessel which has already appeared off Porthmeor Beach. There’s a story that one chip shop has received an order for a thousand fish suppers on Friday night*.

Leaders of the world’s seven biggest advanced economies – including US president Joe Biden and Germany chancellor Angela Merkel – will be here and in neighbouring St Ives for diplomatic talks this weekend."…

“One complaint, in particular, is raised time and again: the sheer incongruity of so much taxpayer money being lavished on a three-day event in what is, despite pockets of affluence, the poorest region in England. Almost a third of children in St Ives live in poverty, while, across Cornwall, annual wages are £4,000 below the national average. Against this backdrop, the summit’s security bill alone is estimated to top £70 million: some 5,500 police officers and hundreds of army personnel will be here.” Rumours swirl and disquiet grows as locals says G7 is ‘last thing Cornwall needs’

*Yeah their only customers will be huge and all called “Brad” or "Bret"!

This being just another pill-to-swallow having been pre-medicated with the trope that; “socialism is communism”, quote; “That we now see how America continually, “makes its war on its children” should also give credence to the notion that the New World never did truly sever its links with the old but simply substituted a dictatorial republican hierarchy for a monarchical one” (go to: "Arafel": Part. 2 #WashingtonPost #FloridaSchoolShooting ). Since Reaganomics in the U.S and Thatcherism in the U.K the notion that one may conflate socialism with communism has been promulgated with increasing vigour and enthusiasm by the data-vampires and opinion formers giving the idea the appearance of a meme, ignorance is no defence under law, however, the populace may better understand the dangers of such conflation if the results are made clear to them.



The photo above is of E.F. Schumacher (both the college and the institute which bear his name are located in the West Country not a million miles from the venue for the G7 summit, go to: &,  a “mixed economy” man who expounded the theory that the individual, communal and social realms need to be in balance, each with equal “weight” and import being ascribed to them, within an economy that perforce is dynamic. Thus capital, community and society form an equilateral triangle that provides the stability necessary for the emerging economy and the “cross-pollination” that can occur within such a system ensuring the biodiversity that is the engine of sustainability. A good exemplar of the principle is the fuel supply issue for, as we are now experiencing, over-reliance on any resource creates a monoculture (brittle and hugely destructive when they fail), introducing massive instability, therefore, it is surely sensible to attempt to diversify in terms of energy production. It’s an old story, in order to make use of more sustainable (and concomitantly less environmentally destructive), resources initial investment in infrastructure is essential, cleaning up our mistakes after we have made them being, of-course, a horribly inefficient option, however, these problems only occur when we attempt to exploit resources not when we use them sensibly.

It is in order to continue to exploit resources of all kinds that the attempt has been made to convince the global electorate that a socially dominant economic model is the same as a communal one. It’s called “divide and rule”, which in this case means “freedom or slavery", and is sold to the people as a simple choice between the reassuring gewgaws of the neo-liberal state or enslavement in a drab totalitarian one (anarchy being “Bellum omnium contra omnes”, the terrible “war of all against all”, is Khaos of-course).

Quote; ““Either/or democracy is the dalliance of the totalitarian”” Go to:

Socialist systems rely on the institutions of the state (many of which being pre-existing), to run the economy, communist systems rely on communes to dictate to (and often form), state institutions. The notions are very different, for a socialist there is no “communal filter” between the individual and the insitutions of the state but for a communist the state doesn’t exist without one (the capitalist, of-course, their actions being anathema to community, doesn’t believe in society at all). This exemplifies the veracity of the maxim; “the trouble with “-isms” is that they are full of “-ists”!”

Schumacher and emergent economic theory allow for no dominant political ideology. So where is democracy? Well for one thing it ought to be clear by now that politics the Industrial Revolution model is on its last legs, the G7 summit will be tackling the global problems of environmental damage, lack of biodiversity and sustainability issues that barely got a mention in the mainstream media (MSM), a hundred years ago. This macrocosm shines a light on the microcosm of our individual politics, whereby, we will become aware that democracy is process, it must always be thus for should we ever manifest “true democracy” we will have achieved totality, quote;

“Hence “lack of dimension” is only apparent regarding individual #BlackHoles because lack of totality denies them dimensional non-existence…the (SO-CALLED!), #EmergenceTheory guys won’t like that but other universes CAN ONLY EXIST AS POTENTIALS THEY MAY NOT MANIFEST #timesarrow

“Why that’s important is? Because of their #Gravitational effects…!”

“Thus black holes retain their? “Gravitational effects” even #Hawking had to begin to move away (re: “radiation”), from “singularity” (”'coz there’s lots of 'em"), totality doesn’t have the problems because (esp. given #relativity), it can remain UN-manifest…"

“…and is known ONLY by it’s effects and only when #Quantum is applied (no work it out), as opposed to black holes which are? Black #darkenergy #darkmatter, totality allows of NO continuum (of-course), …”

Nb. Therefore black-holes may partake of singularity and pertain to totality but they still retain a subjective existence.

“We” are no longer removed from the equation this is the legacy of quantum research…Currently we constantly look for answers “outside”… paralleling the (unsustainable), extraction of our economic (and political), answers from “without”… (in-fact -of-course-, the science, politics and economics, are all aspects of the same problem)" Go to:

Our focus therefore becomes on “democratisation” not as an enforced process but as a principle the benefits of which are made manifest by entering into dialogue with all the organs of the body politic. This is consistent with the notion of “emerging economy”, quote;

““unsustainable economy” is an oxymoron” No? I thought about this…many would argue (and many on the “left” also), that “short-term” “profit-taking” exploitative economies exist…but do they? Can we truly call them “economies”? For one thing; “how long is your piece of string?” We define economies by describing relationships (they are “relative”), there is a chronological imperative concerned, one cannot (surely), argue that a 5 year “un-sustainability” is an economy whilst a 3 month one is not! 

Economy, of-course, also can be “of effort”, in other words efficient…there is no “economy of effort” in an inefficient system, therefore, we can argue that any economy that is not sustainable does not exist!

If one “economises” one makes one’s actions more efficient…literally one creates an economy.

One can argue that the economy existed for a five year period…but one cannot say it was “un-sustainable” for the same period…period

…and, therefore, sustainability is a necessary component of economy

The system is “open ended” (#opensource), it is emergent

Quote; "Words Based on the Eco- Root Word

Following is a list of words based on the Eco- Root Word:

1. Ecoactivist: One who actively opposes the pollution or destruction by other means, of the environment.
2. Ecobabble: Using the technical language of ecology to make the user seem to be ecologically aware.
3. Ecobiology: The study of the relationships of organisms to their natural environments.
4. Ecobiosis: The conditions pertaining to a mode of life within a specific habitat
5. Ecocatastrophe: Major damage to the environment, especially when caused by human activity
6. Ecocentric: Centering on the environment
7. Bioecological: A reference to the interrelationships between plants and animals and their abiotic enviro ments.
8. Bioecologist: Someone who favors, or specializes, bioecology; such as, an ecologist.
9. Bioecology: The science of organisms as affected by the factors of their environments.
10. Ecocidal: Designed or tending to destroy the environment.
11. Ecocide: Destruction or damage of the environment
12. Ecoclimate: The climate as an ecological factor; the climate of a habitat.
13. Ecocline: Reflecting ecological conditions in general.
14. Econometrician: A student of, or specialist in, econometrics.
15. Econometrics: The branch of economics concerned with the application of mathematical economics to economic data by the use of statistical methods.
16. Economics: The study or the social science of the production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services and with the theory and management of economies or economic systems which include material goods and financial resources.
17. Economist: Someone who studies, works, or is an expert in the field of economics." Here we can see how closely related the notions of ecology and economics really are, this seems to indicate that the Industrial Revolution (esp.), saw a perversion of the language describing transaction/exchange in order to underpin a Socially Darwinistic notion of human evolution, allow this exploitative model to gain ascendency and fulfil (esp.), capitalism’s imperial “manifest destiny”. It may, therefore, be the case that a misapprehension of the nature of economic theory has stemmed directly from the exploitation of non-renewable resources.

Go to:

Democracy must be “open source” (Mr.Gates), only then can it be open-ended.

People are, however, desperate to save the shibboleths of the old paradigm take crypto-currencies for instance surely a true case (Mr.Keiser), of “The Emperor's New Clothes” (this yesterday from “Moon of Alabama”, quote; "Yves Smith of Naked Capitalism had christened crypto currencies “prosecution futures”.

Crypto currencies are not money. One can not pay ones taxes with them." Go to: MoA - The End Of Crypto Currencies), quote; "

“The skyrocketing value of Bitcoin is leading to soaring energy consumption. According to one widely cited website that tracks the subject, the Bitcoin network is consuming power at an annual rate of 32TWh—about as much as Denmark. By the site’s calculations, each Bitcoin transaction consumes 250kWh, enough to power homes for nine days.
Naturally, this is leading to concerns about sustainability. Eric Holthaus, a writer for Grist, projects that, at current growth rates, the Bitcoin network will “use as much electricity as the entire world does today” by early 2020. “This is an unsustainable trajectory,” he writes.”…
…“Bitcoin mining—the process that generates new bitcoins while maintaining the network’s shared transaction ledger—is a secretive global industry. No one knows exactly how much energy it consumes*.
However, we can make some educated guesses. For starters, we know the industry’s revenue: Bitcoin miners currently generate 75 bitcoins per hour, which, at the current price of around $12,500 per bitcoin, translates to $937,500 per hour, or more than $8 billion per year.
Moreover, the industry is highly competitive, and electricity is one of its biggest costs. So when the price of bitcoins rises, we can expect miners to spend more and more on electricity until electricity costs are roughly on par with revenues.” Go to: Bitcoin’s insane energy consumption, explained | Ars Technica for full article.
This may seem insane but the truth is desperate people do desperate things. It has surely been such desperation that has lead to a blind-eye being turned throughout the British media and wider society to the true level of the exposure of our financial system to the Credit Crunch that the LIBOR scandal attempted (and still attempts), to obfuscate."…"this is where Emergence Theory comes in. So far, however, those scientists studying emergence have not linked the disciplines together to form a “whole picture” but this is what a paradigm shift away from the exploitative model of economics requires, “biodiversity is the engine of sustainability” and its pursuit and protection are antithetical to; mono-cultural, short-term, “quick-fix” profit taking enterprises.
“Posturing is the method (or “vehicle”), by which denial transfers the shame that is its genesis.”

*Italics mine." Go to: "Arafel": "The Whole Story"?: #Epidemiology #MarketSegmentation #Algorithms #CambridgeAnalytica #CryptoCurrencies #Libor #CERN #VoteManipulation #Brexit #StrategicCommunicationLaboratories #TheMull #WiFiSurveillance #FusionReactors #TwinTowers #Incineration #Biodiversity #Sustainability #EmergenceTheory

Quote; "Bitcoin is the exemplar of that divorce of wealth from production. Its value appears to be derived from two features: the mathematically elegant blockchain code, which is a distributed accounting system supposedly impervious to government meddling. And “mining” Bitcoin using colossal amounts of electricity to churn the blockchain code, a simple dissipation of energy. What is actually produced by these operations? A promise that a set of digits residing on countless flash drives around the world equal X-amount denominated in national currencies, which are themselves spun out of nothing by a process far less complex than the exertions that produce Bitcoin.

It may be true that Bitcoin’s distributed “ledger” is difficult for governments to crack, but governments can just abolish Bitcoin in a few keystrokes by criminalizing the trade of it and confiscating any theoretical profits from it. They have probably refrained so far because the traffic in Bitcoin is still relatively tiny compared to the trade in stocks, bonds, and their derivatives, and because they prefer to keep the Bitcoin model running as a demonstration project in preparation for their own entry into national cryptocurrencies, with all its advantages for tracking individual transactions and targeting tax liabilities.

Let’s spell out the more blatant shortcomings of Bitcoin: The blockchain may be theoretically bomb-proof, but the exchanges that Bitcoin trades on can be fiddled, hijacked, and erased from the universe, and Bitcoins with them. Remember Mt. Gox? When it went tits-up in 2014, 850,000 Bitcoins vanished (out of the 21 million that can ever be “mined” under the system as designed). Bitcoins were worth under $1000 when that happened. Also, keep in mind that Bitcoin is meaningless without reliable electric service and the Internet that runs on it. How many Bitcoins were bought-and-sold in Texas those dark days a couple of weeks ago when a blue norther rolled in and the lights went out? Of course, trading Bitcoin might be the least of your problems when the pipes freeze and all the sheetrock in your house gets prepped for a black mold experiment. But just sayin," Go to:

Nb. Similar to particle-beam accelerators crypto-currencies are destructive their only purpose being to aid in widespread denial re: our rapidly diminishing unsustainable resources (in other words the continuance of the neo-lib/con delusion). Crypto-currencies are a desperate response and in-fact represent, quote; "the plebs scrabbling in the Roman dirt beneath the emperor’s balcony for debased currency!"*  also both requiring and enabling a WiFi "economy" that itself is false.

*Go to: Also see:

Quote; "Stakeholder Capitalism as Newfangled Fascism

Let’s now turn our attention to the second weasel word in “stakeholder capitalism.” If you are confused about whether national socialism (a.k.a Nazism) is indeed a form of socialism, you should read more.

Socialism means the abolition of private ownership of the means of production in favor of mythical “collective ownership,” but the brutal reality is that it is a system of forceful centralized control.

In the same vein, “for fascism the state is absolute, individuals and corporations [are] relative” said Mussolini. Either way, the holders of centralized power, by controlling production, control your life. They become the solitary “stakeholder” in all decisions involving material resources.

As Ludwig von Mises showed, without real private ownership there is no buying and selling and therefore no market price system, so the planners have no way of knowing what people value. They are flying blind, creating chaos in place of economic coordination. For his scathing but inescapable insights Mises had the honor of being intellectual enemy number one of both the Nazis and the Soviets."

“Weasel words”? Oh really? Public ownership should be under democratic control, the accusation that nationalisation is totalitarian can only be made if the democratic process is subverted by allowing one of the realms (individual, communal or social), to assume dominance. I notice there is no mention of democratic process. Monetary value to the individual is not necessarily the prime concern of those in favour of (true -democratic-), public ownership, rather the health of society, community and the individual are (as expressed by the phrase “public happiness”), to claim other-wise is dangerous neo-liberal propaganda. The author does not accuse socialism of perverting public ownership, instead, they conflate public ownership with state control, thereby, denying the possibility of a mixed economy, Schumachians reject this characterisation."..."Where do they dig-these people up from feudal England?" Go to: The Lifeboat News: Neo-liberal Propaganda...

Nb. My goodness the neo-liberals needed state intervention when they were “too big to fail” though didn’t they?

As I am sure the neo-liberal data-vampires are well aware to reduce politics to a simplistic choice between “laissez faire” or social/communal totalitarianism both destroys the Schumachian model and prevents the emergence of an economy, it’s a case of “the elephant in the room” for failing to acknowledge the problem’s existence will only result in getting squished. The conflation exists in order to polarise, the truth is that none of the “-isms” are up to the job and should be consigned to the past. It’s indicative of the “dumbed down” nature of our public discourse that the socialism = communism trope has been allowed (esp. in the U.S), to gain such traction, however, it is vital that this state of affairs not be allowed to continue for the life of our species will be “nasty, brutish and short” otherwise. #DumbleDimandDimbleDumb #BiodiversityistheEngineofSustainability #TimeisoftheEssence #LoS

Sunday, 23 May 2021

Human Rights Issues re: #Covid19 Why we Need a Moratorium on Benefit Re-assessments/Re-applications and Greater Attention Paid to the Needs of Claimants During a Pandemic #Advocacy #InternetAccess #AccesstoTherapy #Lockdown #Eugenics


"The restrictions placed on us by our government as a result of the declaration of pandemic Covid-19 by the World Health Organisation (on 11th March 2020), have without question placed unusual stresses upon the body politic and these have exposed previously somewhat hidden flaws. These flaws have, however, never been hidden from those who experience their effects.

Being a sometime “service-user” myself here in Southampton, a treatment centre for mental health conditions, I have many friends and acquaintances who also use the service and as a result I have a catalogue of very harrowing stories which I could relate, however, one recent tale stands out particularly with regard to the effect of lock-down restrictions. Last November, my good friend Jonathan*, who has a paranoid-schizophrenic condition (episodically hearing voices, feeling persecuted and occasionally compelled to act by these delusions), received notice from the Dept. of Work and Pensions (“DWP”), requiring him to reapply for his Personal Independence Payment (“PIP”). He was then telephoned by the benefit service in order to complete a reassessment which he did, therefore, Jonathon underwent his reassessment for PIP over the phone whilst sat alone in his flat. The assessor even rang Jonathan back two or so days after his initial assessment to; “check some things” (again an inquisitor questioned Jonathan in his home whilst there was no advocate, or psychological/emotional support, present). Following this, Jonathan was informed that his reapplication for PIP had been unsuccessful. He immediately sought advocacy (he usually uses the Citizen's Advice Bureau -"CAB"-), but found that initially he could not get through on the phone (waiting 45 minutes to speak to someone), then that, due to lock-down restrictions, no one at the CAB could help him fill out his form for mandatory reconsideration and that they would send one to him. We agreed that he should inform the DWP that he had no help from an advocate whilst filling out the form and that he could only refer the dept. to the information they already had.

I spoke to him on the phone myself several times during this period and over the subsequent weeks, he was clearly very stressed and “elevated” but although the stress eventually triggered a paranoid-schizophrenic response he was well grounded enough to seek the advice of his psychiatrist. When the psychiatrist heard that Jonathan was suffering from paranoid-delusions she immediately increased his “Olanzapine” dose from 15mg-20mg/day and put him on an anti-depressant (that she hadn't previously prescribed), called “Sertraline”, at a dose of 100mg/day, she then wrote a letter in support of his claim informing the DWP/Tribunal benefit service that (paraphr.); “this man is unwell, he has a serious mental health condition”.

Then something very odd happened; a week or so after his psychiatrist had contacted the benefit service, Jonathan received a phone call from a member of staff who told him, whilst not specifying the decision to which she was referring; “I am on your side. I want to help you overturn this decision!” When he told me this I remarked what good news I thought it was, however, a week or so later Jonathan, rang to tell me that he had received a letter from the benefit service telling him that despite the fact that they had received his psychiatrist's letter and taken on board her remarks they would not overturn their decision following mandatory reconsideration. When I asked him when it was dated he told me that it was dated the very same day he had received a phone call from the member of staff who had told him that she wanted to help. I told him that I wasn't surprised and that I have encountered things like this before, the initial bad decision was affecting the claimant's subsequent dealings with the service (as it desperately tried to cover for itself), however, to ignore a psychiatrist's letter is a breach that probably should be challenged in law (esp. considering that this mentally-ill man was now receiving contradictory advice from authorities he desperately needed to be able to trust). They started paying regular amounts, and some back pay, into his bank during this period but did so whilst still not informing him of their final decision. He's paranoid schizophrenic for Ch****-sake who is going to take responsibility for his reaction to the self-serving two-faced-ness of the benefit service? They sent him confirmation of his award in the end (and gave him a year or two more than his usual apportion of PIP -very generous-), but left him with the legacy of the experience.

I find the story very instructive concerning the isolation and concomitant problems that claimants experience as a result of lock-down. It also shines a light on a wider truth that dare not be spoken of between advocates/claimants and the benefit service (believe me I know this to be a fact, having been a; Disability Living Allowance -“DLA”-, Employment and Support Allowance -“ESA”-, PIP, Universal Credit -“UC”-, and Limited Capability for Work Related Activities -“LCRWRA”-, claimant and ridden on the roller-coaster that is benefit entitlement here in Britain myself), financial insecurity causes mental-health problems! For goodness sake the principle is accepted within the wider population (ie. those not as subject to our government's openly eugenicist agenda)!

I myself am currently accessing advocacy and I can tell you that being re-assessed for or having to re-apply for benefits is an even more stressful process under lock-down that it usually is and, like I said, it's already a (lethal), roller-coaster.

I should have been informed that my PIP was up for reassessment in November, however, it wasn't until I received this year's Council Tax Bill (informing me that I was under different consideration because I was no longer in receipt of PIP), that I realised why it had seemed to me that my February entitlements had been reduced. On receiving my Council Tax Bill I immediately contacted one of my advocates (I use one for debt/benefits and another for medical/NHS issues), who questioned the DWP eliciting the admission that I should have been informed of my change of status. Despite this the DWP have so far refused to reinstate my payments for the few months I would have had to seek a continuation of my award, I am, therefore, being forced to make a new application (not something, I suspect, that will sit well with any possible future tribunal).

Lock-down restrictions mean that I cannot meet my advocate face-to-face to prepare my case, all the filing and referencing my advocate usually does for me is useless because we are not in the same room to go through the documentation together. There is no possible way that a phone call can replace an in-person advocacy appointment, many clients desperately need the psychological and emotional support that the presence of an advocate represents, otherwise they feel trapped, persecuted and isolated and as a result are incapable of rational response. Many claiming PIP, ESA and LCWRA have stress-sensitive mental and physical health conditions and the support an advocate gives is often in the form of help with the stress of dealing with correspondence, something that can only properly be dealt with if the client and advocate are in the same room but this cannot happen under lock-down either.

Advocacy represents the port of last resort for many claimants. Both accessing and making use of advocacy services is difficult at the best of times, but lock-down compounds these problems making of the advocacy process a truly “cruel and unusual” form of torture. I have a stress-related self-harm condition, who will take responsibility should I have an episode? My previous PIP entitlement lasted only 18 months and my condition hasn't changed in that time, in fact under lock-down certain aspects of it have worsened.

The advocates are stressed and over-worked too which doesn't help!

I will be making a paper application for PIP (face-to-face assessment in the presence of an advocate being completely out of the question), as I do not wish to go through the stress of an interrogation on the telephone alone. One can “share” phone calls but the physical presence of a supportive companion is supposed to be a right.

I have managed to get myself to A&E at Southampton General twice, on each occasion under lock-down and whilst “shielding”. On both occasions I was suffering from the worsening of a chronic condition due to lock-down stress. The worsening of these conditions was directly related to my inability to access the proper prescribed therapy, that of swimming/aqua-yoga/aqua-aerobics, for the serious and life-changing injuries I sustained as a teenager which caused me to suffer from tissue-damage, muscle-loss, nerve-damage, skeletal, spinal cord and circulatory problems.

I managed to secure a “Smart Cities” card from the Southampton Unitary Authority only because I paid my GP £30 to write a report stating that I need to have access to less-expensive (Nb. not free), swimming in the city's various public facilities. In the past being a recipient of PIP would have been enough, but now the claimant must receive certain components of the PIP award to qualify for a free Smart Cities card (although the holder is still only entitled to “half-price” access to swimming and/or gym sessions), or seek what is basically a “doctor's note” (the G.P surgeries now charging for such services). What this means, of-course, is that my physician recommends that I engage in certain forms of therapy regularly and that I have a “smart-chipped” card with my photograph on it that entitles me to greater access to such therapy.

As a result of not undergoing therapy I over-strained two old injuries one of which (to my back, pelvis and leg), has become considerably more troublesome and I can be virtually unable to move for days at a stretch. The A&E doctor prescribed a change of pain medication that increased my opioid dose from 4/day Co-codamol 8/500 to 6/day Dihydrocodeine 30mg and I reported to the doctor that the worsening of my condition had induced a self-harm episode. My GP has since concurred with the decision to increase my opioid dose and I now receive Dihydrocodeine on repeat prescription, this is not a solution for chronic pain but medical marijuana (not useless CBD “extract”), is still not available on prescription in Britain.

As I have been shielding I was unable to attend my appointment with Southampton NHS neurology last year but do intend to attend one in August. With various aspects of my conditions worsening and having already attended A&E twice I don't intend to wait any longer.

It is my contention that provision should be made during a pandemic for patients who require access to prescribed/recommended therapies and if this means only letting those who can prove (and with a Smart Cities card such verification is easy), their status have such access then so be it. This may sound harsh but I reiterate I've had to attend A&E twice, whilst shielding, during lock-down!

Even worse though (esp. considering that; "isolation is the worst form of torture"), has been the lack of provision made to ensure that the vulnerable have proper access to the internet during the pandemic and its concomitant lock-down restrictions. The notion that those with physical and/or mental health problems might have difficulty if their already poor access (for those on restricted incomes the option of utilising commercial companies often being a non-starter), to technical support for their internet connection be further restricted does not seem to have occurred to the Powers that Be. This was brought home to me when I tried to get in contact with "Jamie's" (a local charitable business organisation set-up in order to support the vulnerable both at home and with regard to employment and training in computer science and I.T skills; go to:, which proved impossible during lock-down as there was no-one in the office and, therefore, no-one who would have been able to help if my p.c had suffered from any technical issues or needed repairing.

Recently I have had trouble preparing to take up my place on a "Steps to Wellbeing" ten week webinar course ("S2W", go to: -Nb. their courses would usually be face-to-face in groups but, of-course, this is impossible at the moment meaning that a stable connection, working equipment and a capable client base are essential-), although Jamie's are now open again they (unsurprisingly), have a considerable back-log of repair/programming work to do. Even my clinical psychologist with S2W was unaware (as I was), of the existence of; "SO: Let’s Connect/a new project starting in Southampton, with the aim of reducing isolation by enabling people to get connected online.

These issues should have been considered but given the Tory default setting they, of-course, were not.

Does it not seem odd that a government so keen that we should all be part of the "connected society" should fail such a large portion of the body politic in this regard? Perhaps not if one considers what a eugenicist agenda its leader espouses; "In 2000, while Johnson was editor of the Spectator, the magazine carried an article from columnist Taki which said: “On average, Orientals are slower to mature, less randy, less fertile, and have larger brains and higher IQ scores. Blacks are at the other pole, and whites fall somewhere in the middle, although closer to the Orientals than the blacks.”".."Downing Street repeatedly refused to say whether Johnson supported the views expressed by Sabisky on eugenics – the selective breeding of humans – or the IQ of black people." (Go to: ), he says this on his own website; "We seem to have given up on population control, and all sorts of explanations are offered for the surrender" (Go to: ). "One" may have given up Boris but her majesty's government don't seem to.

Clearly our government was not properly prepared for Covid-19. Institutions need to be prepared to run as normally as possible during a pandemic, therefore, prioritising the mental and physical health of the body politic is essential. A triage system only works if physicians are able to correctly prioritise response. Any government's first priority should be the welfare of the citizens it governs and the modelling must reflect this. As E.F Schumacher pointed out, the economy is dependent on the health of each individual, this means that each must be treated equally and proportionately to their needs. Needs not wants!  

Our current administration only serves the wants of the few. What the Tories have been doing to the vulnerable during this Covid-19 pandemic is just a worsening, for the sake of expediency (and eugenics), of what they have been doing for years, marginalising the response to genuine concerns and maximising profit for themselves and their supporters, however, I believe we can challenge some of the hubris for there must be many stories like the two I’ve recounted.

We need to seek a moratorium on re-assessment/re-application for those on PIP, ESA and LCWRA during a pandemic. The risk of inflicting lasting harm and even death on claimants who do not have the resources to respond to the increased stresses imposed by lock-down, including the near impossibility of securing appropriate advocacy, by forcing them to undergo re-assessment and/or to have to re-apply for entitlements, is far too great. If you are, or were, a PIP, ESA or LCRWRA claimant who has been affected by Covid-19 pandemic lock-down restrictions, especially with regard to seeking advocacy, please contact

If we need to challenge our government's actions in the international courts, so much the better. These are human rights issues and the solutions to the problems should be enshrined in international law (if they are not already), that way we can ensure that we are better prepared to protect the whole body politic in future."

by Kevin Francis

*Names of those mentioned in this article have been changed in order to protect their identity.

 Disabled people largely ignored in response to pandemic, says new book

Quote; "Those particularly impacted negatively by the pandemic, it says, include disabled people and those with long-term health conditions; black, Asian and minority ethnic groups; people living in deprived areas and poor housing; and older people.

But these are the groups who have largely been ignored in developing responses to the crisis, and as a result have been “further detrimentally impacted by it – in many cases fatally”"..

Disabled people with vast experience of social isolation could have made valuable contributions to ‘shielding’ policies and social care provision and yet typically were not invited to contribute to decision-making processes,”* it adds.

The collection of chapters by a range of authors, including leading disabled campaigners, calls for marginalised voices to be better heard through co-production.

In his chapter, Professor Peter Beresford, chair of Shaping Our Lives, compares the pandemic efforts of frontline NHS health workers with the “arbitrary and sweeping decisions” of senior NHS managers to “clear out thousands of older, long-term patients” into care homes and domiciliary services, which “then caused the infection to spread on a massive scale”.

He says that the NHS’s actions, which used “social care as a dustbin for COVID-19 casualties” were made “doubly dangerous and discriminatory by the appalling state of social care in England”."..."They say that the scale of the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on disabled people –about three-fifths (59 per cent) of COVID-19-related deaths in England during the pandemic have been of disabled people – has “not been reflected in the response to the crisis”*." Go to: for full article. 

*Italics mine.

Psychosis and COVID-19: is it time to pre-emptively revise advanced directives?

Quote; “Revised advanced directives might be necessary to indicate preferred treatment choices, given the re-assessment of the risks and benefits of health-care delivery during the pandemic. Decisions regarding hospitalisation, initiating clozapine, receiving long-acting injectables, and electroconvulsive therapy might pose different risk–benefit profiles after the pandemic onset. Additionally, given the increased mortality rates in people with psychosis secondary to COVID-19,4
dynamic revisions in advanced directives should also reflect the decisions regarding COVID-19 treatment—eg, whether to receive the vaccine or not, type of vaccine, and the mode of delivery.
Pandemics might come and go but medical ethics principles should stand resolute against mitigated or unmitigated disasters. Dynamic, advanced directives in line with the rapidly evolving pandemic situation will add more value to patients’ autonomy.” Go to: for full article.

The Lancet seem, despite their posturing, to be prioritising enabling legislation for their own agenda not promoting individual autonomy for their patients, it’s a good example of bad-modelling by the institutions. One has no choice but to advise; “follow the money!”



Prison governors' chief says lockdown freedoms need to be extended

A 'significant kickback' could result if offenders are still required to spend up to 23 hours a day in their cells the country opens up

Quote; "Jails are at risk of a backlash from offenders if their release from lockdown lags behind the rest of society, the prison governors’ leader has warned.

Prisoners have spent up to 23 hours a day locked in their cells during the pandemic in a successful bid to avoid up to 2,700 deaths forecast by Public Health England (PHE).

It has led to falls of up to 45 per cent in violence with claims that jails have as a result become safer environments after years of record levels of assaults both on prisoners and staff.

But Andrea Albutt, president of the Prison Governors’ Association (PGA) warned there could be a “significant kickback” from offenders if there was not a return to normality in jails at a pace similar to society’s.

“We are moving into a period where they are beginning not to understand why they should not be unlocked, why they cannot hug their loved ones, why they cannot be unlocked in the same way as officers can hug people, socialise, go on holiday, shop and then come back into the prison,” she said.

“Prisoners are starting to feel less tolerant as they see the reduced risk to staff who are dealing with them on a daily basis. We need to watch and see if that tolerance we have had will continue or whether there will be a significant kickback if they don’t see a fairly speedy improvement.”

Prisons in England and Wales have moved to a “level 3” regime down from the highest “level 5 total lockdown” where offenders were allowed only “minimised” time out of their cells, meals served at their doors and no time in the open air.

The “restricted” level 3 regime still only allows limited time out of cells for some education and work and “limited” social visits instead of a total ban. Governors can apply for level 2, although this still requires segregation of symptomatic inmates, quarantine for arrivals and shielding the vulnerable.

Ms Albutt said there was not as yet any increase in violence or disorder because only small numbers were allowed out of their cells at any one time. 

But she added: “In prisoner focus groups you get a sense that they feel they are sacrificial lambs. To be fair, they have a reasonable argument because staff are living virtually normal lives.”" Go to: for full article.

Quote; "10 million people (8.5 million adults and 1.5 million children and young people) in England will need support for their mental health as a direct result of the pandemic over the next three to five years.

Based on an analysis of over 200 high-quality studies from around the world, our model (developed by clinicians, researchers and economists from the NHS and Centre for Mental Health) identifies key groups of people who face an especially high risk of poor mental health as a result of the pandemic. These groups include people who have survived severe Covid-19 illness (especially those treated in intensive care), those working in health and care services during the pandemic, people economically impacted by the pandemic, and those who have been bereaved.

While the NHS is already investing in additional mental health services, the predicted levels of demand are two to three times that of current NHS mental health capacity within a 3-5 year window. This briefing makes it clear that Government and the NHS must take action now to meet a very steep increase in demand for mental health support" Go to: for full article.

Saturday, 21 November 2020

#Yugoslavia, #NATO, #Brexit, the #EuropeanUnion and the #Euromerta (a response to the dreadful neo-lib/con whitewashing of the sepulchre by #PBS: "#TheBalkansinFlames")

Quote; "Yugoslavia was a uniquely independent and multi-ethnic, if imperfect, federation that stood as a political and economic bridge in the Cold War. This was not acceptable to the expanding European Community, especially newly united Germany, which had begun a drive east to dominate its "natural market" in the Yugoslav pro vinces of Croatia and Slovenia. By the time the Europeans met at Maastricht in 1991, a secret deal had been struck; Germany recognised Croatia, and Yugoslavia was doomed. In Washington, the US ensured that the struggling Yugoslav economy was denied World Bank loans and the defunct Nato was reinvented as an enforcer. At a 1999 Kosovo "peace" conference in France, the Serbs were told to accept occupation by Nato forces and a market economy, or be bombed into submission. It was the perfect precursor to the bloodbaths in Afghanistan and Iraq*." Go to: 
for full article. 

*Italics mine.

Quote; "Shortly after the declaration, President Tujman introduced a new Croatian constitution which defined Croatia as the national state of the Croatian people and others, pointedly relegating the Serbs, Jews, Gypsies and Muslims to second class status. This was an exact repeat of what had happened in 1941 when nazi Germany invaded Yugoslavia and set up Croatia as the national state of the Croatian people and others. After the HDZ dominated Government passed the new constitution, discrimination against the Serbs began immediately. Serbs lost government jobs in the civil service, police, local authorities etc…they were evicted for their homes, many lost the ownership of their own businesses, and Serb newspapers were closed down etc. A special property tax applicable only to Serbs was introduced, and Croatian militia openly looted and closed down shops selling expensive products such as jewelry. These measures clearly indicated to the Serbs living within the administrative borders of Croatia that they must leave the land where they had lived for three centuries, or face the consequences of staying." Go to:
for full article.

  Quote; "For decades, the right-wing elements in the German state never had the opportunity to cooperate with a major party that shares its views. Now they do.

For hundreds of civil servants, the rise of Alternative for Germany has presented an opportunity to engage in more right-wing political activities than would have been possible only a few years ago. A senior public prosecutor in Berlin, a judge in Dresden, as well as police officers and teachers across the country: For all of them, supporting the party serves as the bridge between the functioning state apparatus and the far right.

Very often, the party’s members draw connections between their profession and what they take to be the necessity of right-wing activism. They spread rumors of the government’s secret commands to prioritize anti-right policies over the solving of crimes committed by refugees or the “left-green indoctrination of students” in public schools. Their conspiracy theories have not diminished with their proximity to power. The future is a dark one when a right-wing party surges and finds sectors of the state full of “classic civil servants.”" Go to:

Quote; "Since World War II, Yugoslavia--prized by both sides--has been molded by the forces of Cold War.

Early in the first Reagan administration, the U.S. escalated the Cold War with an aggressive, secret strategy to undercut the Soviet economy, destabilize the USSR, and ultimately bring about the collapse of Communism. (1) In 1985, then-Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick dubbed this new strategy, which went well beyond containment, "the Reagan Doctrine." (2)

At about the same time, according to recently declassified documents obtained by CovertAction, the U.S. adopted a similar strategy toward the countries of Eastern Europe, including Yugoslavia. In September 1982, when the region seemed stable and the Berlin Wall had seven years to stand, the U.S. drew up National Security Decision Directive (NSDD) 54, "United States Policy toward Eastern Europe." Labeled SECRET and declassified with light censorship in 1990, (3) it called for greatly expanded efforts to promote a "quiet revolution" to overthrow Communist governments and parties. While naming all the countries of Eastern Europe, it omitted mention of Yugoslavia.

In March 1984, a separate document, NSDD 133, "United States Policy toward Yugoslavia," was adopted and given the even more restricted classification: SECRET SENSITIVE
. When finally declassified in 1990, NSDD 133 was still highly censored, with less than two-thirds of the original text remaining. (4) Nonetheless, taken together, the two documents reveal a consistent policy logic.

The "primary long-term U.S. goal in Eastern Europe" as described explicitly in NSDD 54 was "to [censored...] facilitate its eventual re-integration into the European community of nations." (5)

Since the Eastern European states could not have been "reintegrated" into "the European community of nations" as long as they remained under Communist rule, the basic U.S. goal required removal of Communist governments. The implication of ending Soviet influence extends to the more cautiously worded remnants of NSDD 133. The goal of "U.S. Policy [toward Yugoslavia]," it states, "will be to promote the trend toward an effective, market-oriented Yugoslav economic structure...[and] to expand U.S. economic relations with Yugoslavia in ways which benefit both countries and which strengthen Yugoslavia's ties with the industrialized democracies." (6)

Thus, the basic U.S. objective for Yugoslavia was much the same as for Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, the GDR, Hungary, Poland and Romania: a capitalist transformation. The list of policy instruments described in NSDD 54 to promote change in Eastern Europe may help fill in some gaps in the more highly censored Yugoslavia-specific NSDD 133. The mechanisms included most-favored-nation status, credit policy, IMF stewardship, debt rescheduling, cultural and educational exchanges, information programs, high-level visits, and restrictions on diplomatic and consular personnel. (7) Even in this document, some items were completely or partially deleted in the declassified version.

Today, the revelations in the two documents may seem banal. It should be remembered, however, that for many years, the government felt the need to keep secret even the more overt means of pressuring for change. Furthermore, significant parts of U.S. policy in the region, particularly in Yugoslavia, remain secret even today. Covert policies, which undoubtedly were implemented, are not usually discussed at any length in a National Security Decision Directive.

The U.S. and Yugoslavia's Internal Crisis

The existence of a separate document for Yugoslavia reflects that nation's special relationship with the U.S. After Yugoslavia left the Warsaw Pact in 1948 over disagreements with Stalin, the West saw it as a buffer state against Soviet expansionism. When the Soviet Union made threats against it in the early 1950s, Yugoslavia asked the U.S. for help and quietly undertook "certain military obligations" towards the West in the event of a conflict with the Soviet Union. (8) The agreement included a commitment to "protect northern Italy from penetration by Soviet troops based in Hungary." (9) According to a knowledgeable Yugoslav analyst, the "alliance with the West," along with expanded educational, diplomatic and commercial ties, "forced Yugoslavia Communists to open up to Western cultural and political influences." (10)

During the post-war years, Western aid--amounting to several hundred billions of dollars, most of which came from the U.S.--helped to create a boom in Yugoslavia. And, although Yugoslavia remained poorer than most of the countries of the industrialized West, the relatively equitable distribution of the fruits of industrialization carried much of the country out of poverty. By the end of the 1980s, Yugoslavs were better off than most people in Portugal, Spain, Turkey, and parts of Greece. That economic success was crucial in diminishing regional and ethnic tensions.

Thus, the Yugoslav socialist experiment was generally viewed as successful, even in the West, both for its economic progress and for the unity which Marshall Tito brought to an ethnically diverse state.

Yugoslav planners, however, strove to combine structural change with rapid economic growth. And that policy was costly; it created a large trade deficit and weakened the country's currency. The oil crises of 1973-74 and 1979 exacerbated Yugoslavia's problems. (11) By the early 1980s, the country faced serious balance of payments problems and rising inflation. As usual, the IMF, in the name of financial rectitude, stepped in and prodded the Yugoslav authorities to slow growth, restrict credit, cut social expenditures, and devalue the dinar. Although the trade deficit was reduced and the balance of payments showed a record surplus by 1970, (12) the IMF "reforms" wreaked economic and political havoc. Slower growth, the accumulation of foreign debt--and especially the cost of servicing it--as well as devaluation, led to a fall in the standard of living of the average Yugoslav.

The economic crisis threatened political stability. Not only did the declining standard of living undermine the authority of the country's leaders, it also threatened to aggravate simmering ethnic tensions.

The 1980 death of Marshall Tito--the one leader whose authority could hold the country together--plunged Yugoslavia into a dual crisis. And without leadership, the economic crisis suddenly become more difficult to resolve.

Moreover, since Yugoslavia was linked to the world capitalist economy, it had suffered the same economic stagnation that affected Western Europe and North America during the 1970s. When the Reagan administration's supply-side economic policies precipitated a recession in 1981-83, the effects were felt everywhere, not least in Yugoslavia.

It is hardly surprising that Yugoslav planners found it difficult to arrest economic decline in their own country. Some observers claimed that the inability of the economic system to respond to the 1980s crisis demonstrated the failure of the Yugoslav model of socialism. While there is some truth to the charge that the system was rigid, Yugoslavia's troubles were caused first and foremost by the transmission of the Western economic crisis to those countries on the edge of Europe which were closely linked to the West by aid, trade, capital flows, and emigration.

The uneasy U.S.-Yugoslav alliance persisted throughout 1980s. Because of Yugoslavia's unique "buffer" position, the U.S. had a special stake in its stability. Despite discomfort with its communist "ally," the new Reagan administration preserved the relationship, hoping to benefit from the developing instability in Yugoslavia in order to install a more amenable government.

In the late 1980s, three factors suddenly altered the dynamics of the U.S.-Yugoslav relationship. Yugoslavia began to suspend its market-oriented "reforms." The Cold War ended and Yugoslavia was no longer so useful. And a newly united Germany, staking out a larger role for itself in Europe, demanded that the Bush administration adopt the German policy of working for the "dissociation," that is, the dismantling, of Yugoslavia*." Go to: for full article. *All italics mine (also see "The #Euromerta" below).

  This is, in my opinion, by no means all though. It has been my distasteful task, over the years, to read and to listen to many fine words about collusion and intervention with regards to the West's involvement in the Yugoslavian conflict and never hear (if anyone else has and can name a source please let me know), what I consider to be the obvious "deeper truth". This truth concerns what a facilitating conflict the Yugoslavian Civil War was, I read often about how Zionists and the "Red, White and Blue" (U.S, U.K and France), collude and connive in undermining regimes throughout the world but it never seems to strike anyone just how damaging the Yugoslavian War was to the integrity and authority of the United Nations (it did at the time but the understanding seems to have disappeared down the memory-hole), "Interventionism" has been the principle by which NATO has subverted the authority of the United Nations ever since (certainly there have been interventionist State Dept. sponsored adventures before -such as Korea and Vietnam-, but Yugoslavia specifically enabled the "transcendence" of NATO remodelling it for a post Cold War world and transforming the alliance into the blunt instrument of a western imperialism that no longer required the destruction of aggressive communism for its raison d'etre, go to: Is it beyond the wit-of-man to encompass the notion that one of the primary reasons for forcing this European strife was to break the will of the U.N?

In Pilger's article he describes the Yugoslavian conflict as; "the perfect precursor" and it was as it represented a very "good bet" for the vested interests of the western military-industrial complex. Attempting to subvert the authority of the U.N in order to facilitate an Interventionist approach (a simple enablement of neo-con/liberal laissez-faire monetarism whereby democracy equates to the fulfilment of -as its adherents see it-, capitalism's manifest destiny), by destabilising a non-European country whose populace were predominantly non-white and non-Christian would have rightly been perceived as a very "dodgy investment" whereas sparking a conflagration in a European state bordering the E.U presented the "sheepish-masses" with a (more or less), fait accompli, in other words; "how can you standby and do nothing whilst your neighbours die (the subtext being; "you and yours could be next")?" This is why the Yugoslavian Civil War (for such it was as should never be forgotten), preceded the interventions in the Middle East (which were mostly driven by the desire to control the world's oil supplies). If one wanted to get one's hands on Middle Eastern oil by invading its countries but could not (except in the case of the first conflict against Iraq when Saddam was encouraged to attack a neighbouring sovereign nation, quote;
"George Bush senior had been unable to break the deadlock, however if one can “suspend disbelief” one can imagine that both The Pentagon and the CIA had been devising strategies with which to remove such obstacles to action -of which Mr. Bush was, of-course, fully aware-, one of which was to provoke or “encourage” an attack by Saddam Hussein on one of his oil rich neighbours -something that Saddam would “jump at” at the time in order to refill his treasury following Iraq’s bloody and costly war with Iran-. In order to facilitate this it would be necessary to somehow deceive Saddam as to America’s true interests in the region as not even he would risk direct conflict with the most powerful military machine on the planet. Such a deception would, however, risk showing America’s hand to the international community in a way which even Bush senior felt unable to justify and therefore these plans remained shelved until such time as the political climate became more favourable. Around this time however certain documents were stolen from the United States which were to provide precisely the right impetus with which to change the weather. It seems that although America had secured the necessary technical documents which would enable one to produce a viable fusion weapon -something Saddam did not have the industrial or financial ware-withal to do in any-case-, the original Alamogordo trinity test specifications for a fission bomb were not held under such tight security and were stolen -“rumour has it” by an Asian “freelancer”-, and then sold to the Iraqi regime. Bush senior then “green-lighted” the operation that would lead to “Desert Storm” -go to: “How Bush Tricked Saddam into Invading Kuwait “The April Glaspie Interview”"-. As you can see this information is extant -thank you Adel Darwish and Gregory Alexander –“Unholy Babylon” Gollancz 1991-"-" Go to:
), justify such action without claiming the need for intervention, in order to "democratise" the poor unfortunate country concerned, how would such a thing be allowed (or even simply "tolerated"), by a United Nations that had not already bowed to the NATO sword? Public opinion was deliberately manipulated by the meddling in the internal politics of post Tito Yugoslavia (the ground for such being prepared well before Tito's death), to swing popular consent within the major European Powers away from that of the international rule of law and back to an imperialist notion of Manifest Destiny. To fail to ascribe to the manipulators and massive vested interests enough sense to realise the barrier that a strong and truly "United" Nations represented is to live in a fool's paradise. I believe one of the reasons that this process has, to quite a large extent, been colluded in by the Left is that it has never really respected the U.N and refuses to take its mandate seriously, the Left always preferring their own moral high-horse of international socialism to policies based on the consensus of nations (unless that consensus happens to suit the purposes of the "International" -but even then an inimical attitude to international institutions of a different hue promotes a failure to engage that leads to lack of experience, consequently the Left often seems to shoot itself in the foot-), in my opinion this has been a terrible if not truly treacherous indulgence and exemplifies many of the problems the Left in Europe (and especially in Britain), have with democracy (reliance on the union, first-past-the post and the Crown should give the lie but they don't seem to). When will the posturing Left grow-up and smell the coffee of the 21c I wonder?

    "The death of Robert Parry earlier this year felt like a farewell to the age of the reporter. Parry was "a trailblazer for independent journalism", wrote Seymour Hersh, with whom he shared much in common.

    Hersh revealed the My Lai massacre in Vietnam and the secret bombing of Cambodia, Parry exposed Iran-Contra, a drugs and gun-running conspiracy that led to the White House. In 2016, they separately produced compelling evidence that the Assad government in Syria had not used chemical weapons. They were not forgiven.

    Driven from the "mainstream", Hersh must publish his work outside the United States. Parry set up his own independent news website Consortium News, where, in a final piece following a stroke, he referred to journalism's veneration of "approved opinions" while "unapproved evidence is brushed aside or disparaged regardless of its quality."

    Although journalism was always a loose extension of establishment power, something has changed in recent years. Dissent tolerated when I joined a national newspaper in Britain in the 1960s has regressed to a metaphoric underground as liberal capitalism moves towards a form of corporate dictatorship. This is a seismic shift, with journalists policing the new "groupthink", as Parry called it, dispensing its myths and distractions, pursuing its enemies.

    Witness the witch-hunts against refugees and immigrants, the wilful abandonment by the "Me Too" zealots of our oldest freedom, presumption of innocence, the anti-Russia racism and anti-Brexit hysteria, the growing anti-China campaign and the suppression of a warning of world war.

    With many if not most independent journalists barred or ejected from the "mainstream", a corner of the Internet has become a vital source of disclosure and evidence-based analysis: true journalism. Sites such as,, ZNet,,,, and are required reading for those trying to make sense of a world in which science and technology advance wondrously while political and economic life in the fearful "democracies" regress behind a media facade of narcissistic spectacle.

    In Britain, just one website offers consistently independent media criticism. This is the remarkable Media Lens - remarkable partly because its founders and editors as well as its only writers, David Edwards and David Cromwell, since 2001 have concentrated their gaze not on the usual suspects, the Tory press, but the paragons of reputable liberal journalism: the BBC, the Guardian, Channel 4 News.

    Their method is simple. Meticulous in their research, they are respectful and polite when they ask why a journalist why he or she produced such a one-sided report, or failed to disclose essential facts or promoted discredited myths.

    The replies they receive are often defensive, at times abusive; some are hysterical, as if they have pushed back a screen on a protected species.

    I would say Media Lens has shattered a silence about corporate journalism. Like Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman in Manufacturing Consent, they represent a Fifth Estate that deconstructs and demystifies the media's power.

    What is especially interesting about them is that neither is a journalist. David Edwards is a former teacher, David Cromwell is an oceanographer. Yet, their understanding of the morality of journalism - a term rarely used; let's call it true objectivity - is a bracing quality of their online Media Lens dispatches.

    I think their work is heroic and I would place a copy of their just published book, Propaganda Blitz, in every journalism school that services the corporate system, as they all do."...

    "When he was US commander in Afghanistan, General David Petraeus declared what he called "a war of perception... conducted continuously using the news media". What really mattered was not the facts but the way the story played in the United States. The undeclared enemy was, as always, an informed and critical public at home.

    Nothing has changed. In the 1970s, I met Leni Riefenstahl, Hitler's film-maker, whose propaganda mesmerised the German public.

    She told me the "messages" of her films were dependent not on "orders from above", but on the "submissive void" of an uninformed public.

    "Did that include the liberal, educated bourgeoisie?" I asked.

    "Everyone," she said. "Propaganda always wins, if you allow it."" Go to:

    *Italics mine.

  The Euromerta

Quote; "as we have examined elsewhere on this blog the formation of an Eastern European Union would break the back of the Now Actively Treacherous Oligarchy ("NATO"), that has come to ascendancy and dominates the body politic and help establish the principles of independence and emancipation benefiting all the significantly (currently marginalised and ignored), ethnically and culturally divergent regions in the union.".."
Not a sniff in either article that it was the Wider Europe and its NATO-isation that has both overstretched EU finances and put so much pressure on Western European societies that additional immigration from the Middle East has become unacceptable to much of the populace".."So does separatism within the European Union represent the biggest threat to the markets? Only if you're a zombie desperately trying to find fresh living flesh to feed on! Should Britain (for instance), achieve the kind of devolution for (what should be), its independent member states and then reorganise itself on a more egalitarian basis both a United Ireland and the mighty economy that is Brittany would be able to contribute to our common-wealth (having never actually joined the poor-old Euro perhaps even a "United Brit-Pound" could be something "we" could sensibly contemplate), and form a counterweight to a more democratic Western European Union (containing a number of then devolved member states and regions), and newly formed Eastern Union of a similar hue itself." Go to:
Quote; "Unfortunately for both Macron and Merkel; "a house divided against itself cannot stand" and both will have problems forming a European force whilst the Wider Europe dominates the agenda. The Wider Europe is NATO's Europe, Trump is simply reasserting the U.S State Dept.'s interests in the region and demonstrating the true nature of the NATO-ised agenda. I am forced to admit to a certain amount of wishful thinking on my part concerning the withdrawal of NATO from the European Theatre (and "drama" it certainly is now-a-days if not actual soap-opera), but as I am not (and never have been), in favour of the expansion of the European Union I have no interest in continued adherence to the NATO-ised narrative, Macron and Merkel are, however, hoisted by their own petard with regard to this issue as both will find that if they don't embrace the notion of the formation of an Eastern European Union ("EEU"), the removal of the parasite that is NATO will prove very difficult indeed. 
 Putin's involvement in the funding and promotion of separatist and nationalist groups is designed to weaken NATO's power-base but an EEU would undermine this strategy and lend credence to more moderate patriots (whose voices should be heard), within the Eastern European states who do not feel that it is necessary to resort to fascism in order to protect either their cultures or ethnic identities.".."
“We should work on a vision of one day establishing a real, true European army,” Merkel told MEPs during her speech, drawing applause – and booing – in the chamber.
Although Merkel left open how such a step could materialise in practice, she backed the forming of a European rapid reaction force and a common arms acquisition policy. According to a previous French proposal, a small group of states could go forward and build up a powerful intervention force for crisis operations, for example in Africa.
Echoing Macron’s catch-phrase of a “European army”, she also made a huge step towards Paris. Only last week, the French president argued for more European strategic autonomy when urging that the EU should be able “to protect itself with respect to China, Russia and even the United States.”"..
 "Although her position represents a trend of Europeans answering calls by US and NATO to enhance their capabilities, Merkel clarified: “This is not an army against NATO, it can be a good complement to NATO.”* Go to:
for full article.

*Italics mine. This exemplifies the double-think Merkel has always indulged when it comes to Germany's position in Europe; "Ah chancellor it was ever thus but surely if one learns from history one does not repeat the mistakes of the past!"".."it seems that the balance might have been TTIP-ed by the increasing intransigence (at least as far as the U.S is concerned), shown by most of (esp. mainland), Europe by its policy of the non-acceptance of less regulated produce such as genetically modified foods and chemically and/or pharmaceutically "enhanced" produce from America finding their way on to the shelves, such opposition to the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership may well have been the issue that weighted the scales in favour of electoral intervention by the Trump/Farage/Mercer/Johnson/Putin alliance and the machinations of the "home-grown" talents of Cambridge Analytica."".."These people simply exploited an already unstable Europe though as the Wider European Adventure had stretched the tolerance of both the former E.U's member states' domestic populations and economies further than either was comfortably able to tolerate" (also see; ""Sophie's Choice" -again-. #Brexit #EUReferendum #VoteYes #VoteNo Montage" go to: Quote; ".... Why should not The Poles (who "don't like" the Germans and consistently produce the lowest turn out of any E.U nation in European elections), the Western Ukrainians (bye bye Crimea!), and the other recently assimilated Eastern European States attend to their own affairs? Such would surely be both socially and financially better for all of us.
Take the debacle over the Shengen agreement. Really Mr.Major? Your country's citizens got nothing out of that, is Europe only for the businessmen then? It seems so (quote; "The free movement of persons was a core part of the original Treaty of Rome" go to: ). One would think that it would be the job of our country's "liberal-left" to point out the "diminishment of persons" that not becoming signatories to the Shengen Agreement represented but noooo as so often where European politics is concerned there was a terrible silence in the "oppositional barn"").

 So how to resolve the impasse? The simply expedient of a third choice (as should also have been presented to the British people with regard to our recent referendum on electoral reform by including the option of proportional representation on the ballot papers), whereby Britain would choose not to rejoin unless a process that would reform the current structure by fostering the creation of an Eastern European Union (consequently addressing the issues of the wider union and the influence of  NATO), was entered into by all member states, might well give a truer representation of the electorate's wishes and concerns and encourage real debate on the nature of the union that people wish to see, such would surely better serve the interests of democracy."" Go to:

Quote; "the "omerta" concerning discussion of the true nature of The Yugoslavian conflict and the economic, social and political consequences of "The Wider European Union" that is so rigidly adhered to and enforced by The European Media applies to R.T and Al Jazeera as-well (whose collusion indicates both the true extent of the omerta's influence and it's source).  Russia's behaviour (and that of the westernised Arab states), which is similar to that of America with regard to foreign and domestic policy dictates that such should be the case, for just as it is not in N.A.T.O's interest to encourage stability in the middle east it is not in Russia's to encourage the formation of an Eastern European economic and political community (whatever did happen to ours?), Russia's embrace of monetarist values and "laissez-faire" ensures that her foreign policy decisions are taken solely in order to maximise short term profits for a small group of people in just the same way as are those of the member states of N.A.T.O"...."For those of us who were conscious during the process of the "Sophie's Choice" of a referendum on electoral reform that the post Yugoslavian Conflict British electorate were encouraged to accept as a true expression of their democratic freedoms the notion that a transcendent N.A.T.O does not control the economic, political and social direction of our country is ludicrous (is it not Mr.Ashdown?). Cameron dances the nationalist tune but he does not "pay-the-piper" yet whilst the anti-European lobby postures pro-Europeans (and this is true throughout Europe and beyond), simply refuse to accept the idea that "The European Adventure" has been hijacked by imperialist brigands" Go to:

"The Poles (bless 'em), to whom we owe a great deal, would surely have been better served (as would we), if the E.U's unconsidered expansion to the very borders of Mother Russia had not taken place. The Germans who -virtually- single handedly destroyed the fabric of The United Nations by recognising an independent Croatia having done so then colluded with America (again? go to -Edit 21/11/10-), to point missiles up Putin's nose*." Go to:

Quote; "The fact that this situation has now worsened (re: NATO involvement in the Ukraine and the State Dept's continuing presence/influence in Europe), should give the clue as to the causes of the U.K's current "State of Khaos". Those forces within the European Union which are pushing for the federally administrated fascism of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership ("TTIP"), and the "Nato-isation" of Eastern Europe have no interest in democracy such as that represented by the exercise of their rights of self-determination by the "European" Electorate (or anyone else come to that)! That any politician or any commentator should have considered that entering into a vote on independence for the Scottish People without first determining how Scotland (and the rest of the U.K), would cope economically and continue to trade with the rest of The World should the vote be "Yes" is clearly asinine. Or is it? Not if you depend for your power-base on anachronistic institutions which are anathema to the "modern" (community centred), democratic process it isn't! Perhaps Alex Salmond felt powerless against The Eurasian State but does this excuse his seeming lack of ability to go "toe to toe" with The Euro-fascists on the issue of currency union? Certainly the fire-breathing Euro-dragon has become a formidable and heavily armed opponent for any single postulant or squire." Go to:

Quote; "Putin's actions in "annexing" The Crimea are simply a tit-for-tat reaction to U.S attempts to extend its influence by abusing its relationship with The European States (and those same states stupidity in colluding with them), and a long-term strategic aim for Mother Russia because it denies The U.S a possible base in The Black Sea* (go to; "Analysts: Black Sea port in Ukraine still key to Russia's naval interests":
 That R.T should begin to screen documentaries on; "the true nature of The Yugoslavian Conflict" following the denouement of The First Act of this gripping drama is therefore hardly surprising; the scene has moved on, the wheels are in motion....Our  soft-fascism continues too with "The Omerta" in full-force regarding The Greater Europe for once again both Left and Right Wings in Britain have failed to grasp-the-nettle with regard to European immigration. Quote: "How has Pallas Athena offended us so badly as to provoke us to perpetrate these obscenities? Well for one thing The European Union is too big ( ), as Schumacher intimated in "Small is Beautiful";  "a "Greater Europe" will represent an unsupported socio-economic structure and must collapse"
" Go to:

 Napoleonic style imperialist republican zeal is not the only reason why the E.U has become an untenable structure, however, for it is still made up of a number of "princely states" first and foremost amongst these is of-course the U.K. Elizabeth the Second might well express her lack of amusement with the outcome of the Brexit referendum for she wishes to prevent the United Kingdom from disbanding. It is in the monarchy's interest to maintain (at least the illusion of -although even in the 21c the U.K monarchy's power is certainly not all "smoke-and-mirrors"-), power and independence for Scotland would be the beginning of a very slippery and steep slope for the House of "Windsor" (it matters not that the SNP are in favour of Scotland remaining in Europe as the Scots will -effectively-, be a republic if they leave the union despite what the SNP leadership may posture for the cameras), leading to many voices in Wales, Northern Ireland (and even places like Cornwall), being raised in favour of greater and greater devolution and ("eventual"), independence from the English Crown. In this sense the European Union is an anachronism for it (still), represents an attempt to resolve the internecine strife that sparked the great European conflagration of wars one and two, as such the E.U is a compromise between both families and political philosophies and now the compromise is "past-its-sell-by-date"! Perhaps we will discover that E.F. Schumacher was absolutely right when he outlined the principles by which he saw international consensus (and international institutions), developing, that such must come from; individual consciousness, supported by communities, expressed through societies and "enshrined" in republics, for if humanity is to to come together successfully, despite its ethnic and cultural differences, each individual must be sovereign unto themselves and not enslaved to any other.

Quote; "Sheremet, 44, was a Belarusian journalist and TV host who has been working outside of Belarus for a long time. He used to work in Russia as TV host and journalist before moving to Kyiv around five years ago.
Sheremet hosted a morning show on Radio Vesti. According to the radio's website, the journalist was heading to the radio's office to host his show when the car exploded." Go to:

Quote; ""Before becoming Ukraine’s Finance Minister last December, Natalie Jaresko collected $1.77 million in bonuses from a US-taxpayer-financed investment fund where her annual compensation was supposed to be limited to $150,000, according to financial documents filed with the US Internal Revenue Service this year.

The near 12-fold discrepancy between the compensation ceiling and Jaresko’s bonuses, paid in 2013, was justified in the IRS filing from the Jaresko-led Western NIS Enterprise Fund (WNISEF) by drawing a distinction between getting paid directly from the $150 million US government grant that created the fund and the money from the fund’s “investment sales proceeds,” which were treated as fair game for extracting bonuses far beyond the prescribed compensation level.

Using this supposed loophole, Jaresko and some of her associates enriched themselves by claiming money generated from US taxpayers’ dollars while avoiding any personal financial risks. She and other WNISEF officers collected the bonuses from what they deemed “profitable” exits from some investments even if the overall fund was losing money and shrinking, as it apparently was in recent years." Go to:

Quote; ""What my dear is this man doing in my house?" Well that's an interesting question young man..some of it (and I stress "some of it"), goes like this.....this man has no right in your house or to tell you what to do...those who make up what could become "your people"  are about to make a decision driven (one way or another), by economics concerning whether they wish to remain in close proximity to our bloodied former enemies or take their chances in (as "Mr.President" pointed out), an open boat on the North Atlantic! Call me picky but don't this (what otherwise -?-, would be carpet-bagging), individual and the country he represents bear at least some measure of responsibility for The Wider Europe's current appalling problem in terms of immigration from the states that his country so enthusiastically encouraged all the other NATO members to bomb and/or invade? Yet no in the wondrous world of  "Unclo Samo" it is possible to consider electing a man who considers that simply sharing the faith of those one has so imprudently attacked be sufficient to deny one entry to ones fair land! So will European democracy be the first casualty in the war? No I don't think so I believe we are at the triage stage now" Go to:

Quote; ""Either/or democracy is the dalliance of the totalitarian"" Go to: 

Quote; "North and South? You might just as well say, "beat the w*ps!" Surely returning the Grecians their marbles would be an anti-imperialist act (for it is the imperialists who have championed "The Greater Europe's" unconsidered eastern expansionism -is it any wonder that; "The centre cannot hold"?-)? Please see; "Sophie's Choice (again)", go to:" Go to:

Quote; "
The nation WAS Europe’s breadbasket – and now in an act of bio-warfare, it will become the wasteland that many US farmlands have become due to copious amounts of herbicide spraying, the depletion of soil, and the overall disruption of a perfect ecosystem.
The aim of US government entities is to support the takeover of Ukraine for biotech interests (among other strategies involving the prop-up of a failing cabalistic banking system that Russia has also refused with its new alignment with BRICS and its own payment system called SWIFT). This is similar to biotech’s desired takeover of Hawaiian islands and land in Africa.
The Ukraine war has many angles that haven’t been exposed to the general public – and you can bet that biotech has their hands in the proverbial corn pie.
Originally Published: Global Research
"Go to:" Go to:

Quote; "Our problems are causing seems to this observer that the media is failing in its duty to point out America's responsibilities at this time..the Left (because of its attitudes towards Europe -and Shengen-, re: The Scottish Vote etc.), are poor Europeans and as a result consistently fail to properly represent our financial interests to the U.S!" Go to:

Quote; "
With the help of historians and contemporary witnesses, the three-part documentary 'The Balkans in Flames' examines the disintegration of the former Socialist Federation of Yugoslavia. The #Balkans in Flames 7.20pm, Wednesday 18 - Friday 20 November" Go to: