@bringbackBR (#NHS). My MP is a Labour Whip (Shadow Cabinet member) and her comment may interest you.

August 29, 2014

This is my MP’s response to my signature on a petition email ref. future fare rises. I’ve isolated one sentence put it in Bold Face for emphasis.

As she is a member of the Shadow Cabinet, I would say that they still don’t favour this, or any other re-nationalisation.

Rather, their intent is to make privatisation “work”.

Yvonne Fovargue MP House of Commons
London
22 August 2014

Dear Mr Shale
Thank you for contacting me regarding rail fare increases and the ownership of the rail network.
I appreciate and share the concerns of passengers who are faced with steep rail fare increases and I know this is having a serious impact on household incomes. Rising rail fares and season ticket prices, which have gone up by 20% on average since 2010, are also contributing to the cost of living crisis that is affecting people across the country.
I believe there needs to be real reform of our railways in order to reduce costs and improve services for passengers. The Government should, for example, impose a strict cap on rail fares, reform ticketing and remove the power for train companies to `flex’ fares.
The Government have also made a real mess of their rail franchising programme. Their disastrous handling of the West Coast Main Line franchise has cost the taxpayer at least £55 million and they have taken the unnecessary and dogmatic decision to privatise Intercity services on the East Coast Main Line even though East Coast is working well and will have returned around £1 billion to the taxpayer by the end of this financial year.

There should, of course, be no return to old style British Rail and there can be no blank cheque.

However, it is clear that the current system is flawed and that we need to find a better way forward so that franchising arrangements reflect value for taxpayers’ money and create a more coherent system.
I know that the Shadow Transport Team are looking at pragmatic and affordable solutions to this as part of their policy review process and I can assure you that will continue to follow this closely.
I will continue to bear in mind the points you raise and I thank you once again for writing to me and for sharing your views.
Yours sincerely
Yvonne Fovargue
Labour Member for Makerfield

EU,Jihad,NHS,Privatisation. The British will accept any insult from Gov’t. but for a few protest marches.

August 28, 2014
posted to D.Express (22/8/14) but not published
Consider how little success that Government has had in preventing illegal immigrants from entering the country.
Consider their lack of success on removing illegal immigrants once discovered.
Consider the way that European criminals have re-appeared in this country within weeks of being found guilty and deported.
Now consider the likelihood that the British Government would be able to deal with Jihadists returning from their Islamic State, once there is no-one left to kill.
These killers wouldn’t return wearing head scarves, carrying Kalashnikov’s and holding up British passports with a stamp from Islamic State.
They’ll be legally entitled to enter the C
ountry.
They might be subject to lengthy chats but they’d inevitably be passed through, as of a right.
 
We have already had two Jihadists publicly behead a British soldier, without having left this country and they still have our legal system tied up.
What will our politicians do when the returnee’s have made good their threats and publicly beheaded more soldiers, reporters, police and anyone else likely to attract media attention.
How many can be safely held in custody, under the watchful eye of Serco, or G4s?
It is doubtful that our politicians have the wits, or power, to bring in measures to contain this threat and that’s the real calamity of our present political arrangements and those who’ve been trained in academic-based political theory.
 
The British are, in the main, extremely tolerant, forbearing and even passive, as we found under IRA provocation, but they aren’t going to rush to the polls to elect BNP or EDL councillors and feel satisfied with that.
At some point, if the threat is as great as the media predicts, someone will eventually take direct action to avenge a personal loss. The authorities will take their usual stance and the response will be disastrous.
Our political master’s have made the Laws and signed the treaties, which confound them.
They have the power to rescind both and to enact new laws, which Police and Judiciary would gladly implement.
They just have to remember that they are our representatives; not those of Brussels, Uncle Sam’s, or anyone else.
If we believe that they act in our interests, we’ll support them.

Scotland could be the open door for illegal immigrants.

August 28, 2014
Here’s a thought. If Scotland goes independent, will there be any point to the Border Control Agency?
The French would willingly let illegal immigrants cross The Channel but Illegal immigrants would have no problem, at all, if they entered via Scotland.
Wouldn’t the Scots let them enter their independent territory, on the condition that the illegals promised to immediately stroll down the road to England?

Giving HMRC licence to raid our accounts is simply an extension of privatisation philosophy , so why are Capitalists upset?

August 28, 2014
Posted (27/8/14) to D.Express but not published.
I fully endorse Stephen Pollard’s attack on the The Government’s giving HMRC the right to seize our assets, without recourse to Law.
However; this attitude of mind has not suddenly sprung up out of some archaic political theory. It has evolved from a long-standing and fossilised view of political reality.
I notice that he was careful to blame Parliament, rather than the Government of the day. He was right to do so but, I believe, it was for the wrong reasons.
I’m glad that it was not a Labour Government in power, as he would have fouled up his well presented case with an attack on Socialism, ignoring the fact that this attitude, assumed by
all Parliamentarians, irrespective of party, has been the norm for decades.
I’m sure Mr.Pollard was, and is, a very strong supporter of the privatisation of British Gas, along with all subsequent sales of tax-payer funded assets and tax-payer subsidised services.
I also hope he sees and accepts the connection that I am trying to make.
For me, it is clear that the two party system has created a duopoly, which is neither Left wing, nor Right wing but serves its own agenda of self-perpetuation.
It’s concern is to gain greater power over us and to treat both Capital and Labour, as theirs to command.
It’s reflected in their refusal to let us have a say in membership of the EU, or the destruction of the NHS.
It’s reflected in their ever newer forms of taxation, including those raised by private companies and quangoes e.g. Hospital car parking charges, speed camera fines and reduced wheelie bin collections.
It’s as if we had hired a shepherd and he was not only selling us our own mutton, he was hiring out grazing rights on our pastures to our neighbours.
Perhaps, if Mr. Pollard were to look again at some of the policies he has supported in the past, he will see that they do encourage politicians to have this view of their role.

“Inter-disciplinary partnerships” and “collective responsibility” means no blame and apologies

August 28, 2014
This was posted to Daily Express (27/8/14) but not published
BBC North West reported on the abuse of a large number of children, whilst in care, in Rotherham.
They reported that there had been calls for the resignation of Rotherham’s Police Commissioner, who had been the Councillor in charge of such matters, at the time.
He rejected such calls, claiming “collective responsibility”.
I seem to have read of this excuse being used far too often, especially where “across-discipline partnerships” have been invoked as a ploy to share out blame and thereby dilute the penalties.
Why is this accepted as a defence for bureaucrats and politicians but not gangster’s.
It didn’t work for the slayers of Julius Caesar but it seems to be accepted in courts when some highly overpaid (because of their level of responsibility) Official is dismissed, without “proper procedures” being applied.
Surely if people are extremely well paid for taking on a responsibility, then any failure to meet their share of that responsibility should be sufficient grounds for summary dismissal.
Rotherham’s Police Commissioner is an elected official but, if he is aware of reports of abuse and hasn’t acted on them, in his new role, then he has failed to act responsibly in this post, also.
What is his function? What is his responsibility? Have such officials been created without any oversight, or Home Office control?

@bbctv when doesGovernment “Information” become News?

August 19, 2014

This is a letter to the Daily Express but is really meant to express my irritation over how much the BBC seems to have become an extension of Government propaganda. 19/8/14

It is puzzling as to how the BBC  deems some items Newsworthy.
The announcement that a Government Minister is choosing which, of three companies, he will award a train franchise to is only newsworthy, if the companies are named and, then, only if someone has an objection to one of those names and, then, only if the Minister is likely  to take any notice of that objector. Otherwise it is dead air and not newsworthy.
An Announcement that a local Council has found that a significant number of the schoolchildren, in its catchment area, are obese is only Newsworthy to the extent that they have, in a time of cutting budgets, collated this information.
News is supposed to be informing people about events that have occurred recently and which may be of interest to them.
When did it become a means of allowing bureaucrats to try to justify the tax money being extracted from the listener (or viewer, if the newsreader is on TV and worth lifting one’s eyes from a hastily munched piece of toast)?
An accident on your route into work is News,
The cause of the sirens that woke you, last night, is News.
The farther from your home, the more serious an incident must be, to justify iy being called News
Somebody signing a mundane legal document in Whitehall is not something of interest to a national Newspaper and a local Council Officer preparing a document for the next Council meeting is not a News item to excite a the local paper, So why does such dross fascinate the BBC?
 Perhaps there should be a special post-News section, entitled “public announcements of things in which you have no interest whatsoever, so feel free to dash off and catch the bus for work”.
An Evening version could include “changes in the Law and how they will affect you”.
E.g. there is now a 20mph speed limit on streets on housing estates and if there’s ever enough police cars available to administer it, that white van man who nearly hit you yesterday stands a better chance of winning the National Lottery than of being fined £50, or, more likely, being given a serious verbal warning.
Although there is a chance that Mrs Curtain-Twitcher, will make a complaint against you, which will not be substantiated but will necessitate some PCSO knocking on your door to try and lecture you about the sincere need for such legislation

We need protein culture technology.

August 19, 2014

I came across a video on Facebook, which purported to be an expose of marketing techniques but in actuality was a propaganda piece by fundamentalist vegetarians.

I know that vegetarianism is popular amongst my children’s generation, on ethical grounds but this video disturbed me, partly because of the way it was presented but mainly by the mindset behind it.

I’m from a generation, which knew what food shortages meant, who bought their chickens with head, feet and feather’s attached. we knew that animals were killed to feed us and a chicken was what we ate at Xmas, if we could afford it.

Our parents had come through a War, where people were blown apart.  Squeamishness was not normal and animal life did not appear to be quite so important in that context.

My parents had lived through the Twenties and Thirties and been vegetarians, because they had little say in the matter. Blind scouse was a standing joke. Death through malnutrition was common and diseases caused by vitamin deficiencies were almost unavoidable. State intervention (The Welfare State) to have vitamin supplements added to the plebian diet was a post war phenomenon and it  wasn’t until Windrush, when immigrant Caribbean children began to suffer from rickets, that Vitamin D was added to margarine (butter was expensive) and Calcium was added to white bread.

Foraging hedgerows for edible weeds, fishing canals etc. are modern hobbies. They were until, during my lifetime, a necessary means of supplementing one’s diet and preventing large doctor’s bills.  The Welfare State provided free concentrated orange juice to ensure children got Vitamin C but we still had family days scrambling through brambles to gather blackberries.

Don’t knock modern farming methods.

For the present generation six footers are common. In my generation, only the rich grew so tall

I’m just over 5’6″, which was near average height in my day but at 5’8″ my dad was considered exceptionally tall for his generation. The generation previous to his grew up under the Poor Law reforms caused by recruiter’s having to reject most of the applicants for Army Service, as being too weak and malnourished, with average height being 4’6″ (Puts the film Zulu in a new light).

If you’ve ever visited The Victory and gone below decks, take note that the ordinary seamen didn’t have to duck, when hurrying below decks.

It’s the access to fresh fruit and veg and especiallyto meat (think of the Beadle’s admonishment in Oliver Twist) that has created the tall healthy generation, which we see Today.

Interesting to note that American G.I’s in WW2 were 6 footer’s, whilst the Japs were 5 footer’s, reflecting the diet of those two nations.

It’s true that you don’t need to eat meat to survive and it’s possible, with modern access to fresh fruit and veg to be healthy but you still need Vitamin B12, which you can get from eggs. The only problem is that the present plentiful supply of eggs, depends on chickens and factory farming.

Those who enjoy dairy products, also need to bear in mind where these  come from.  If factory farming was ended, many modern breeds of domesticated animal would cease to exist.

Actually apart from any other consideration, the real problem facing mankind isn’t Climate change, or asteroid hits etc. the main problem is over-population and that may be behind this drive to encourage vegetarianism.

It won’t be enough and future generations will have to face up to The four Horsemen of The Apocalypse. It’s just a question of how they’ll arrive.

The better nourished will be best able to face them and I  fully expect the masses to be taken back to a pre-war diet, within another generation.

(Chicken Little and Soylent Green)

@bruciebabe what a pitiful misunderstanding of Socialism and of Capitalism and of Free Market Forces.

August 17, 2014

If you go here:

http://www.bruceonpolitics.com/2014/07/23/socialism-is-evil-7-articles/

you will see what is claimed to be an accurate description of socialism.

Below is a revision of that piece, from a different perspective:

@bruciebabe begins with a simplistic version of “The Market”
 A simple but effective mechanism that puts the customer first, providing the goods and services that the customer wants at the price and quality that they need and is the reason major calamities like wars, epidemics and natural disasters are quickly overcome.
This mechanic also ensures that the most efficient possible use is made of all resources, from labour and capital through to crops in our field and minerals in the ground.

The following is my continuation/version of what he then wrote:

Then along came the evil of greed. Manifested with punishing the hard working by extorting their labour to give to the lazy and feckless a mechanism whereby they maximised profits and minimised costs to improve their own standard of living at the expense of the health and well being of their employees (impersonalised by referring to them as Labour, a commodity).

To prevent this requires that the state takes control of most things with the moral superiority of treating all men as of value. They protect the individual’s life from cradle to grave and regulate to protect him from the depredation’s of domestic, as well as foreign aggressor’s.
This social care based system was successfully implemented after the second World War, in the form of the Welfare State. Ordinary people have ceased to die of diseases caused by poverty and the rich can longer talk of employing a little man to carry out the menial tasks, because under this system the average height of plebs has increased by six inches. It is called socialism.

Britain was a socialist country but we now have a neo-liberal government and some of the biggest sectors of our economy are now run badly by privateer’s using artificial markets in what are actually cartels.(e.g. Gas,Elec., Rail,Water).
As part of the extending of this process, of raping State Assets (I.e. Assets paid for out of General Taxation), successive Governments have begun a process of debilitating the rest of the executive structure of the Country, selling off, piecemeal, the prison Service, the probation Service, the Police Service, The NHS, Education etc. They seem to be examing the best means of doing the same job with the Armed Forces, Tax collecting, the Judiciary and presumably, when TTIP is signed up to, Government itself.
This process has been accelerated under The Shock Doctrine, to use alleged Austerity measures to  reduce wages and working conditions, whilst shovelling more and more of tax income into the pension pots of privateers’  share dividends. Feckless parasites, leeching off the labour of the masses, whilst berating those unable to secure employment as scrounger’s.

Earlier he wrote seven articles to explain some of  the many evils of socialism. Here they are collated in one place:
Why socialism is evil #1, equality  
The poor want a fair deal. disgusting!
Why socialism is evil #2, envy.
The poor are eating too well. If a million poor people each had £1 taken off them and given to me, I’d be millionaire
Why socialism is evil #3, control freakery
They want to prevent me selling them horsemeat and calling it beef.
Why socialism is evil #4, financial ineptitude.
They want to spend less on shareholder’s and more on the welfare of plebs.
Why socialism is evil #5, they think they know better than the market.
They know that the Market has the sense of a fox in a hen coop.
Why socialism is evil #6, they pretend to be nice.
They are nasty to those who would prey on the masses.
Why socialism is evil #7, financial sleaze.
They don’t know the true meaning of financial sleaze.

Read the above and you will understand that the Conservative party and New Labour party truly are the nasty people of British politics. They have done immense damage to Great Britain in countless ways by applying their evil and avaricious dogma. Their fellow travelers are The City and the bankers, such as Goldmann Sachs, who bankroll them.

What have trade unions done for Great Britain?
They’ve given the masses a chance to see that it is possible for their children to grow up safely in a world free from the horrors that their great grandparents endured, when Trade Unions were illegal.

What is in these articles is not an in depth study of the evil these people have suffered, that would take several books. It is merely a misguided attempt to smear them and obscure the evil done under the doctrine of step on your fellow man and break his neck.

Be Sociable, Share!

Soldier’s get crosses. General’s get statues (and live longer)

August 11, 2014

The theme of my previous posting about QI led me to thinking about the destruction of Folk History in order to write a new politically approved History.
It has become more noticeable with the Commemoration of the murder of millions of soldiers in WWI, as part of our indoctrination into becoming “good” Europeans. The History of the senseless murder of Plebs by Politicians is to be re-written as the noble self-sacrifice of patriots.

They were undoubtedly patriots but folk history remembers the “lions led by donkey’s”, officers shooting soldier’s who were too scared to leap into a hail of machine gun fire, after clambering over  the mounds of men who, seconds before, were their “pals”.  Folk history remembers the guns at Churchill’s Gallipoli, when the Turkish soldier’s were said to have become dazed by the number’s of men falling prey to their guns. It remember’s how General Pershing typified the mentality of the Senior Officer’s by ordering 10,000 US soldier’s to die, knowing that the Armistice was only hours away. Folk History remembers the treatment of those men, who survived to face starvation, or the begrudged charity of the Workhouse.

Folk History remembers the conditions for the poor from before the Poor Law acts and the freeing of the Slaves, right up until soon after the first Labour Government achieved office.

My generation have the recollections of snippets of our parents childhood’s, backed up by an untainted Official school-based History of the times. The History is only about the important people, so it’s impact on the Plebs being taught it was of no more concern than gossip being overheard by the servants. Besides, most knew their place and the consequences of stepping out of it.

My children’s generation have a History, which is constantly being re-written and sanitised, as it happens. Debunking, as in QI, is a constant noise, so News is expunged from memory, or simply disregarded as information overload.

Newspapers, encourage this disconnection, with headlines immediately contradicting those of the previous day. Warnings of  weeks of Heatwave are followed up with warnings of a week of Blizzards. The dangers of Statins, Aspirin etc., announced on the Monday, are replaced, on the Wednesday,  by official exhortations to protect one’s self by daily consumption of them. Wonder foods and adulterated foods and contaminated foods jostle for space amongst the Supermarket adverts, for those same foods.

In this electronic age, one might hope that Social Media would come to the aid of Folk History but it can’t.

By its nature, electronic data can evaporate at the flick of a switch.

Who, apart from the NSA and similar, have records of Yesterday’s tweets. You could download them but how do you keep them?

How long ago were we using floppy discs to store documents and pictures. Who now has devices and necessary software drivers to read them?

Even Wikipaedia, which has large memory storage facilities, can’t vouch for the safety of  the truth.

Apart from the persecution of its overseer’s (£7,000,000 spent, so far, on keeping Assange in prison), its pages are being re-written by TThe Ministry of Information, taking advantage of the nature of Wiki’s open access.

The politicians of the EU have legislated (and maybe bribed with tax freedom) Google into removing access to certain public information. Ostensibly protecting the private lives of ordinary citizens, whilst also blocking access to stories of corruption; protecting pederasts and embezzler’s alike.

If Fritz Lang’s Metropolis were re-made Today, it’d appear very mundane and far from futuristic.

Quite Interesting, or, intentionally, Bloody Irritating?

August 11, 2014

When QI was first aired, it was quite enjoyable.

Alan Davies’ non-stop babbling took some time before it began to get irritating.

The occasional nod to Stephen Fry’s sexuality was in the tradition of theatrical gaiety and took time to become so dominant a theme.

It may be the fact that I was a Science teacher, which makes me irritated that he steals all the best classroom demo’s (used in school lessons to brighten the burden of having to think and struggle to catch intellectually hard concepts) and fritters them away, so Davies can squeal about how if Fry had been his teacher, he’d have enjoyed lessons more (Pillock!).

It was Quite Interesting to find some long held belief’s shown to be unfounded but it becomes tiresome, when question’s were posed, so that they might be debunked;  or appear to be.

For instance the query, “how many moon’s has the Earth got?” is obviously intended to be debunked. A more honest question would have been to ask how many large, natural satellites it had but that would have been a not so interesting question. There may be more than the one , known as The Moon, but the fact that there are other rocks up there, which could be claimed to be moons isn’t really interesting, or accurate.

What about the man-made satellites, from paint flakes to the Space Station. Are the rings of Saturn made up of moons? At what point do people feel entitled to call a rock, a moon? Does it become a moon when it can be distinguished by the naked eye (rules out Phobos and Deimos), or when some sky-watcher rushes in to print with his new “spot”? I know Stephen Fry briefly acknowledged this but it’s the debunk that’s rembered and becomes accepted fact.

Ok! maybe that little rant is pedantry and jibes with the nature of the show but then why was Dara Ó Briain hauled over the coals for knowing about the Triple point of water? If the show is going to claim that precision is Quite Interesting, then it needs to be more precise by stating levels of tolerance and degrees of significance (a point at which most go to sleep, yet it is the essence of Science)

QI also needs to check its own facts such as the story given out about the origin of the Prince of Wales emblem, which an entry on the Prince of Wales’ regimental website discounts.

The big problem is that the sources of these “alleged” myths almost always present them with a disclaimer. Ordinary repeated conversation drops the disclaimer, for the sake of brevity. Some people may preface their repetition with an “apparently” but there’s always some pratt (thinking Alan Davies, again), who’ll immediately jump in with both left feet, shouting that it must, therefore, be a lie.

Now my concern is that Propagandists are using this acceptance of authorative debunking to destroy Folk History.  How do you know what to believe, if authorative and popular personalities are constantly debunking everything you were taught, or believed?

1984 may have been meant to parody 1948, with its scissor and glue copy and paste of books etc. but its idea’s will still work with electronic copy and paste. It’s just faster and easier to disseminate the niu facts.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 335 other followers