Jun 08

Note how even a month ago the Administration was saying what it said on Friday was arrant nonsense.


In a much-anticipated speech about the battle against terrorism, Mr. Obama said that expanded surveillance was among the measures that “raised difficult questions about the balance” between security and privacy, without addressing changes.


Weeks before the 2012 election, Mr. Obama told Jon Stewart on “The Daily Show” that he had “modified” President George W. Bush’s wiretapping approach, adding “safeguards.”


The Bush administration “puts forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we provide,” Mr. Obama, a presidential candidate, said in an August 2007 speech. He also vowed to end the “illegal wiretapping of American citizens.”

written by reaction

Nov 08

Why not just elect Bernanke in 2016? After all he runs the country bar the silly wars to pretend the US is under threat.

He could then print money for whoever wanted it and bring in a compassionate  decimation program for the bottom of society for 2 years. This is an adaptation of the McKinsey’s Enron model which worked along similar lines as QE3.The US would still have about 81% of the population after 2 years enough to provide income for sports, colleges and subdued serfs prepared to work and it would have cleaned the prisons out saving Billions etc. After all it will be better for them than the slow death they inevitably have to suffer due to being poor under Bernanke and Obamaonomics? You can live in poverty, watch your kids starve grow up and go to jail or we can just kill you now. No brainer eh! After a decade or if the $ stoned decimation could start again.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , ,

Oct 12

It’s interesting aspect of the special relationship that is an ironic joke except of course where banker culture and worship is concerned. In that regard Bush, Obama, Clinton, Brown, Balls, Cameron and Osborne all pay homage at the alter of economic ruin.

The Swiss who one would have seen doing rather well out of banker fraud unfortunately had to ask the Septics for a bailout and now hand over files on tax dodgers to the US Treasury and other interested states.

However one tax haven exists unchallenged by law or demands for reform and access. It’s not remote or in the 3rd world. It’s Jersey. It’s where 21+ Billion of dead “Capital” is stored. It also has an orphanage where Jimmy Savile and others went to molest and rape children. There was an investigation into this orphanage but it seems to have ended quickly and without charges. Journalists from abroad are kept from visiting Jersey and the surgical destruction of social workers and doctors that happened because Baby P’s parents were scum is not in the press. It was quietly swept away.

Why would a tax haven where The Queen is head of state cover up child abuse and why would The Queen and Govt let them?

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , ,

Feb 01

Time was when as a Westerner I naively would watch some Middle Eastern or African butcher and listen to them dismiss suggestions that anyone was killed or tortured by them and wonder, really!  Continue reading »

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , ,

Dec 24

Warning contains bitterness

In keeping with other websites read in greater numbers thought I would use the gimmick of a quiz. No prize on offer sadly.

  • Which of these is the biggest liar a) Gordon Brown b) Chris Huhne c) James Murdoch d) a compulsive liar
  • Why is the UK considering getting involved in Somalia a) Humanitarian reasons b) Oil
  • Most Charisma a) Mitt Romney b) Ed Miliband
  • Names Ed Balls 5 best and 5 worst changes of direction on economic policy in 2011
  • George Osborne’s head tilts to the side because a) he only has the artistic hemisphere of his brain b) he’s locked in boxes during election campaigns c) he looks askance at his fellow humans cos he thinks he’s better than them – more than 1 answer may apply
  • Moussa Koussa was released because a) there was no evidence that he was a murdering butcher b) he had the goods on the UK Govt
  • Bigger waste of money a) PFI b) QE c) Bailouts d) Fernando Torres
  • Adam Werritty is a) a ‘friend’ of Dr Liam Fox b) an arms dealer c) a cunt – more than one answer may apply
  • Greener a) UK Greenest ever Govt b) Barack Obama c) Yellow d) BP
  • Better writer a) Nick Cohen b) David Aaronovitch c) Chris Hitchens after 2 bottles of hard liqueur
  • For the average student what is the difference between Govt and Opposition plans for student loans.
  • Belhaven Best is a) the best beer in Scotland b) a load of shit brewed by a multinational
  • Dumber Oxford PPE graduate a) Cameron b) Ed Miliband c) Balls d) all too stupid to nit pick
  • Name a quality UK Newspaper (warning it’s a trick question)
  • You’re an MP invited to a Nazi themed party do you a) refuse b) go and leave at the first salute to Hitler c) compliment the guy on his Waffen SS outfit.

As a tie breaker suggest new friends for Tony Blair since his mates Gaddafi and Mubarek have been made unavailable.

written by reaction \\ tags: ,

Feb 22

Alan Johnson and Peter Mandelson do not think the Prime Minister bullies anyone apparently.  Mandelson we can assume was lying as his mouth moved. Alan Johnson mocks science for seeking a rational basis for things.

See what I did there I took one event from Alan Johnson’s career used it in another context to smear his opinion on a completely different subject. I use it every time I mention the Luddite (did it again!)  as it’s belittling and mocking and means I have dismissed anything he says without analysis. Really they should offer me a job.

They may have missed what has been clear to anyone who watches TV or has had a cursory interest in politics for the last 15 years. Bullying has been the defining feature of New Labour. As we saw with everyone from Professor Nutt, Dr Kelly to ambassadors pointing out our support for torture the Govt deals with dissent or even a differing opinion with public mocking, obfuscation, gossip and smear.

Brown as Frank Field said develops irrational Chief Inspector Dreyfus style hatred of people who argue back at him. Quite funny as the bungling Inspector Clouseau seems like a fitting sobriquet for Brown’s chancellorship as hindsight brutally kicks us in the balls.

Ken Follet a once leading supporter of Blair accused the New Labour Govt of

making malicious gossip an everyday tool of modern British government

The ironically named Balls Brown’s mini me clone has been publicly rebuked for his bullying style.

Brown’s ability to deal with women is also clearly an issue. He promotes to appear a certain way but like a lot of angry insecure men will not let them close as Caroline Flint said at one hopes the end of her ministerial career.

Their response to any accusation is to try to smear people, groups and create a sub argument about whether that person should be saying what they are saying – without dealing with the veracity of the argument. Regardless the issue should remain what the Prime Minister and his office do. Not what some other body does, that is their business whereas the Govt is all our business.

Note the careful way their denials are truism or only cover a subset of allegations. Brown never hit people apparently. Yet he was accused of grabbing and pushing. In the careful way they use language that’s an admission surely?

Given how outwardly nasty they are it would surely be shocking if bullying was not de rigueur internally? They all turn into mild mannered polite little men internally? And they’re all men BTW.

The mistake here again extends from the frankly bizarre decision to make Brown the message. Even to Old Labourites like me that absence of strategic thought, ball of reactionary self centred nastiness and narcissism is more off putting than Cameron.

In real-politik thinking they did not have to respond to these accusations especially as they are clearly true. Sometimes you cannot spin lies for convenience and quietly letting things burn out works.

You cannot deny what you are.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , , , , ,

Jan 08

Too much state money.

Too much religion.

Too melodramatic.

Too intolerant of others.

Too do as I say not as I do.

I recall wondering why the Loyalist community was so seemingly in favour of an ugly status quo. My man told me that a  lot of couples had jobs in the Govt or RUC and thus the status quo paid them very generously and gave them a stake and an insulation from that society. They and their politicians in turn sold that bigotry to the working class loyalists in speeches dripping with bile, bigotry and hatred.

So no crocodile tears  here for Ulster’s first couple.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , ,

Dec 25

Anger gives clarity by cutting down the frame of reference. It feels good in some ways to have an angry outburst and feel 100% right.  Anger misses the big picture. It closes its mind to alternate views. It misses that we may lack the knowledge to comment and that we should couch our views much more in terms.

Reading through lots of blogs and comments on more reputable sites it’s clear that enough people can talk to themselves and smear others without a fact – believe what they want to believe. Worse they tend to believe that the people of contrary opinions are actually evil rather than products of the institution to which they belong.

No doubt someone who is a Democrat or New Labourite would accuse me of similar. Or maybe more accurately of not having to confront the reality of the broken institutions of Govt or the mob mentality of the Fourth Estate and voters – I plead guilty on that BTW.

What interests me is that I am not the only one to dislike and dare I say hate. I try to hate on stuff that is hate-able and inexcusable like throwing out the Geneva Convention, rendition, torture, genocide and war and all the apologies and justifications for them. After all those things don’t get any better the more they go on in the background and the more accepted and less newsworthy they are. Afghanistan gets no more valid because Obama and McChrystal want to conduct the war more like a liberation.

The polarisation out there is frightening. Whilst on the fringes you will always have sceptics who are set – such as those who still deny HIV leads to AIDS. Yet this fades to nothing as the Climate Change denialists point to a few iffy sentences in an email and invent a conspiracy to tax people more.

One over riding reason I don’t believe in conspiracies per se is that no one is that clever and no group can ever approach the cohesion required. Arguably this is why we form institutions (Charities, Pressure Groups, Religions, Corporations and Govts) to create the pressure and levers that make bad things happen – institutions create their own ideology, storylines and illogicality. 

Once Climate Change became accepted science then some corruption would creep in but surely to deny the whole hypothesis is madness? Yet people will smear and scream and shout because they want to believe it. Conversely arguably far more has been spent paying people to deny climate change than to prove it – no one wanted it to be true. This escapes the angry as they talk satanically of cabals of Liberals plotting to undermine their world. For what end? Do they believe people see benefit in taxation and lower consumption for their own egos? Telling people to accept lower growth and higher unemployment? Hell these same guys have yet to tell us the truth as they hope for a miracle – see Copenhagen.

What probably drives this is that increasingly institutional decisions make no sense hence we can cynically deny the undeniable and point to parallels if it suits our predilection. Policy seems to lack anything more than surface logic if at all. Thus even serious issues based on science are seen like the Afghanistan policy or Health-care reform – matters of opinion. Things our prejudice can inform us on.

We increasingly face this in work as anyone who has worked in a big corporate would know conformity and acceptance are the ways to an easy life. Have you tried to understand why so many checks and obstacles are thrown in the way of pro-activity and attempting to achieve something – qualities they claim to want. Why work socials are just extensions of work. Why quietly saying nothing beats delivery every time.

Maybe the anger comes from our toothlessness and impotence or our relative failure in such a world. Once we are angry and cannot see an obvious direction maybe on the fringes some will strike out at even science and rationality. With so much irrationality is the climate change denier any worse than anyone who believes the moving feasts and smorgas bord of crap used to justify wars and corporate nonsenses?

I like to think I am not angry at things because I want to be – that whilst angry my views stem from rationality but like the Climate Change denier who am I to judge myself . After all I’d like to believe in the current system. The alternatives involve pain in transition and have never proved to work and arguably never will work for the benefit of more than a small proportion of mankind. They also would almost certainly deny me the freedom I have in writing this. I want to like Obama and his seeming rational ability to discuss issues. I want to believe that a supposedly cerebral guy like Brown is despite his personality able to lead. Or even believe that however wrong it appears that Bush and co really believed they were doing the right thing.

If I have a resolution it is not to write anything while angry. To not over step my actual knowledge with my opinions.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , , , , , , ,