Coppers narks
17 May 2012 Leave a Comment
in High Court, Human Rights Tags: community, Duty of care, Law, Queen's Bench
I find it quite amazing that Mr Justice Eady and Lord Justice Moses relieved the media of their obligation to supply essential evidence that can help prosecute criminals. The media is worried they might be seen as coppers narks.
Why would the media not want to assist in the solving of crime? why would the media be getting this value free area, in which they can witness crime but do not have to help solve it?
Ordinary residents and businesses are very keen to assist the police by giving information if they can. We hear the appeals via Crime Stoppers, Crime Watch. Every country has crime and wanted criminals bulletins. The recent riots saw the pictures of wanted rioters distributed everywhere.
The ruling of Mr Justice Eady and Lord Justice Moses could now prompt mainstream publishers to refuse showing wanted posters of criminals because they could be seen as coppers narks.
What is in fact the benefit for society if people can report about crime and have evidence of it but have no obligation to give information about the crime to police? There is no value on that at all. We do not benefit from it that we can see ongoing crime, but we only benefit if we see a reduction in crime.
I have long had quarrels with Mr Justice Eady and the High Court myself, who has a strange idea of citizenship and freedom of the press in general. What this judgement actually promotes is crime and it helps the press be a sensationalist instrument that shows crime to sell papers and sell Internet publications on the basis of showing these sensationalist breakages of the law and it suspends their normal citizen duty to help solve crime. That is a completely and utterly ridiculous decision.
continued from before
Or lets say a reporter watches an old age pensioner being mugged and assaulted in the street, he takes photos and only shows the one where the mugger’s face is unrecognisable; this ruling of Mr Justice Eady will sanction it that the reporter can withhold the photos that show the face of the criminal. The paper can then run a story, the brutal face of crime in the UK, police unable to stem the tide of crime or something along those lines.
It is scary and frightening how both the current government and the judges at the high court systematically undermine the police in their duties. But strangely enough, they haunt any publisher that cooperates with the police like News International did (at least so I assume, but don’t quote me on that). It seems even more strange that the High Court and Mr Justice Eady of course wrote a blank cheque to Der Spiegel when I complaint about their reporting and laid open a lot of discrepancies in the law of data capture and publishing but that only News Corp. International get systematically haunted.
In my very personal view I think Mr Justice Eady is a first-class nerd.
Boris re-elected
05 May 2012 Leave a Comment
in Democracy, England, Health, United Kingdom Tags: Councils, elections
The results are in and Boris can feel good about himself as the majority of Londoners voted for him in a closed contest.
What I found really interesting were the results in my own constituency of City and East where there was a relatively high vote for the BNP with 7031 votes, but that was down -5.7% on the previous election. Comparing this with the Community United Party, that brought in 6774 votes,
The turnout was relatively low at 33.7%. Obviously people did not feel threatened by the election or they would have turned out en-mass.
Still it is good to see fringe groups standing for election as it mirrors a general mood for support. The UKIP was very lowly voted for. Yet if we read the media, they blow up their importance out of all proportions.
I think the underhand winner was the Green Party who came in third all around, beating the Liberal democrats into fourth place. There is a good amount of environmental conscience in London and that was a vote for healthy air, I think.
Surprisingly for me, the BNP beat the Christian People’s Alliance in the London wide voting. Though the loss of the BNP percentage (-6.5%) was greater than the loss of the Christian’s People’ Alliance loss (-2.1%).
The vote reflects that Londoners are Middle of the Road people that favour their economy over philosophy. But the overall result shows that people are generally using their democratic tools to liven up the political debate and favour an overall Conservative rule with local Labour politics, which creates a layer effect of locally we care about the people but nationally austerity measures.
schooling connected to eye damage
04 May 2012 Leave a Comment
in Education, Health Tags: Duty of care
I think that is quite a case for shorter school days, what I always promoted, that children’s short-sightedness problems are connected to spending longer hours in school or even just within buildings. Apparently the number of kids suffering eye problems has risen by 90% in Indian towns, since they were sent to schools all day.
I think the kids’ instinctive desire to preserve health is behind refusal to go to school more than anything else. The body has a built-in warning system to do or not to do things that are bad for your health. But that is variable from person to person. Like in adults some are more health conscious than others. I think it is merely connected to instinctive body clocks that so many kids bunk off school rather than a dislike of learning.
Obviously if spending all those hours make you short-sighted if you spend those hours inside class rooms, we are preparing our children for a slow degeneration process.
In the UK, the percentage of short-sighted children is about 30%. Ii always said I prefer a shorter school day and more time spent outside. I grew up in Germany where school was finished at 1pm and the rest of the day I often spent outdoors.
Quit clearly the eyes sense of perspective gets completely distorted if our eyes only look at short distance objects within 4 walls rather than at objects that are at a variety of distances in their natural perspective.
Time is not on their side
30 Apr 2012 Leave a Comment
in Terrorism Tags: Europe, Law, sympathy
The longer this Abu Qatada problem goes on, the worst for us because the public discussion and time delays in deporting him will only help to give the terrorists momentum and strengthens their movement but does not help to improve anything for us at all.
Threats have already been made by radical Islamists who have offered a hostage deal for Qatada’s release. Khalil Dale, a British Muslim convert, who was found murdered, was taken hostage in January in Pakistan, he was a British Aid worker.
The ECHR is not helping by halting the deportation of Qatada. This matter should be kept as quiet as possible and not allow the press to built the public imagine of that man up and not give terrorist a reason to group up around him. I think there should be a press restriction on reports about the matter. Unfortunately Labour only uses the debacle to try and gain public support by blaming Theresa May for the problems that appeared around the appeal date.
I think such problems show the weakness of the political system in that parties cannot overcome their zealous fight to protect the interests of the nation. No pictures of Abu Qatada should be shown in the press at all. He is already a living shrine to many radical elements and pictures make it worst. Crime prevention should take prevalence, we do not want to learn from mistakes after they were made, we should want to prevent other attacks on innocent people.
Like this:
Modern minimalism
24 Apr 2012 Leave a Comment
in Economy, Socio-economic Tags: community
I think it is an excellent criticism that the Newham Council is accused of social cleansing but that problem has been brought on by minimalist government strategies that merely concentrate on budget related issues, like debt reduction with little consideration for human needs, sentiment and pastoral care.
Even the Public Administration Committee, led by a Conservative, insists that the government lacks a political strategy, making it impossible for individual ministers to follow clear set goals. It’s a patch and mend approach says Bernard Jenkin, according to a BBC publication.
People do not just need flats and food to exist. People are social ‘animals’ who live in groups and develop social orders, which need time to evolve. Disturbing the social balance will bring on political and individual radicalism. Pastoral care is completely ignored in today’s modern governance.
Council’s in inner London cannot find landlords who are willing to house poor families on the rent allowance set by the government, which is currently £400 for a 4-bedroom property per week because obviously there are others who demand those properties and can pay more. Obviously landlords should not be able to keep properties empty on speculative grounds, so as to keep the rent values high.
If people are then planned to be moved to other remote towns with cheaper rent patterns then whole population groups are migrated elsewhere without any backup for their social, medical or schooling needs. They get dropped onto an existing community that has no infra-structure to cope with the influx. This is feared to lead to right-wing radicalism and that is from experience and not sheer theory.
In that we now have a freedom of movement, I wonder how much there is freedom rather than force to be moving. Like we have the right to work but are forced to volunteer.
People’s desire to work and live somewhere is closely related to their personal life, their family, their relations, one cannot just put people anywhere at any time because of some budgetary considerations. People form social networks from personal, work and religious involvements. That is also commonly called a tradition. We just cannot simply just uproot people like that.
The current government is so debt driven, that they do not care about people any longer, all they want to see is the economy going up but that often leads to less comfort. The situation is so bad that again churches have to provide feeding centres for those who have to wait for benefit changes too long, have to provide over-night shelters for the increasing numbers of homeless. Whilst others are happy to come over to the UK and earn a quick buck, they rest safe in the knowledge that their families at least have a steady home with close family relations somewhere else, may that be Poland or Turkey, but what happens here in the UK is that our own residents cannot even rely on keeping their homes and families together any longer, which his what leads to social instability.
Breivik a warning to all lone wolves out there
22 Apr 2012 Leave a Comment
in Crime, Terrorism Tags: Baader-Meinhof, Christian, Duty of care
I think in a way it is good that Breivik at least agrees to talk freely about his experiences and explaines what goes on in his mind because it helps us to understand the psychology that is behind his behaviour. It would also have helped tremendously if at the time the Germans would have captured Baader-Meinhof’s sstate of mind, which was stopped by untimely deaths.
What seems clear from what I can read from the distance is that he had a lot of remote contact over a long period of time with people who groomed him into these attacks. He had very few direct meetings with actual people. But what is clear that if you now go and meet someone over a few days in a strange location you really do not know who you are dealing with. Anybody can pretend to be somebody or dress up an appear in a certain manner to dupe you into thinking that you are on the same wavelength.
Lets face it a lot of extremist ideologies have a lot in common. It is not impossible for an al-Qaede operative to get a Christian radical thinker into carrying out a terrorist act against his own race by twisting his mind long enough.
Breivik was even given uniforms with lapels on and medals. Anybody from any group could have dressed up to pretend to him that they are the Knights Templar. I would urge anybody not to belief others they only meet occasionally, who they are. Unless you know somebody from a real live situation do not belief them please.
A lot of grooming goes on over the Internet, where for example sexual predators pretend to be children and coax kids to meet them but in that instance it would be hard to pretend to be a child when they meet but in the situation around ideological things, that go on in the mind of a person,it would be very hard to distinguish one person from another.
Many ideologies can be carried by any person and often enough today not all blonde and blue eyed persons are Arians any longer, not all who have brown eyes an black hair are Muslims.
If Breivik really wanted to do himself and the people he loves so much a favour, he would describe in detail who the people he met are and what they look like to the littlest detail he can remember. But the fact that he refuses to do that leaves it open to the interpretation that he is not really interested in protecting the Christian culture as he says but that he is merely interested in killing as many as possible with any excuse. That makes him a mere mass murderer who dresses up his actions under some far fetched ideology.
He is very cold and calculating and understands perfectly well what he was doing and even how he manipulated his own emotions to be fit for the task he set himself or allowed others to set for himself. But if he really wanted to protect Christian culture he would have asked each and every person he shot or killed whether they are a Christian or not and he did not do so. That fact alone leads me to belief that he is merely pretending and lying.
Anti-discrimination doesn’t benefit the poor
21 Apr 2012 Comments Off
in Education, YouTube Tags: community, Duty of care
The rich and powerful always want to stay at the top of society regardless of what methods they have to use to stay there. Even if all rich persons today were to become disabled and disease stricken, they would never give their money away to somebody who is poor and clever. They would make all types of laws and rules that lets them keep their money and keep the poor poorer than themselves.
Only when the majority of a ruling elite in a society become so brain damaged that they cannot control their armies to defend them will a whole culture vanish rather than the diseased rich giving up power to a poor person beneath them. That is in principle what happened to the Roman Empire and that is the problem we encounter today again.
There are now so many laws in place and legal mechanisms that are only there to ensure that no rules can exist that could seriously threaten the powerful elite today that all we can do is sit back and wait.
I really do not know why some people keep on protesting so hard against this, that and the other and get themselves in danger because all this does, is help the rich cement their power.
There are now so many instances today where we see that rulings for examples in courts are completely besides the point but that no sensible outsider can even make suggestions to remedy the problem. For example the previous post shows how a German court ordered YouTube to instal filters, when that is a hilariously impossible suggestion to make and the simpler solution of charging a flat fee license fee never even crossed the judges minds, so it seems.
We saw the rich inventing cigarette smoking and getting themselves and the poor smoking to death until it gotten so bad, that they eventually had to concede that it was a bad idea after all. Then we had some brain boxes decide that it was much better to stop individual farming in favour of urbanisation. The poor Greeks are currently the ones who get the same treatment that German farmers got in the 50s and 60s. They are told that because of economic pressures small farms become uneconomical and that they should stop farming.
The problem just is that whilst things happen nobody can really afford to speak up and protest because we have to keep our jobs and homes and income but usually all problems only come out decades later or even centuries later when suddenly somebody concludes the sensible thing, that was not admitted at the time.
If all the richest persons in the world were also the most cleverest and the most healthiest then you could bet your last Dollar that the laws we have today would be completely different. We would see a repression of the chronically sick, a discrimination against slow learners. But because there are now more and more rich people with health and learning problems, that is the only reason why society adopts a more tolerant approach to disabilities and illness. Yet the more the upper classes degenerate the more will the whole of society become weaker and slowly disintegrate into unmanageable chaos.
Could we not find a way to allow those who have the abilities and natural vigour to also get more responsibility over those who just wither away with their Dollars in their pockets.
I often ask myself why did the Bible often speak about people reaching much higher ages than today and I thought that it is possible that some rich persons gotten jealous of those with long-life genes within them that they killed them all and that is why our lives are shorter today.
Sometimes we hear about the odd person with extraordinary talents, who are not charlatans but genuinely have other features to their whole personas than the average person has. It is not a matter of only giving those who have the perfectly healthy bodies all the best attention but it is a matter of not getting into a situation where we over-emphasize either being too set on all healthy and fit against being too understanding for degenerative conditions to the point that slow learning can sometimes set the mood in whole schools so that children with talents have to suffer and cannot learn properly any longer.
We should re-balance the equation and give schools extra money for children with disabilities as well as for children with abilities so that schools stop being tempted to fill their classes with disabilities just to get more money coming in, as they otherwise would. Equally why do only parents with disabled children get extra money but parents with able children don’t? Why do only youths that committed a crime get work placements and why do those who are decent and don’t commit crimes don’t get any jobs? All these things happen because the repressive mechanisms that are in place today, want to dishevel society so that only those with problems can be kept under stricter control and those without problems cannot get into a position where they could challenge the authority of those in high places.
E-publishing
21 Apr 2012 Comments Off
in E-commerce, Internet, Music, YouTube Tags: Europe
YouTube has been found to be responsible for the copyright of music despite the E-commerce regulations and the German court decided that an Internet publisher should install filters to prevent the posting of copyright material but that is in my view a very laborious an unworkable concept. There are only 2 possibilities, its either only allowing approve material or charging U-Tube a universal license per month, quarter, annum, which is much more practicable and workable.
Asking a large company like YouTube to pay for each clip played, would be similar to charging a pub for each piece of music they play to their customers but such companies pay a universal license fee instead.
The Q-elite
20 Apr 2012 Comments Off
in Comprehensive schools, Education Tags: Children, comprehensive
Having read in an article that the youngest MENSA member is aged 2 and that other bright young children can be certified as brain boxes I set out to find how that can be done in the average London borough.
And in the course of that ‘investigation’ I had one of the most enlightening and constructive conversations I’ve ever hand, thanks to the persons who spoke to me, you know who you are.
I thought, how would it be possible to follow the MENSA recommendations and ask an educational psychologist of a local education authority to assess a bright child and learned that there is such a long waiting list for assessing that it would take a very long time to get a child seen if ever. The waiting lists are usually full of children with learning problems get seen first and even they have to wait very long queues to be seen.
One cannot just turn up and say, look my kid can do this and that and is absolutely wonderful. Sorry love, join the queue is going to be the answer. So realistically speaking to get a child assessed one has to pay for it and that is the only way.
So all those children who are lucky enough to have rich parents and can get assessed as having high IQ have to stand out because there is no standard testing that is broadly available to all children. I am certain that if there was a standard testing program many more very clever children would be diagnosed but as it is they just stay in their classes and learn as well as they can with the material and teaching provided.
Of course it is not absolutely impossible that Educational Psychologists that get paid to assess might make results look brighter as they really are because that is the expectation of the paying customer, namely the parent who pays to get an excellent result.
It would be much fairer to all children if they could get IQ tested aged 2 because they could be very clever, it is just that nobody knows it and once kids are fed into the normal comprehensive education stream expectation stays on a medium level and most children just want to oblige and settle for the median. I think that results and achievements are related to the expectations that teachers have and in the current educational climate, most schools practise an average policy and so they get average results.
No school would refer an excellent pupil to an educational psychologist to get an IQ result and so we never find out what the potential would have been. Quite astonishingly how do you determine if a child is clever? Many kids play with books when they are two and many are above average readers or ahead in their class work.
I think it has a lot to do with common perception in that we are constantly told that those who pay for tests and education achieve better in life but we have never tried to test those poor pupils and we constantly talk poorer children down as non achievers. So the common perception is low and a child grows up knowing that it doesn’t have to perform as it cannot achieve in any case. There is normally no program for bright pupils in the average comprehensive and no further propaganda is made by the Department for Education that schools can get grants for high achievers. We only ever hear of the special payments that are made for slow learners. So schools know they get extra money the more problem kids they have and so they like problem children. If schools knew they get extra funding for the better learning achievers then that would be an incentive for them to work along those lines.
If parents were given the choice to get an educational psychologist assessment for their child’s IQ if they wanted then that would be a fair choice to give to people but instead only those rich enough ever get the chance to test their child to get them into MENSA. So how clever is the MENSA system really, is it just trickery to please rich parents or can it help poorer kids to shine?
In the BBC published list of tell-tale signs for a clever child they only list some point but omit the point that MENSA makes that clever children don’t like other children. But that is not stated as a must but as possible option, which is not listed on the BBC website.
I think if you can afford to have your child tested and celebrate their true potential then that is a great starting point for that child but there are many other clever children who never even get the chance to be tested because the parents cannot afford to pay for that and then the child’s talents go mingled up and are not further developed especially because schools do not have the mechanisms to do so.
One thing all those children have in common, when you look into their faces,there is a certain maturity in their facial expression and I often get the feeling that I talk to an adult rather than a child when I talk to my clever kid but then when she goes off to play with others she suddenly turns into her age. Myif child is quite unusual in that she absolutely loves everybody and all other children and gets on with everybody and never says a bad word about anybody else, despite being quite bright and having learned to walk aged 6 months and being far ahead with her reading skills.
But despite all those kids in the Mensa testing coming out tops and being totally adorable an sweet, I think all this testing proves is that those parents could afford a test and that those kids could afford the test. The test result doesn’t mean that there are no other such clever kids around just because they could not have parents who can afford the test.
Yet if all children who are this clever would be found out about at an early age, that would benefit society tremendously as surely that could be nurtured. Why should only those children, whose parents are rich enough to test them get the future elite pampered treatment and be cherished especially high?
Poor and clever children instead get ignored and have to make do with what they got. Their talents might stay unnoticed or even vanished because those around them cannot appreciate someone clever in their midst as it so often happens.
In human evolutionary terms if all those who are especially clever were found out about then we might be able to allocate jobs to those who actually have some talent and not just those who can afford to get certain schooling. Certainly today, as things are, we would never come across a rich person whose IQ test is low and who would give his money to a poor person because it is better in those person’s hands, instead we would rather see a rich person trying to stamp the poor person into the ground.
Don’t do to others ….
19 Apr 2012 Comments Off
in ECHR, Europe, High Court, Libel cases, Terrorism Tags: Europe, Law
Unfortunately I have to use this very sad occasion, where an enemy of this state might get positively discriminated against by another, higher force, to show that this very old saying still is true and always will be true and it goes: “You should not do to others what you don’t want done to yourself” or another commonly understood one is “What goes around comes around”. I cannot even feel Schadenfreude or glee that this happened to the government because I am not on the side of the bad guy.
But in this instance the government fell victim to the very same rule that was used against me in my own cases before the High Court in that procedural rules are allowed to be broken if the court favours a particular legal outcome.
In my own case against Der Spiegel, dates were obviously falsified, appeals made on the wrong forms, but still the court allowed it all to help the defendant, win the case. In other cases all types of evidence was allowed against me that by established case law would be forbidden normally.
There we have it if there is a desired legal outcome then courts can break all rules they want because they are the highest authority and what the highest judge says that is the law.
It is particularly upsetting that the UK has to learn that point in the case against Abu Qatada, who is an enemy of the state. It remains to be seen why the EU wants to protect him so much, what does he do for them?
One can now ask the question is there any justice at all if outcomes can be set from the start to reach a desired goal and ignoring all rules along the way to get it.
Looking at the principle of this, our whole education system is set up to teach children to be fast and accurate and correct, but in the legal world, fast and accurate method is not required,all that is required is acting for the pre-determined, winning side and all other principles are forgotten. Is that corrupt or is it freedom?
