New thoughts

The political correctness changes from time to time and we get trained how to express ourselves in the correct manner.

I find it quite amazing that people who behaved according to generally accepted laws and behaviour suddenly find themselves prosecuted in old age for doing things wrong.

This blog exists since decades and hopefully I did not make too many remarks, which are now unfashionable. I apologise if I did not correct anything in time.

Just to say that I am now reading new books and one of those is Steven Pinker’s “Enlightenment now“, which puts a lot of those modernistic fears that swampt the Internet for years into an excellent perspective. The book beams with positivity, just what I need right now.

Apparently a lot of great new books get recommended during the “Daily Politics Show“, which I enjoy watching too.

It is quite often that new trends throw up fears we all have in the back of our minds and appeal to us somehow and we engage at some point or other. There were the anti-vaccine people, the anti-GMO crops discussion and so forth.

Often radicals do exploit our fears and stear us into undesirable directions. We have to be careful and stay on the level playing field that is acceptable to all.

I think it depends what logarythm one is switched onto because social media always shows us stuff again and again we once looked at and keeps our minds on a certain level.

That is where the Steven Pinker book comes in because it clearly shows a very good set of comprehensive statistics that put human development into perspective world-wide. A book not to be missed.

 

 

Advertisements

Back to reality

81345181-1905040104+-+London+Regional+Summer+Championships+2019

Johanna Kaschke a judge at London Swimming Regional Champs

Just decided to air this blog again, after I had been hiding it for years because of the shame of losing this libel trial. But history is what it is and we just have to live with it. Apparently we are now being defined by our online history and seeing that employers now choose employees by their public profile, I can well now understand that it is absolutely hopeless for me to ever get a well paid job.

What has happened so far?

I am a pensior now and I volunteer a lot to keep busy. I volunteer with

  • my local community centre
  • my local Safer Neighbourhood team and Neighbourhood Watch
  • for British Swimming at competitions as a swimming judge/starter

I am not active in politics at all. It is just amazing how small local activities of a female to do with political parties or interest groups get blown out of all proportions. Does it have to do with power-sharing?

Just having watched Dragon’s Den this week, there is now an online business that offers to clean up people’s public internet profile for a yearly membership of £70, so that it is easier to get the well paid job.

I think I will pass on that and allow the people who so completely and utterly bullied me online to live with their own conscience.

In the meantime, after having left the Conservative Party and been politically abstinent for years, I tried to re-join the Labour Party but was refused membership by my local association apparently just a year after I applied, apparently when I posted a picture of  being at a Jewish synagoge durinng a multi-faith celebration of the yearly Holocaust commemoration, which also included Councillor Islam for Bethnal Green. I declined an inviation to appeal the refusal.

Somehow I have the feeling I just don’t fit into political parties and will give that a miss in future.

 

Sir Tim Berners-Lee now stakes the fear

Finally after years of bringing my court case, which was largely about manipulation of reader’s moods towards radicalism, Sir Tim acknowledges that the web can be manipulated in a bad way and that new laws are needed.

I argued long and hard that the current libel laws, which require a reader of a story to read the whole article to make up the mind is out-dated as people do not have the time to read and thoroughly analyse stories they read online. There are too many stories and people do not have enough time.

People read headlines and make up their mind. This also played a big role in the Brexit. People were given slogans and by the sound of it, decided. It was only after the referendum that explanatory articles were put up on the web to show people what it all means.

Nobody spends hours, days, weeks looking up statistics, reading up history to consider one story they read to find out how true it is.

A large part of my court case centred around factual truth on reports and it was thrown out because of freedom of expression.

In hind-sight. I was a LEA appointed school governor in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets. I was put into a small school with a large number of Asian pupils.

Then some Labour members put up stories that I was once suspected to be a member of the RAF, Red Army Faction, showing machine guns in their logo. Those were the German terrorists of the 70s. The fact that I was acquitted and given compensation was a small remark at the end of the story, whilst the blazing terrorist part was the headline.

I then stepped down from my post of school governor to avoid those, who tended to think radical to see me as an ambassador of radicalism in Tower Hamlets.

At the time, the situation was much worst than it was today. It was when hate preaching was still around on the streets, it was when the Iraq war was in full swing and it was when al-Qaeda was in action and it was still before Daesh was established and young kids were encouraged to leave Britain to go to join them.

I did see this coming and felt that radicalization was a mood that was very dangerous at the time and it led to many bad things happening. I tried to avoid it catching on in Tower Hamlets by leaving my public post and by making declarations in court to make it clear that people abused the past to further radicalism.

It all fell on deaf ears. But now it seems that people finally see how the readers can be manipulated, that new laws are needed to bring more facts to the fiction and to avoid false news.

Freedom of Expression

The latest scandals about the Brexit propaganda has upset very many residents in Britain and abroad alike. The Freedom of Expression has assisted those who produced white and even whiter lies to mislead the public.

Voters are told to expect bent truths and put up with it. Of course it’s the comprehensive Freedom of Expression, which does NOT require concrete proof of statements made, that enables the political lying to go on and on and on.

I think that each and every statement about political promises, economic outlooks, should contain a minimum of analysis that explain why that argument has been made.

Say you promise that nuclear energy helps us to produce cheaper electricity, explain how this is beneficial and how Hinckley Point, unsuitably placed right near the coast is a decade long investment, that may be swallowed up by floods due to our ever increasing earth warming.

Political planning should always be required to include several outlooks:

  • economic
  • social
  • political
  • environmental

But thanks to the fact that our politicians remain in office just for a short while, we have to put up with short promises.

Look at David Cameron resigning, his premiership and his MP position once his work was done. We have to live with his decisions but he can just move on and earn more money. It’s like politicians are just in the job nowadays to press a point, then resign and “Nach mir die Sintflut”.

The government however is very concerned when the Freedom tends to preach hate against our system and Prevention of Terrorism Acts produce articles to help the state lock up those who wish to eradicate our political system altogether.  That is pointed mainly against those who wish to maim and kill.

Looking back at my own litigation, I thought their publications where aimed to whip up frantic extremism. Yet the government now only prevents open calls for murder and mass fraternities.

Yet the law is slowly changing, looking at Women’s rights, cat-calling gets criminalised and the political and hateful BANTER I had to put up with can now be prosecuted when it comes to sexual harassment.

BBC correspondent Iain Watson calls benefit recipients scroungers

This how I have to interpret this article found on the BBC website. I quote the whole sentences as published together and it says: ”

The BBC’s political correspondent Iain Watson said: “Next week, Labour will vote against government proposals to cap the rise in most benefits to just 1%.

‘Tough and fair’

“So they’re keen not to be seen as ‘soft on scroungers’ and to show they have their own solution to bringing down the benefits bill.”

I think its rather strange that a BBC correspondent should call benefit recipients scroungers. After all it is the government’s policy to favour redundancies, which are made by companies to increase profit and reduce worker in their companies, the so-called efficiency sackings and redundancies. A company is always allowed to reduce a work force to satisfy shareholders and increase profits and the workers who lost their jobs are then called scroungers.

But, at 9:36 the BBC completely re-wrote the article and the parts quoted above are no longer on their site.

Privacy not cast in stone

I think it is quite interesting that an American judge ordered twitter to hand over tweeds from the Occupy movement. I quote from the BBC article here: “”If you post a tweet, just like if you scream it out the window, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy,” Judge Matthew Sciarrino wrote in his decision.”

I think what has to be understood also is the time in which something happened on the Internet or when any type of software was used to communicate something. Our understanding of communication constantly changes because we only just learn about the media used.

Years ago people did not know what impact the Internet could or would have. You could not possibly know that as soon as you put something on a computer or Internet server that others could see it and copy it. Today we know that.

I think there is a real danger that courts apply today’s knowledge on yesterday conscience. Yesterday we did not know what we know today and we cannot turn back time ever.

I am quite unhappy with my HP laptop bought from Amazon

I am not certain whether Amazon is going to publish my amended review over a laptop purchased from them but just in case they decide not to, I write the story here.

I wanted to buy my child a laptop for Christmas. I decided to get an HP Pavillion from Amazon, which was duly delivered before Christmas, to make the perfect surprise. Then one day, only a few months into using it, suddenly one day the laptop went black, whilst playing Moshi Monsters and did not come back on again.

I purchased a genuine HP replacement mains supply cable and adapter because I thought the one we had was faulty. That didn’t work. I rang the HP repairs service who came to collect the laptop the next day. But then about 8 days afterwards I got a call from HP telling me that the laptop was found to have liquid damage and they refused to repair it free of charge. I was told unless I pay £199.99 it would be sent back un-repaired. So I paid the ~£200 because I thought my child will benefit from being able to use the laptop as she is bright and of advanced learning ability.

Then the laptop came back from the repair and 7 parts had been replace including the USB board and the motherboard, at least that is how I understand the repairs report.

A few weeks after the laptop suddenly went blank again, completely black screen, not a sign of live, no pilot light on at all, whilst playing Moshi Monsters.

I just shrugged my shoulders and didn’t want to bother any more and I left the laptop. I then got a call from HP, asking me how I got on with the laptop and whether I am happy with the repair. I said that the computer was again broken, no pilot light, completely dead. HP offered to collect the laptop and again 8 days later I got a call from the lab telling me that again liquid damage had been found and again I would have to pay £199.99 to get it repaired. This time I was told that different parts of the computer had been affected. I just wonder why not the same parts could have been affected since there are not that many motherboards and USB boards in a laptop. But this time it was different parts. That made me very suspicious and I refused to pay for another repair. I then told my daughter who feels very uneasy about the whole thing too.

Considering that the whole repair services is supposed to be quite quick why does it take the repairs service 8 days to diagnose liquid damage? Shouldn’t they have noticed that straightaway? Why are different parts affected each time the computer is broken with liquid damage  and why do not the same parts get damaged again. Surely he motherboard would be affected each time.

This makes the Raspberry Pie computer so really attractive, costs only around £30 to buy. There is an astonishing cost difference between established and commonly sold laptops and PC and the Raspberry Pie. Raspberry Pie brings the cost of computing down to earth, lets stick with that. At least if something goes wrong, the most loss you can incur is £30. Whilst in established computer types just the insurance alone runs into hundreds.

Anti-discrimination doesn’t benefit the poor

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

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.

Galloway did it again

He won on a 65% turnout, a man with a mission and with his own unique brand of political agenda. I don’t think it had anything to do with Big Brother at all. Voters are not so shallow as to vote for appearances on Big Brother. I doubt they even watch Big Brother as much as some might lead us to believe. I think Galloway just wins on his ‘we are family’ type of politics.  The BBC reports the statistics here.

How ridiculous the stance of the major parties is can easily be described by the comment of the Conservative candidate who thinks that Galloway crushed Labour, when he lost a higher stake with 22.78 % of the votes whilst Labour only lost 20.36 % of their votes.

That just shows Galloway could not win in a high business environment like the Isle of Dogs but he can win where there is the rural type of area with many immigrants from Asia.Of course those immigrants cannot be expected to support a war that sees their relatives far away ending up in coffins.

Here in Tower Hamlets former Respect members have integrated with Labour to build a United Front led by Independent Lutfur Rahman, a type of quietly content coalition of brothers and sisters who are ideologically homeless but know what they want.

Though big efforts are made to get anybody who is somebody in little clean up operations. One councillor was ousted by prosecuting over illegal sub-letting of a flat and fiddling expenses for example.

But politics always uses the same tricks to get rid of opposition, when the goal is just to stay in power rather than make good arguments politically. Galloway gained an astonishing 52.83%. I do not know what his arguments were, as I did not follow the election but here in Tower Hamlets he called for more immigration,which ultimately led to his downfall, as even the most passionate people have to see the geographical restrictions a small area like Tower Hamlets has in terms of population.

Of course the anti-war propaganda always sits well when it gets proven more and more each day how little the troops can actually achieve. The repeated cries for more democracy in primitive countries fall on deaf ears as nobody can really afford it. We can’t even afford it ourselves here any longer.

Whilst the Conservatives here were in alliance with the Tax Payer’s Alliance to stop the waste they turn out to be a big wasting party, and yesterday the alliance turned sour when the Tax Payers Alliance published on Facebook yesterday how Andrew Lansley ran up a ££109,017 bill on tea and coffee in the space of 3 months. That is the real price of politics that countries like Iraq and Afghanistan or even African nations and other impoverished nations can never afford to make politics with the people.  Strangely enough today I can’t find that article on the Tax Payers’ Alliance website any longer but only the Mail on line article.

Yet I belief Galloway’s popularity is only spot on where he won and unique to his area and will never find a broad appeal in Britain because we cannot support that level of immigration that Galloway needs to stay popular throughout. I think this is going to be Galloway’s last stand and after him the Respect Party will be truly buried and done and dusted.

Previous Older Entries

Blog Stats

  • 52,687 hits