Back to reality


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.

A revolution for education

An American university is the first to provide a completely free of charge online course, that carries a valid degree as a result. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, MIT, will offer a course on Circuits and Electronics. It does not require formal entry qualifications but one has to understand science and maths to pass. There are interactive exercises.

I very much welcome this concept because it frees up education for anybody to study from their own environment without having to group their whole lifestyle around study. The university plans other courses to follow and there is finance for it but contributors to the courses are sought.

This puts a stop to putting people under severe pressure for education.We are constantly blackmailed in having to pay very high prices for education, cannot have kids and study or work and study and that puts an end to it all, brilliant.

Hacking made possible by corruption

I wrote about this previously, saying that if those who are the best in computing would be in work, there would be no hacking.I do not defend the hackers but its obvious they could not get jobs that’s why they are hacking in the first place. Why could they not get jobs if they are so good at their field? Most likely because employers chose computer programmers according to whose kid they are or who the parents are or where they live rather than how good they are at computing. It’s a who you know industry.

There are sustained hacking attacks on established websites, even those who provide the most important government backed web sites. They got to be pretty good those hackers as they have not been found out yet.

It is hardly possible for somebody who is good at something to let their talent lay to waste just because they cannot find a job doing it. Of course they will try and disheveled those who denied them a job in the first place and that is the government and the established industries. It does not make their services any better if they keep on employing inferior web designers who allow their sites to be hacked by those who know the job.

If those hackers were in charge of websites, the likelihood of those sites being hacked is extremely remote as they know all the tricks.

There are many with superior technology skills in the Far East and if you look up on your firewall you will see the origin of hackers as often being Chinese. Yet hacking is not restricted to far away places. Computing knowledge is one of the most learned skills today and the arsenal of technical wizards is huge. I think employers should try harder to find the best for the jobs rather than employ the wrong people to do websites.

Just to mention nobody ever managed to hack my website when I had my own. This one is only a borrowed one from WordPress and I have no desire to conceal any content from people.

World War II was partly lost by the Germans because their technology was busted by those who were better at it and cracked the codes, this type of scenario now seems to get repeated by the hackers who beat the ….out of the establishment but really the establishment needs to make sure to employ those who are good at what they do. It is a big problem nowadays that the ruling classes always want to make sure that their children get the best jobs, that is happening throughout. Real talent gets sidelined for the lower jobs and that produces a lesser quality at the top and hence we see the state the economy is in today.

The rulers have to stop being self-serving and start to think on the survival of the species instead of  just their own self-serving policies.

Of course if the hacker attacks are led from some enemy country then it could be seen as an act of war but if its some kids from our own shores then it is just sheer frustration of not being recognised as having a talent that goes to waste because somebody less good was given the jobs.

Often enough the hackers from our own countries are genuinely concerned and want to lay open weaknesses in security.

The problem with our privately financed education is that any parent who spent thousands on a child’s education thinks they are entitled to the top jobs, goes without saying.

There is no longer a desire to do talent finding. Sometimes the biggest talents can have communication disabilities or are not quite as clever as expected in their interview techniques. So employers are looking for talents with the wrong methods. They should search for talents instead of waiting for the best communicators to come forward.

It is very easy to manipulate the recruitment process and employers tend to give jobs to those who are the best able to manipulate the recruitment process but that doesn’t necessarily mean those people are best at the jobs they are asked to do.

Of course if you were an employer, wouldn’t you want to give the job to the son of Tony Blair (only an example)  if he applied, rather than to the shy autistic person who is excellent at programming but not so great personality wise?

One other possible link is bribery within the industry see link here.

But hackers are now becoming an increasingly independent powerful entity and plan to launch their own satellite. It looks like the Internet becomes its own entity and it is governed by the Hackers council. Well, where there is corruption there usually appears an anti-dote, serves them right. Wonder whether any entrepreneurs want to invest into hacking, which seems to be the future investment.

Privacy versus Secrecy, prostitution through the back door?

I am very concerned about those Super Injunctions enabling the rich to stop gossiping. Because it’s just what people do, people get relationships easy when they are rich and people then gossip about them.

Lets just take the old-fashioned boy meets girl constellation, although there are others possible.

It’s often been the moment of fame when a girl found out that her recent one-night stand was a famous star, that kept her going for the rest of her live and naturally she would boast about that to her friends. It’s just always been super-normal to talk about human interaction of any type.

Why now forbid those chats on the basis that it would wreck a rich person’s profitability? It’s now all about money.

I have read somebody argued that a child could become subject to playground bullying or taunting if the nature of an extramarital relationship was to become public. That is frankly laughable.  That is excusing the wrong behaviour by saying it could cause more wrong behaviour. Its like fighting evil with evil so to say.

These type of super injunctions also allow and aid and promote the plain sexual exploitation of people by rich super stars. If no one can even talk about it then that little relationship with the poor girl never existed and that poor girl has been taken advantage of and cannot make any gain from giving herself to the entertainment of that rich person who never intended to let that relationship go any further. Because that is what this boils down to if the rich can have sex with the poor but the poor are not allowed to speak about this. It is then no longer a relationship, how ever short, it is just a service someone has to give for free. But that is not what the Big Society is about then is it? Surely the idea of volunteering cannot go so far! Because if it does it would mean legalizing prostitution but only if it is done voluntarily.

That means the public profile of the rich person is still intact whilst the poor person has been sullied and has to suffer in silence. It brings the concept of slavery and human exploitation nearer to us. It opens the question when is a relationship worth to report about?

It makes me puke to think that rich people can have this respectable front and flawless family imagine when in fact the person has a seedy and secret personal life and dirty habits.  It becoms a dirty habit if one cannot see it as a relationship between people any longer.

As I just read online, nobody can factually stop people from talking on the Internet such as, where search engine results bring up chat. People can post anonymously and if it infuriates enough people they will simply stick together to publish regardless. I think those recent English super-injunctions are repression of the worst kind and even laughable.

What is more important as an question if the fact that once you are rich and constantly in the media for professional success the public is interested in your private life too and you cannot separate one from another, if that fact would stop brilliant professional talent from blossoming in the public media and/or stop careers before they even take off.

Lets face it there are thousands of brilliant football talents out there and it is only because some major firms have banked on marketing one personality, that they have invested considerable amounts of money in doing so, that those names are worth something to them. The industry itself is not flexible enough, they should stop putting all eggs into one basket and highlight talent and allow new talent to come through the undergrowth and push the old names out when they cannot live up to public expectations.

Musicians were always notoriously immoral with wild parties and now they suddenly are expected to drop their lifestyle and live like prudes to help sell more records?

Kids asked to pose in underwear on Facebook scam, police warns

If I was asked to state my most hated crime, then I would say it is the exploitation and abuse of children. I do know that many parents and children circumvent the registration process on Facebook to allow children under the age of 13 onto the site. Kids enjoy Facebook for its games and also because often their parents and other friends are registered and the communications methods are easy to learn and use for children too.

There are users of Facebook who use the trademarks of popular children’s modelling agencies to get children to post photos of themselves in their underwear. Children are being approached and told that if they wish to get into modelling they have to pose in their underwear. Those photos then can stay online forever. This can have profound effects on a person’s career path.

It is also indecent and demeaning to do this. One well-known modelling agency, Pat Keeling, state on their own website, that they do not have a Facebook account, but someone set up a Pat Keeling ID on Facebook.

There are 2 issues for me here, one is how easy it is to impersonate somebody else on Facebook and the other is that people must be warned not to fall for such trickery as this is most likely a set-up of paedophiles that want to get children to expose themselves in their underwear.

I should say social networking sites of any type should include software, into their registration process, that double checks the ID of registrants against their addresses. So that if somebody uses a well-known trademark, that their e-mail address and address is checked against the registered details of that trademark, or that a verification process has to involve the proper registered trademark holder for example. This would eradicate the identity theft of well-known personalities and trademarks.

Of course the police are doing a splendid job in issuing a public warning against this menace.


Of course I have got to make a remark about this latest bombshell that rocked the world of media and communications. Wikileaks seems to be, to be the new generation of high-tech protest, something to tell the world about the secrets and behind closed doors activities of political leaders and also how military actions do get carried out.

I watched an interview with Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, you can watch it here too, where he tells us who finances his operations. He says it’s ordinary families with children who give him money and not businesses or organisations. I think this is significant because in my view its often ordinary families that are the most deprived of having a say in our society today. Running a community focussed group I find that parents of children are the least consulted about anything and our housing estates are dominated by non parent persons who have the time to come to meetings because families with children have to stay indoors to care for their children.

Also in the media families with children, especially if they are poor, are often portrayed as scroungers on society, being perceived as problems and in my view single parents are the most discriminated against group in society today, that it is people with children who fund Wikileaks the most. Of course I would  also like to know of what ethnic background those families with children are before being able to appreciate the situation fully.

Wikileaks of course is a new generation of protesters who want to do something about something they perceive as important.

As far as I understand Wikileaks has now been declared a terrorist organisation and as such has reached the status of subversive criminals. I remember not so long ago an autistic individual had great problems with extradition procedures to the US over his hacking into US military computers when he searched for evidence of aliens but this Wikileaks situation  is of course far more problematic because it displays findings to the public whilst the previous hacker was a private individual who did not widely publish his findings. Gary McKinnon I thought was a relative isolated one-off matter, but the Wikileaks situation shows that high-tech is the new widely used media by protestors around the world. I had experienced it that Chinese hackers were the most prominent group of people who tried to hack into my systems when I ran an online business some time ago.

This new generation of ‘revolutionaries’ is far more technology-wise than the old-fashioned warriors who excelled in causing physical damage mostly through bombs. I have several problems with this, one of which is that Wikileaks helps the Taleban. I read that Taleban leaders have now assigned a 9 strong group to sift through Wikileaks material to pinpoint US informers and then will want to go  out and kill them.

As a woman I find the Taleban abhorrent. They treat women as rubbish and as such I would not appreciate them at all. They are very sexist and would want to undo all progress western women have fought for so hard. Incidentally in Afghanistan single mothers are treated with the utmost contempt, women being made responsible for the rape by a man and punished, and then released with little chance of survival in the outside world. I fear there is a tendency in our society to make single mothers scapegoats for their status too.

Wikileaks activities support those gross human rights breaches against woman in Afghanistan because they support the Taleban and woman should be very careful before supporting his cause. In effect Assange’s actions help the Taleban discover US military activities and weaken the US military effort. So at least  the women of this world who have a concern about their freedom should stop supporting Assange from that perspective alone. Sweden once issued an arrest warrant over rape accusations against Assange. Women have to be very careful whom they support because  if it is a male with underlying sexual motives, we need to think more cleverly.

Of course the matter of disclosing diplomatic incidents is most likely perceived with eager interest by the whole world and that is a totally different matter but it can also weaken diplomatic efforts throughout the world and play into the hands of dangerous leaders like the Iranian president.

a breach of trust

If it wasn’t so serious, I would use the well-known Abba song, “its so funny how we don’t talk anymore” to describe the recent leaks of military classified information on the open web, namely Wikileaks. The BBC reports about this on a regular basis.

It is plainly completely irresponsible to disclose classified military documents on the open web for all to see. It works against the western military forces and those trying to establish democracy in those nations concerned like Iraq and also Afghanistan and it endangers military personnel and installations.

It’s so funny how the army and other organisations do anything to swear their personnel to secrecy and how outsiders can disclose such information by using modern technology, whereby the technology breaches all known borders that usually contain such information. A so-called wild-cat action by those wanting to disturb peace efforts of the military in Iraq and Afghanistan.

That shows that war can take many shapes and forms of deceit, in this instance electronic multiplication without authorisation on an open platform. Whilst recently a computer hacker was jailed for hacking into US army computers, searching for evidence of aliens; there is definitely a lack of law to deal with electronic multiplication of secret material on an open platform across jurisdictions.

This would be a good opportunity to develop international copyright and privacy laws to do with publication.

Internet Stalking

I came across the concept of Internet Stalking yesterday for the first time when I saw an article on the BBC about it. I instantly felt that this applies to me. Today I also saw an article on MSN about how Facebook plans to deal with stalkers.

What is most interesting in this article is the statement by an officer of the CPS that Internet stalking affects all walks of life, which involves also politically active persons. So far I have constantly been told that political activists have to put up with all sorts of nasty online comments and activities.

On Wikipedia we can read about Cyberstalking and there is an interesting definition where it says “Stalking is a continuous process, consisting of a series of actions, each of which may be entirely legal in itself.”

On a BBC article we read that service providers are reluctant to crack down.  The same BBC article also mentions the following: “Groups that support victims of online harassment say those targeted can suffer from anything from low level abusive messages to orchestrated campaigns.”

Researchers are trying to find the true level of Internet stalking at the moment. The CPS (Crown Prosecution Services) has unveiled new guidelines to prosecutors.

How is your self-esteem?

All Facebook users have been told by “the Mail online” that they are narcissist and have low self-esteem. That is frankly speaking a very nihilistic manner in which to dispose of a worldwide social club that meets online.

Why only restrict the analysis to Facebook, there are many similar online social networking sites, which all work on the same principles. Facebook was just used mainly by the Conservatives and could be singled out by political opposition to deliver a fatal analysis.

If we want to analyse all remote social networking as being performed by persons of low self-esteem and narcissist, then we condemn modern technology and should then also include TV into the equation.  TV and films produce a transformation of the personal self onto a self-made platform seeking acknowledgment by the remote public.

Yet social networking sites like Facebook probably are easily dismissed as negative because they do not make money in a pay-as-you-use style. That is perhaps the only valid reason I can use to explain this running down of Facebook users.

For me personally, and I think for many others, it is just a useful way to communicate, e.g. via the messaging system, to share meeting information, via the groups system.  In my estimation the vast majority of users actually want to play the games on Facebook and those have become profitable for the inventors and are seen as a socially valuable tool to enhance communication between people.

The whole question of social schizophrenia is however a very interesting topic and I have a personal interest in it, therefore that research is quite interesting to me, yet the motives and tendency to vilify Facebook users as mentally obscure is a bit of a cheek. Remote communications are a sign of our times, available because of our communications technology and a result of spare time available because we in fact have disposed of our direct local, economic and social involvement on a vast international scale especially in the developed nations.

I generally agree that using any type of remote technology as entertainment lowers your grades, achievements, but that equallly applies to TV, lots of music etc.

Blog Stats

  • 52,762 hits