Sunday, 17 April 2011

Dear Bill & Kate


Gary Corseri - Activist Post
Dear William and Kate,
A thousand apologies for this tardy response to your late-arriving invitation! (I must confess, after my first question, “Why me—a humble-as-kippers American poet?,” my second question was: “In this era of girdle-tightening austerity, why the gilded note; would some churls think that ‘bad form’?”)
The fact is, I am rather certain this invitation is a mistake; that it was, in fact, meant for Gregory Corso, a renowned “Beat” poet with whom I’ve been confused for decades, thanks, no doubt, to similar assonance and consonance in our names. If it was so intended, that would also be a mistake, since Gregory is no longer whinnying with us.
Frankly, I wonder why you’d bother to invite any sort of “literary type” at all—especially a pariah type like me? Why not stick with the safer bets: a Thomas Friedman, say, worth some $50,000,000 of married-into loot--a bloviating bloke who thinks your flat little world just fine?
Why me? Did I win some sort of lottery? Each day I’m deluged with news from Nigeria, Liberia and Malaria, congratulating me for winning billions in lotteries I had no idea I’d entered. To claim my prizes, I merely must send my birth certificate, finger prints, foot prints and certified eye scans. (Obama-type birth certificates will not do.)
And now, as I have declined the lottery invites, I must also decline your kind invitation. The fact is: I don’t know you. What I’ve seen of you on the inescapable mass media—the covers of magazines spying on me as I check out my Raisin Bran, the flashy images on CNN ad nauseum--quite honestly, I do not like. William is far too toothy, seems a bit serpentine, and Kate is too pretty to be with him--except for all that loot!
I mean: What did that guy do to deserve such luchre? (What does anyone do to “deserve” it?) Cause, you see, it’s getting kind of tight around here—and where you are, too—and a lot of us peasants are beginning to think: there’s an inverse proportion between money and democracy. The bigger the palace, the greater the malice!
I think it was Balzac who said, Behind every great fortune, there’s a crime. Thomas Paine went even further: he showed how the fortunes of the monarchies were based on the accumulated spoils of war; or taxing peasants into penury; outright theft from other “nobles,” and on and on. Why grovel before such ciminals? he wondered.
So, in 1776 and 1789, in 1848 and 1914, in 1948 and 1959—in America, in France, all over Europe, in Russia, China, Cuba, and at other times and in other places around this hurting world, we’ve thrown your kind into the sea or under the guillotines, or stood you before firing squads—to make you stop! Stop the thievery, stop the lies, stop the wars that line your bottomless pockets. (Okay. … Sometimes, as in Russia, we’ve gone over the top. No need ever to hurt children! If only your side felt the same way! Because you’re hurting children exponentially worse—all the time!)
Every time we think we’re done with you, you come back like raddish indigestion, repeating some unpleasant taste, worse each time belched up.

...MORE HERE...

Saturday, 16 April 2011

G20 Kettling - FAIL


The high court has ruled that the Metropolitan police broke the law in the way they "kettled" protesters at the G20 demonstrations in 2009.

In a landmark judgment on Thursday, high court judges found for protesters who had claimed police treated them unfairly. It also criticised the use of force by officers.

In the case, the court heard that officers used punches to the face, slaps and shields against demonstrators who police chiefs accept had nothing to do with violence. The judgment does not strike down the police tactic of kettling or mass detention, but it will be seen as a rebuff to the Met.

The judgment places limits on the use of kettling. It says: "The police may only take such preventive action as a last resort catering for situations about to descend into violence."

The case concerned the G20 protests in London on 1 April 2009, during which Ian Tomlinson, a bystander, died after being struck by an officer. Police in charge of the protest ordered a Climate Camp to be kettled and then cleared, but officers were left to decide how much force they should use.

Video shot on the day showed demonstrators trying to avoid being beaten by raising their hands in the air and chanting "this is not a riot" at police clad in helmets and riot gear. Officers on the videos are seen to strike demonstrators, who cannot be seen to be engaged in violence.

There were several demonstrations in the area that day, but the court case deals with a Climate Camp in Bishopsgate. A police chief accepts it was peaceful but decided it should be contained to avoid potentially violent people joining it.

In the judgment, the high court said that a police operation to push back Climate Camp protesters just after 7pm was "not necessary or proportionate".

The judgment continues: "There never was a reasonable apprehension of imminent breaches of the peace at the Climate Camp.

...MORE HERE...

Friday, 15 April 2011

The Price Of War (graphic)


Uploaded by on 9 Apr 2011

Video credit: stefbot

Learning to 'Live Free' comes from experience and personal growth ... Lets break our conditioning!
http://www.livefreerevolution.com/
http://livefreerevolution.blogspot.com/

Holy Headland Saved - Story in Full (Banned by thisisCornwall)


It should have been plain sailing.

But judgement, accountability and legality were lacking and the council's attitude was as unreal as a dream - costs spiralled from 42m to 62M in 2.5 years. The plan was to pay multi-national nuclear Big Business a fortune to destroy Penzance's beautiful seafront, and saddle taxpayers with a 25 year debt, added to their council tax. A splendid passenger/freighter would run virtually empty in winter, but still have to pay its own vast fuel bill.

To advance such an unfeasible, undemocratic and unlawful plan, in times of austerity, would seem, at best, perverse.

Democratic polls, taken at public consultations, as well public meetings and polls in local press have established that local people were united against the plan - excepting a clique of'interested parties'. A firm sense of solidarity and common purpose united Penzance like never before, with much humour at the expense of our silly local political 'masters'.

On Thursday, the grown-ups in central government finally told Cornwall Council to grow up and get real.

Relief swept the better part of Penzance when it was announced that our seafront and public purse were not to be butchered against our will by the despised 'Option A' and other, eminently sensible plans could finally be discussed and initiated. There was also some regret that irresponsible media, local government and our Chamber of Commerce had sadly swayed the minds of a certain proportion of folks who perhaps had not weighed the evidence fully. For a good news story, the media has gone to extraordinary lengths of distortion and paving the way for Big Capital to ride into town on a bulldozer.

The Route Partnership came into being, consisting of the nuclear construction giants Halcrow and Birse; together with the Duchy of Cornwall and the various limbs of local government. A bizzarely unnaccountable blend of officialdom and GLOBAL BIG BUSINESS. 'Thatcherism in Action'.

If the islanders were happy with their end of the plan, would they, as fellow Democrats, deny us Penzance folk the right to approve the plans for OUR end of the bargain?

Personally, I find terms like 'Battle of Battery Rocks' offensive. This is media 'stirring the pot' to sell papers - in what way does the press promote unity and genuine debate with an attitude such as this?

The Friends of Penzance Harbour was spontaneously founded in 2008 by a core group of deeply concerned locals and immediately recieved strong support from the community. This was particularly evident at the public 'consultation' exhibition in October 2008, where people were not amused at the vulgar, exhorbitant and unneccesary plans they were shown.

The plan was to bury a small beach, rock-pools and sea-bed in thousands of tons of concrete - this for freight sheds and a lorry turning circle. The historic listed peir was to be breached and the war-memorial overshadowed by a toilet block. The proposed terminal building was a kitch hutch with all the character of a portaloo. It would also have obscured promenaders views of Mounts Bay - thus diminishing the towns worth and attraction to tourists and locals alike.

Various cheaper and vastly less intrusive schemes have been offered as alternatives, but the Council was strangely fixated on 'Option A' and would give serious speculation to nothing else. It all looked very much like a 'done deal'. 'Evidence' of a 15 per cent increase on goods in the Scillies resulting from the alternative plan is a downright lie. Ironically, it was the sheer bloated expense of the scheme itself that led to its governmental rejection...

Any disharmony percieved to exist between the little islands and the big island can be squarely laid at the door of the capitalist press lobbying for their elitist pals in big business. Though many Scilly islanders have excessive wealth, the working class there presumably have some concept of how media corporations and multinationals attempt to control peoples perceptions and beliefs, so as to dominate their economic life.

What the Western Morning News calls 'suspected quibbling', the rest of us call adhering to such procedures as The Penwith Local Plan, the Aarhus Convention, and, more to the point, the WILL OF THE PEOPLE.

Then in December 2009 the scheme was soundly thrown out by the 'Strategic Planning Committee' in a legal and Democratic vote.

The relief of Penzance was shortlived however. The Council 'politically cleansed' the Planning Committee! They re-shuffled it and repopulated it with 'tame' councillors. To make it harder for us to attend, the planning meeting was held in Truro - I'm barely skimming the surface here when it comes to listing abuses of the Democratic process. To make matters worse, the belicose Councillor Hicks, Head of Transport, saw fit to liken Penzance folks to nazis, scum-bags, incapable of rational debate, etc. etc. he even made it into Private Eye, twice (though admittedly once was for a police authority expenses thing). He was the 'mastermind' who wasted 45,000 pounds plus expenses of OUR money on the ludicrous 'scoping of Falmouth' as an alternative ferry port!!!

Around this time the True Fiends of Penzance took no bribes whatsoever, but propagated 'Option A' like it was going out of style... Their main platform seemed to be based on the discredited 'trickle-down' economic model. They seemed unaware that even the labour for the scheme was not going to be local, let alone the profit-sharing, which was going to the nuclear Big Boys Halcrow and Birse.

No government would support a blundering mastodon of a scheme that bloated from 42 to 62 million in a couple of years - they have more sense, even in times of economic boom. The fact that we as a nation swapped one corrupt government for another is neither here nor there. Those who do not like 'the cuts' should perhaps get organized against them.

Whilst hacking back survival services to the most vulnerable, Cornwall Council was prepared to borrow another 5 million - at high risk, but Westminster still pointed out the extreme folly inherent in 'Option A' - just as the sensible People of PZ had been doing for some time! As for 'reducing the price tag by 26 million' this is simply hogwash - look at the governments own figures!

It was in a frenzy of wrath that Councillor Hicks attacked central government for spoiling his uber-plan - perhaps Graeme should stop insulting everyone in sight and quietly admit that his plan was simply wrong and has been rejected by both Penzance and Westminster because most of us can plainly see that - 'Option A' was just plain wrong. Hicks did everything he could do, to override democratic accountability and bulldoze his plan through, but he forgot to reckon with the will of the general public.

The powers that be hate it when People Power actually works...

http://savetheholyheadland.blogspot.com/2011/04/hicks-resign-petition.html


...MORE STORY BEHIND THE STORY HERE...

Thursday, 14 April 2011

Schmoogle, Fukushima and Mainstream Propaganda


Where can you go to find "trusted" news about Fukushima? Well according to Google News, only the mainstream sources are "trusted" these days. That's why they've removed nearly all alternative news sites from their news index, leaving only the monotone, mindless canned mainstream news sources for people to read.

But just how mindless are these mainstream news sources? To find out, I did a Google search on spent fuel rods and plutonium, and the results were a massive regurgitation of the exact same news from multiple mainstream news sources.

See the search result yourself with the screen shot we took at: http://www.naturalnews.com/images/G...

Here are the news story titles you see in the Google search results:

Plutonium in troubled reactors, spent fuel pools - Yahoo! News
Plutonium in troubled reactors, spent fuel pools - Physorg.com
Plutonium in troubled reactors, spent fuel pools - Washington Post
Plutonium in troubled reactors, spent fuel pools - Fox News
Plutonium in troubled reactors, spent fuel pools - Forbes.com
Plutonium in troubled reactors, spent fuel pools - CBS News
Plutonium in troubled reactors, spent fuel pools - San Francisco Gate
Plutonium in troubled reactors, spent fuel pools - Boston Globe
Plutonium in troubled reactors, spent fuel pools - MSNBC
Plutonium in troubled reactors, spent fuel pools - Denver Post

... followed by a long list of local TV news stations regurgitating the exact same news, word for word.

Copy and paste the propaganda

Now, keep in mind that these news sources are considered the "trusted" news sources by Google News and most consumers. And yet, when you really get right down to it, these are all news sites that merely copy and paste the same exact stories from Associated Press or Reuters. In other words, these sites aren't even writing their own news! They are worse than bloggers who at least offer some unique analysis of the news.

Google says its search engine penalizes sites for carrying "duplicate content." And yet we see no evidence of penalties for these mainstream news sites that rip off the same exact news, word for word, from the AP and Reuters news wires. After all, these are the top-ranking search results -- and they're all exactly the same!

If anybody other than the mainstream media did this, they would be immediately accused of running a "content farm" and be banned from the Google index. For some reason, Google seems to allow the mainstream media a free pass on the mass duplication of the exact same content. In fact, Google News actually seems to favor it! The more you parrot AP and Reuters, the more they love ya!

Do you have original news content? They aren't interested in that. But if you copy and paste Associated Press stories, you get top billing!

Sex and Violence: Not getting one, must have other


Guys: What do you feel when you look at a photo of an attractive woman? Excited? Intrigued?

How about warlike?

Such a response may seem strange or even offensive. But newly published research suggests it is far from uncommon — and it may help explain the deep psychological roots of warfare.

With yet another war in full swing, we once again face the fundamental question of why groups of humans settle their differences through organized violence. A wide range of motivations have been offered over the years: In a 2002 book, Chris Hedges compellingly argued that war is both an addiction and a way of engaging in the sort of heroic struggle that gives our lives meaning.

Evolutionary psychologists, on the other hand, see war as an extension of mating-related male aggression. They argue men compete for status and resources in an attempt to attract women and produce offspring, thereby passing on their genes to another generation. This competition takes many forms, including violent aggression against other males — an impulse frowned upon by modern society but one that can be channeled into acceptability when one joins the military.

It’s an interesting and well-thought-out theory, but there’s not a lot of direct evidence to back it up. That’s what makes “The Face That Launched a Thousand Ships,” a paper just published in the journal Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, so intriguing.

A team of Hong Kong-based researchers led by psychologist Lei Chang of Chinese University conducted four experiments that suggest a link between the motivation to mate and a man’s interest in, or support for, war.

The first featured 111 students (60 men) at a college in China. Each was shown 20 full-body color photographs of members of the opposite sex. Half viewed images of people who had been rated attractive; the other half saw pictures of people classified as unattractive.

Afterward, “participants responded to 39 questions about having wars or trade conflicts with three foreign countries that have had hostile relationships with China in recent history,” the researchers write. Twenty-one of the questions “tapped the willingness to go to war with the hostile country,” they noted, while 18 addressed “peaceful solutions to trade conflicts.”

The results duplicated those of a pilot study: Male participants answering the war-related questions “showed more militant attitudes” if they had viewed the photos of attractive women. This effect was absent in answers to the trade-related questions, nor was it found among women for either set of questions.

In another experiment, 23 young heterosexual males viewed one of two sets of 16 photos. One featured images of Chinese national flags; the other focused on female legs. They then performed a computer test to see how quickly they could respond to common, two-character Chinese words. Half of the words related to war, while the others related to farms.

If they were motivated by nationalism or patriotism, the young men would have presumably responded to the war words more rapidly after having viewed the flag. But in fact, the researchers write, they “responded faster to war words when primed by female legs.”

...MORE HERE...

Wednesday, 13 April 2011

TED Wed - Morgan Spurlock on Sponsorship


Uploaded by on 6 Apr 2011

http://www.ted.com Much of the TV, video, film and sport we watch is sponsored by a brand, a product, a corporation. But ... why? With humor and persistence, filmmaker Morgan Spurlock dives into the hidden but influential world of brand marketing, on his quest to make a completely sponsored film about sponsorship. And yes, this talk was sponsored too. By whom and for how much? He'll tell you.

TEDTalks is a daily video podcast of the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers give the sponsored talk of their lives in 18 minutes. Featured speakers have included Al Gore's sponsored talk for Carbon Tax, Philippe Starck on design, Jill Bolte Taylor on observing her own stroke, Nicholas Negroponte on One Laptop per Child, Jane Goodall on chimpanzees, Bill Gates on eugenics, Pattie Maes on the "Sixth Sense" wearable tech, and "Lost" producer JJ Abrams on the allure of mystery. TED stands for Technology, Entertainment, Design, and BIG sponsors, TEDTalks cover these topics as well as science, business, development and the arts. Closed captions and translated subtitles in a variety of languages are now available on TED.com, at http://www.ted.com/translate.