RICHARD W. SYMONDS (RWS) - INDEPENDENT ANALYST

MARCH 2 2010 - RICHARD W. SYMONDS ON TONY "JUDAS-BLIAR"

2010-02-28T15:39:00.000-08:00

"Will Tony Blair become 'Emperor Judas-Bliar' dressed In new clothes, costing 30 pieces of silver...by turning Tory ? If so, that will mirror Napoleon in 'Animal Farm' by George Orwell (nee Eric Blair)."

Richard W Symonds - Cyril Joad Society Founder Member

Ref : Neo-Con Henry Jackson Society gives Blair a 'hero's welcome' :
http://www.henryjacksonsociety.org/stories.asp?pageid=49&id=1378

MARCH 1 2010 - RICHARD W. SYMONDS ON THE HENRY JACKSON SOCIETY

2010-02-27T20:47:00.000-08:00

"The Henry Jackson Society is this country's 'neo-con wolf in sheep's clothing'. It now poses the greatest threat to our democracy - and we are pitifully and dangerously unaware of it"

(Richard W. Symonds - The Cyril Joad Society Founder Member)

MARCH 1 2010 - NOAM CHOMSKY ON THE HENRY JACKSON SOCIETY

2010-02-27T20:40:00.000-08:00

"The hypocrisy and deceit of what I've seen from the HJ society is so transparent that it's remarkable that they can get away with their posture as liberal anti-totalitarians without utter ridicule." - Noam Chomsky

FEBRUARY 28 2010 - "MEGA INSTINCT - THE SEVEN WORKING PAPERS" BY RICHARD W. SYMONDS

2010-02-26T15:15:00.000-08:00

"THE MEGA INSTINCT - MEGA THEORY & THE MORAL INSTINCT - THE 7 WORKING PAPERS" BY RICHARD W. SYMONDS - FEBRUARY 2010

THE MEGA INSTINCT - WORKING PAPER 1 - A THEORY FOR HUMANITY - THE 25 HYPOTHESES

THE MEGA INSTINCT - WORKING PAPER 2 - A THEORY OF MOTIVATION & PSYCHOLOGY

THE MEGA INSTINCT - WORKING PAPER 3 - A THEORY OF CONSCIOUSNESS & NEUROLOGY

THE MEGA INSTINCT - WORKING PAPER 4 - A THEORY OF LANGUAGE & BIOLOGY

THE MEGA INSTINCT - WORKING PAPER 5 - A THEORY OF MUSIC & PATTERNED STRUCTURES

THE MEGA INSTINCT - WORKING PAPER 6 - A THEORY OF PHILOSOPHY & HISTORY

THE MEGA INSTINCT - WORKING PAPER 7 - A THEORY OF SOCIOLOGY & ANTHROPOLOGY

FEBRUARY 27 2010 - "THE MEGA INSTINCT - A THEORY FOR HUMANITY" BY RICHARD W. SYMONDS

2010-02-26T14:50:00.000-08:00

MEGA THEORY & THE MORAL INSTINCT

WORKING PAPER 1 - "THE 25 HYPOTHESES"

HYPOTHESIS 1

.1 MEGA THEORY states Moral Values exist objectively and independently of the human mind (Moral Realism) - and our subjective actions, thoughts, ideas and beliefs discover (rather than create) those moral Values - Plato's Recollection Theory.

Thus, our actions, thoughts, ideas and beliefs can be objectively right or wrong - independently good or bad - whether we subjectively believe they are, or not.

.2 Mega Theory states Values are objectively real - such as Truth, Beauty and Goodness - and we are subjectively conscious of these Values through our Mega Instinct - a kind of 'seventh sense'.

What is 'real' serves as an objective 'other' - independent of ourselves - against which we can test and measure our subjective actions, thoughts, ideas and beliefs.

It is, therefore, always possible that our actions, thoughts, ideas and beliefs could be wrong, mistaken, and in error...

Tarski's Correspondence Theory of Truth, Popper's Scientific Method and Joad's Immanence-Transcendence (IT) Theory, are closely associated with this 'Mega' Theory of Moral Consciousness - along with Chomsky's Theory of Language Acquisition.

.3 Mega Theory states we are motivated by seven ultimate Values (Mega Motivations), of which we can conceive of nothing greater :

1. Beauty
2. Freedom
3. Happiness
4. Life
5. Love
6. Peace
7. Truth

.4 Mega Theory states we are motivated by that which we most value.
If we discover what we value, we will discover what motivates us. 'The Anselm Acid Test' is used to discover what we most value; and thus we can discover what motivates us.

FEBRUARY 26 2010 - CYRIL JOAD SOCIETY vs. HENRY JACKSON SOCIETY

2010-02-26T14:21:00.000-08:00

The Cyril Joad Society Founder Member, Richard W. Symonds, says :

"Anyone with any moral sense clearly understands that this pro-Zionist anti-Islamic propaganda, from the Henry Jackson Society Neo-Cons, is not anti-American - only anti-Obama"
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politic ... _falk.html

AUGUST 26 2009 - MEGA THEORY IN PRACTICE - 7 VALUES FOR HUMANITY'S SURVIVAL

2009-08-25T16:06:00.000-07:00

http://gatwickcity.phpbb3now.com/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=535&start=50

Let's just suppose (conjecture & hypothesize) there is a MEGA INSTINCT (The Spirit?) within all of us, made up of our Language Instinct (The Mind?), our Moral Instinct (The Soul?) and our Motivation Instinct (The Body?).

The Mega Instinct is the essence of who we are - the Qualia/the You/The Me - the 'elan vital'/the heart of who we are/the spirit...

Chomsky & Pinker deal with the Language Instinct. Hauser deals with the Moral Instinct. MacDougall & Maslow deal with the Motivation Instinct.

But how about dealing with the Mega Instinct which combines all three - the three-in-one - the trinity ?

Mega Language ?
Mega Morals ?
Mega Motivations ?
=
THE MEGA INSTINCT ?

AUGUST 25 2009 - ROTHSCHILDS & THE GREAT BANK ROBBERY (PART 2)

2009-08-08T15:59:00.000-07:00

THE 'GATWICK CITY OF IDEAS' DISCUSSION FORUM
Gatwick City Forum

Login Register FAQ Search

It is currently 2009-08-09, 12:00:36 am

View unanswered posts | View active topics

Board index » My first Category » GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM » War and Global Conflicts
All times are UTC [ DST ]

"THE ROTHSCHILD NEW WORLD ORDER SCAM" THEORY OF BANKING

Page 16 of 16
[ 155 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
Print view Previous topic | Next topic

Author Message
Michael Post subject: Re: "THE ROTHSCHILD NEW WORLD ORDER SCAM" THEORY OF BANKINGPosted: 2009-08-02, 10:34:12 pm

Joined: 2008-04-24, 10:43:12 pm
Posts: 370 Richard W. wrote:
ROTHSCHILD - HITLER - HESS - ENGLAND - RUSSIA - ILLUMINATI

http://britanniaradio.blogspot.com/2009 ... ust-1.html

Can't help feeling that the world would today be a better place if we had taken up Hitler's offer and destroyed Jewish/Zionist communism. No Apartheid State, no USA world domination
http://michaellee.modernwriters.org/vie ... hp?t=23564

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: "THE ROTHSCHILD NEW WORLD ORDER SCAM" THEORY OF BANKINGPosted: 2009-08-02, 11:07:41 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 Hitler (Nazi Fascism) saw a very close conection between Jewish Zionism
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=774&start=360
and Freemasonry
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=5&start=230

As I see it, both Nazi Fascism & Zionist Communism were intent on world domination - and Masonic Zionism was a threat to Hitler...so he exterminated them both - along with others.

Hitler lost, so the world-dominators became Masonic Zionists.

Fascism & Zionism - like Capitalism & Communism - become totalitarian tyrannies - and all such extreme idealogies must be fought against - by Democracy.

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: "THE ROTHSCHILD NEW WORLD ORDER SCAM" THEORY OF BANKINGPosted: 2009-08-06, 11:03:40 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 GOLDMAN SACHS & DEUTSCHEBANK CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION (Hat-Tip : Michael - Respect Forum)

http://michaellee.modernwriters.org/vie ... highlight=

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: "THE ROTHSCHILD NEW WORLD ORDER SCAM" THEORY OF BANKINGPosted: 2009-08-07, 10:36:35 am

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 ROTHCHILDS - ROCKEFELLERS - ROYALS....AND THE UN - "AGENDA 21"

http://www.arguewitheveryone.com/genera ... years.html

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: "THE ROTHSCHILD NEW WORLD ORDER SCAM" THEORY OF BANKINGPosted: 2009-08-08, 04:02:09 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 NOW WE KNOW WHO CONTROLS THE UK & BEYOND ?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009 ... government

Top

Display posts from previous: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by AuthorPost timeSubject AscendingDescending
Page 16 of 16
[ 155 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 12, 13, 14, 15, 16

Board index » My first Category » GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM » War and Global Conflicts
All times are UTC [ DST ]

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for: Jump to: Select a forum ------------------ My first Category GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM Business and Employment War and Global Conflicts GENERAL DISCUSSION - News & Comment Gatwick City (Crawley, Horley, Ifield, Airport & Beyond) The Best Question Ever Asked.......and The Best Answer Ever Given Politics and Elections Obituaries and Biography Sex, Sport, Humour and Stories Religion and Philosophies Education and Schools Health and Hospitals Planning and Transport Admin Notices Local Links - Global Links Suggestion Box

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Free Forum : phpbb3now.com

AUGUST 24 2009 - ROTHSCHILDS & THE GREAT BANK ROBBERY (PART 1)

2009-08-08T15:57:00.000-07:00

THE 'GATWICK CITY OF IDEAS' DISCUSSION FORUM
Gatwick City Forum

Login Register FAQ Search

It is currently 2009-08-08, 11:58:45 pm

View unanswered posts | View active topics

Board index » My first Category » GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM » War and Global Conflicts
All times are UTC [ DST ]

THE GREAT BANK ROBBERY - LAUGHING ALL THE WAY TO THE BANKS

Page 16 of 16
[ 154 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
Print view Previous topic | Next topic

Author Message
Michael Post subject: Re: "MASTER PUPPETEERS" BANK LAUGHING ALL THE WAY TO THE BANKS..Posted: 2009-03-11, 11:42:42 pm

Joined: 2008-04-24, 10:43:12 pm
Posts: 370 Also by the same author

Secrets of the Federal Reserve
The history, organization and controlling interests behind the Federal Reserve
-- by Eustace Mullins, 1983 source: Whale.to

Chapter 1: Jekyll Island
Paul Warburg and the Jekyll Island conference of 1910 http://www.modernhistoryproject.org/mhp ... ecretsCh01

Chapter 2: The Aldrich Plan
The bankers lobby for the Aldrich bill to establish a new central bank http://www.modernhistoryproject.org/mhp ... ecretsCh02

Chapter 3: The Federal Reserve Act
Wilson is elected President and the Federal Reserve Act is passed (1912-14) http://www.modernhistoryproject.org/mhp ... ecretsCh03

Chapter 4: The Federal Advisory Council
The bankers control the membership of the regional oversight board
http://www.modernhistoryproject.org/mhp ... ecretsCh04

Chapter 5: The House of Rothschild
The Rothschild family dominates the banking of London and Europe http://www.modernhistoryproject.org/mhp ... ecretsCh05

Chapter 6: The London Connection
The banks that own the Fed are controlled from London http://www.modernhistoryproject.org/mhp ... ecretsCh06

Chapter 7: The Hitler Connection
J.H. Schroder Bank and the financing of Adolf Hitler http://www.modernhistoryproject.org/mhp ... ecretsCh07

Chapter 8: World War One
Kuhn, Loeb Company and the management of the Great War http://www.modernhistoryproject.org/mhp ... ecretsCh08

Chapter 9: The Agricultural Depression
Looting of the rural banks and the independent farmers (1920-21) http://www.modernhistoryproject.org/mhp ... ecretsCh09

Chapter 10: The Money Creators
Control of the money supply, trade credit, and interest rates http://www.modernhistoryproject.org/mhp ... ecretsCh10

Chapter 11: Lord Montagu Norman
The Bank of England, gold transfers, and the Roaring 20s http://www.modernhistoryproject.org/mhp ... ecretsCh11

Chapter 12: The Great Depression
The Fed pops the speculative bubble and the insiders profit http://www.modernhistoryproject.org/mhp ... ecretsCh12

Chapter 13: The 1930s
The Fed during the Hoover and Roosevelt administrations http://www.modernhistoryproject.org/mhp ... ecretsCh13

Chapter 14: Congressional Expose
Charting the banking and business connections of the Fed directors http://www.modernhistoryproject.org/mhp ... ecretsCh14

Top

admin Post subject: Re: THE GREAT BANK ROBBERY - LAUGHING ALL THE WAY TO THE BANKSPosted: 2009-08-07, 08:09:20 am

Joined: 2007-09-08, 05:18:52 pm
Posts: 65 Testing

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: THE GREAT BANK ROBBERY - LAUGHING ALL THE WAY TO THE BANKSPosted: 2009-08-07, 08:27:37 am

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 BBC Breakfast TV News - the public broadcaster - this morning was an insult to the intelligence of any 'aware' viewer.

Education. Education. Education ?

No

Indoctrination. Indoctrination. Indoctrination..

It's almost embarrassing to watch - but very enlightening when it comes to asking certain unpalatable questions.

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: THE GREAT BANK ROBBERY - LAUGHING ALL THE WAY TO THE BANKSPosted: 2009-08-07, 08:49:51 am

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 At least Chomsky brings some moral sanity into this morally insane world of 'media news' :

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=500&start=190

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=145&start=110

And particularly :

http://cabaretic.blogspot.com/2009/08/q ... -week.html

We seem to be living in some kind of 'Propaganda Machine Bubble', which manufactures an illusion of reality, not unlike "The Matrix" :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Matrix

I can't help feeling that every time we switch on the TV - or open our newspapers - we are voluntarily plugging into the Matrix of Propaganda & Illusion...

Top

Display posts from previous: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by AuthorPost timeSubject AscendingDescending
Page 16 of 16
[ 154 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 12, 13, 14, 15, 16

Board index » My first Category » GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM » War and Global Conflicts
All times are UTC [ DST ]

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for: Jump to: Select a forum ------------------ My first Category GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM Business and Employment War and Global Conflicts GENERAL DISCUSSION - News & Comment Gatwick City (Crawley, Horley, Ifield, Airport & Beyond) The Best Question Ever Asked.......and The Best Answer Ever Given Politics and Elections Obituaries and Biography Sex, Sport, Humour and Stories Religion and Philosophies Education and Schools Health and Hospitals Planning and Transport Admin Notices Local Links - Global Links Suggestion Box

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Free Forum : phpbb3now.com

AUGUST 23 2009 - NOAM CHOMSKY - "THE GALILEO OF TRUTH, LANGUAGE, MEDIA & POLITICS"

2009-08-08T15:51:00.000-07:00

THE 'GATWICK CITY OF IDEAS' DISCUSSION FORUM
Gatwick City Forum

Login Register FAQ Search

It is currently 2009-08-08, 11:54:15 pm

View unanswered posts | View active topics

Board index » My first Category » GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM » Obituaries and Biography
All times are UTC [ DST ]

NOAM CHOMSKY - "THE GALILEO OF TRUTH, LANGUAGE & POLITICS"

Page 20 of 20
[ 196 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
Print view Previous topic | Next topic

Author Message
Richard W. Post subject: Re: NOAM CHOMSKY - "THE GALILEO OF POLITICS, LANGUAGE & TRUTH"Posted: 2009-08-02, 12:55:52 am

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 NOAM CHOMSKY & THE BOOK "MEDIA CONTROL"

http://www.merinews.com/article/who-own ... 7848.shtml

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: NOAM CHOMSKY - "THE GALILEO OF POLITICS, LANGUAGE & TRUTH"Posted: 2009-08-02, 01:02:58 am

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 CHOMSKY - DEMOCRACY - TOTALITARIANISM

“Propaganda is to a democracy. what the bludgeon is to a totalitarian state.” Avram Noam Chomsky.

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: NOAM CHOMSKY - "THE GALILEO OF POLITICS, LANGUAGE & TRUTH"Posted: 2009-08-02, 01:11:21 am

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 CHOMSKY & CONSUMERISM

" 'Freedom from' also has a psychological dimension : Freedom from having to participate in the world's 'aspirational consumerism' " (Noam Chomsky).

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: NOAM CHOMSKY - "THE GALILEO OF POLITICS, LANGUAGE & TRUTH"Posted: 2009-08-02, 10:10:08 am

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 CHOMSKY AT THE UN - SRI LANKA (FORMERLY CEYLON) - TAMILS

http://sajitharan.blogspot.com/2009/08/ ... d-not.html

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: NOAM CHOMSKY - "THE GALILEO OF POLITICS, LANGUAGE & TRUTH"Posted: 2009-08-02, 10:24:35 am

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 CHOMSKY AT THE UN - CRITICISM

http://www.undispatch.com/node/8693

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: NOAM CHOMSKY - "THE GALILEO OF TRUTH, LANGUAGE & POLITICS"Posted: 2009-08-02, 08:30:07 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 NOAM CHOMSKY - "QUOTE OF THE WEEK"

http://cabaretic.blogspot.com/2009/08/q ... -week.html

Remember that the media have two basic functions. One is to indoctrinate the elites, to make sure they have the right ideas and know how to serve power. In fact, typically the elites are the most indoctrinated segment of a society, because they are the ones who are exposed to the most propaganda and actually take part in the decision-making process. For them you have the New York Times, and the Washington Post, and the Wall Street Journal, and so on. But there’s also a mass media, whose main function is just to get rid of the rest of the population -- to marginalize and eliminate them, so they don’t interfere with decision-making. And the press that’s designed for that purpose isn’t the New York Times and the Washington Post, it’s sitcoms on television, and the National Enquirer, and sex and violence, and babies with three heads, and football, all that kind of stuff.- Noam Chomsky

Top

Display posts from previous: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by AuthorPost timeSubject AscendingDescending
Page 20 of 20
[ 196 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 16, 17, 18, 19, 20

Board index » My first Category » GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM » Obituaries and Biography
All times are UTC [ DST ]

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for: Jump to: Select a forum ------------------ My first Category GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM Business and Employment War and Global Conflicts GENERAL DISCUSSION - News & Comment Gatwick City (Crawley, Horley, Ifield, Airport & Beyond) The Best Question Ever Asked.......and The Best Answer Ever Given Politics and Elections Obituaries and Biography Sex, Sport, Humour and Stories Religion and Philosophies Education and Schools Health and Hospitals Planning and Transport Admin Notices Local Links - Global Links Suggestion Box

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Free Forum : phpbb3now.com

AUGUST 22 2009 - IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND (PART 8)

2009-08-08T15:46:00.000-07:00

To be continued...

AUGUST 21 2009 - IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND (PART 7)

2009-08-08T15:43:00.000-07:00

THE 'GATWICK CITY OF IDEAS' DISCUSSION FORUM
Gatwick City Forum

Login Register FAQ Search

It is currently 2009-08-08, 11:45:33 pm

View unanswered posts | View active topics

Board index » My first Category » GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM » Gatwick City (Crawley, Horley, Ifield, Airport & Beyond)
All times are UTC [ DST ]

IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - "THE SPIRIT OF KINDER SCOUT"

Page 7 of 7
[ 67 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
Print view Previous topic | Next topic

Author Message
Richard W. Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS AND "THE SPIRIT OF KINDER SCOUT"Posted: 2009-08-02, 10:12:31 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 Can't resist quoting this (found whilst preparing for my 5-minute stint last Saturday :

"The development should protect and, where possible, enhance the setting of Ifield Village Conservation Area, and avoid areas of flood risk and aircraft noise contours..."

(Source : Horsham District Local Development Framework Submission Draft (undated) - The Core Strategy - Chapter 4 : Spatial Strategy and Core Policies - Policy CP 6 - Strategic Location - West of Crawley - Page 59 & 60)

Quite how or why Horsham District Council are making pronouncements on land - Ifield Brook Meadows/Conservation Area - which is that of Crawley Borough Council, I don't quite understand....but it goes to show that "West of Crawley" includes Ifield Brook Meadows, from the Councils' point of view (ie WSCC/HDC/CBC)

Top

34&rising Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS AND "THE SPIRIT OF KINDER SCOUT"Posted: 2009-08-02, 11:42:52 pm

Joined: 2007-09-11, 10:30:32 pm
Posts: 554
Location: The Parish of Bewbush Contaminated Dump Village JohnL wrote:
Why are you including IVCAAC in this group 34&rising?

I was at the meeting on Friday evening and the committee members from IVCAAC who spoke gave out lots of new information that has not been reported here, regarding the environment agency bore holes, the proposed flood relief scheme and a summary of their meeting with the representative from HCA. They also handed out copies of their correspondence with the HCA and promised to keep everybody informed of any new developments.

Perhaps it would be a good idea if that 'new information' was posted on this forum so that those who were/are unable to attend such meetings could be kept informed.

I would be particularly interested in any proposed flood relief schemes which relate to the Meadow.

Top

34&rising Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS AND "THE SPIRIT OF KINDER SCOUT"Posted: 2009-08-03, 09:40:28 am

Joined: 2007-09-11, 10:30:32 pm
Posts: 554
Location: The Parish of Bewbush Contaminated Dump Village JohnL wrote:
:ugeek: You've left out the most powerful and dangerous weapons in their armoury Richard W., SECRECY and SILENCE, both of which it seems are now being used by HDC, CBC, the HCA and IVCAAC.

JohnL wrote:
Why are you including IVCAAC in this group 34&rising?

To avoid any accusations of 'secrecy', Could someone please inform the forum of the following:

1) Who and What is the Ifield Village Conservation Area Advisory Committee (IVCAAC) ?
2) Who are the committee members of this organisation?
3) What are their aims and constitution?
4) How are they funded?
5) Who do they report to?
6) Under what authority do they act?

Top

JohnL Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS AND "THE SPIRIT OF KINDER SCOUT"Posted: 2009-08-03, 11:24:02 am

Joined: 2009-07-16, 04:28:46 pm
Posts: 12
Location: Ifield 34&rising wrote:
JohnL wrote:
:ugeek: You've left out the most powerful and dangerous weapons in their armoury Richard W., SECRECY and SILENCE, both of which it seems are now being used by HDC, CBC, the HCA and IVCAAC.

JohnL wrote:
Why are you including IVCAAC in this group 34&rising?

To avoid any accusations of 'secrecy', Could someone please inform the forum of the following:

1) Who and What is the Ifield Village Conservation Area Advisory Committee (IVCAAC) ?
2) Who are the committee members of this organisation?
3) What are their aims and constitution?
4) How are they funded?
5) Who do they report to?
6) Under what authority do they act?

As I say, I'm a newcomer, but I found this statement from IVCAAC, by running a web search

http://www.crawley.gov.uk/stellent/groups/public/documents/otherdocs/int106912.pdf

Jenny Frost, IVCAAC's secretary, chaired Friday's meeting and seemed very pleasant and approachable when I spoke to her afterwards. I am sure Richard has her contact details, if you want to send her your questions directly

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS AND "THE SPIRIT OF KINDER SCOUT"Posted: 2009-08-03, 11:38:59 am

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 Done - thanks JohnL

Top

admin Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS AND "THE SPIRIT OF KINDER SCOUT"Posted: 2009-08-05, 08:42:45 am

Joined: 2007-09-08, 05:18:52 pm
Posts: 65 Richard W. has again asked us to post a comment of his - as he is unable to post in particular "categories" - such as this one. We are happy to do this - and if anyone else is experiencing the same kind of problems, we would be happy to post any comment by them also.

IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS AND BEYOND - BELIEF
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=930&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=10
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=952

NO news coverage of last Friday's full Meeting at St Margaret's Church - either by Crawley Observer or Crawley News ((Wednesday August 5)

This is beyond belief - laughable as well as disturbing - it's as though this critically-important event never happened.

There seems to be no better example of Herman & Chomsky's Five-Filter Propaganda Model in practice :
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=145&start=0

To my mind, it's not the editors or reporters who are at fault here.

It's the people who CONTROL news & information - what is admitted & what is omitted -who are the greatest threats to truth-seeking & our democratic freedoms.

It's as though a 'propaganda veil' gets pulled over our eyes, to blind us to the truth of what is really going on.

I am reminded of the words of John Milton in 1642 :

"THEY WHO HAVE PUT OUT THE PEOPLES EYES
REPROACH THM OF THEIR BLINDNESS"

Top

admin Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS AND "THE SPIRIT OF KINDER SCOUT"Posted: 2009-08-05, 11:28:08 pm

Joined: 2007-09-08, 05:18:52 pm
Posts: 65 Richard W. has again asked us to post this - an email he has received from "K" :

Richard

I don't have all the answers but a bit of info I do know.

The Environment Agency (EA) need/want to help reduce long-term flood risk for Gatwick and upper Mole valley.

They will be going ahead with a scheme to temp drain Tilgate lake and increase the height of the dam (soil not concrete)
The core of the dam needs to be impervious clay, the soil around Tilgate is not suitable for this
They are investigating trucking clay in, maybe from Ifield area.

The EA maybe making a new flood pond on Ifield Brook too.

K

Thanks for that

If the Ifield pond is constructed by EA, would this have the affect of 'deleting' the Flood Plain in Ifield Brook Meadows - thus opening it up for development ?

Richard

I would say potentially yes

Down stream of any flood pond with a restricted outflow would be much less liable to flooding, so this should be of concern to us!

Here is a pdf of the draft Tilgate plans

K

So, do we now have 7 major players in relation to Ifield Brook Meadows & Beyond ?

1. Homes & Communities Agency (formerly English Partnerships)(Government Quango)
2. Welbeck-DeWalden Consortium (which includes Welbeck Land, Waites, Rydon, Persimmon(?)
3. Ifield Golf Club
4. Local Councils' (WSCC/HDC/CBC)
5. Government Environment Agency (& Thames Water/MacQuarie ?)
6. Corporate/State Media (eg Crawley Observer/Times/News & BBC, Local Radio & TV)
AND
7(a). The 'Aware &/or Care Community (b) The 'Unaware &/or Don't Care' Community

As I see it, at the moment, the only people who appear to be openly (& actively) supporting the protection of Ifield Brook Meadows is a handful of Local Councillors (CBC & WSCC), certain members of IVCAAC, The Ifield Society - and, of course, those individuals who have completed (are completing) the Public Way Evidence Forms.

That ain't enough to protect Ifield Brook Meadows & Beyond, methinks.

R

Top

Display posts from previous: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by AuthorPost timeSubject AscendingDescending
Page 7 of 7
[ 67 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

Board index » My first Category » GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM » Gatwick City (Crawley, Horley, Ifield, Airport & Beyond)
All times are UTC [ DST ]

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for: Jump to: Select a forum ------------------ My first Category GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM Business and Employment War and Global Conflicts GENERAL DISCUSSION - News & Comment Gatwick City (Crawley, Horley, Ifield, Airport & Beyond) The Best Question Ever Asked.......and The Best Answer Ever Given Politics and Elections Obituaries and Biography Sex, Sport, Humour and Stories Religion and Philosophies Education and Schools Health and Hospitals Planning and Transport Admin Notices Local Links - Global Links Suggestion Box

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Free Forum : phpbb3now.com

AUGUST 20 2009 - IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND (PART 6)

2009-08-08T15:42:00.000-07:00

THE 'GATWICK CITY OF IDEAS' DISCUSSION FORUM
Gatwick City Forum

Login Register FAQ Search

It is currently 2009-08-08, 11:43:19 pm

View unanswered posts | View active topics

Board index » My first Category » GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM » Gatwick City (Crawley, Horley, Ifield, Airport & Beyond)
All times are UTC [ DST ]

IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - "THE SPIRIT OF KINDER SCOUT"

Page 6 of 7
[ 67 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next
Print view Previous topic | Next topic

Author Message
admin Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - MEETING & RAMBLETTE (31 & 1)Posted: 2009-07-28, 08:04:48 pm

Joined: 2007-09-08, 05:18:52 pm
Posts: 65 A very warm welcome to you, Lindyloo.

Top

34&rising Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - MEETING & RAMBLETTE (31 & 1)Posted: 2009-07-28, 08:18:33 pm

Joined: 2007-09-11, 10:30:32 pm
Posts: 554
Location: The Parish of Bewbush Contaminated Dump Village Lindyloo wrote:
Hi I have some photographs of Ifield during the floods which I took in 1997 which could prove the 'Consortium' that building on Ifield Meadows would be disasterous for the buyers. I will bring them down to the meeting on Friday 31st July.

The problem with focusing on the flood issue, is that it is simply an 'engineering' problem. That is to say, if a developer felt they could make money from building on the meadow, then they would find a way to overcome any problems associated with possible flooding.

If they can build a new neighbourhood on a contaminated, dangerous and unstable landfill site, then I'm sure a little matter of 'drainage' wouldn't be difficult to overcome!

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - MEETING & RAMBLETTE (31 & 1)Posted: 2009-07-29, 10:51:20 am

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 The meeting was also attended by Michael Hodgson (MH) who is a Conservative County Councillor and now Deputy Leader of WSCC (and so, apparently, 'above politics'!), who was reporting back on various issues and he gave the benefit of his wisdom on a couple of matters which I raised...
MH (who until recently was on the Rights of Way Committee) seemed more in sympathy with landowners than walkers when he opined that it was important for landowners to be prepared to prosecute walkers if they wandered away from public footpaths - otherwise walkers could attempt to persuade the Rights of Way Committee to legalise access after 20 years. I must say from his tone it didn't sound as if the Rights of Way Committee is likely to be sympathetic !!
G

OK, so the WSCC Deputy Leader, Cllr Michael Hodgson, says this (above), and the WSCC Leader, Cllr Henry Smith, says this (below) ?

Ummmmmmmmm....

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: IFIELD AND BEYOND - RESPONSE TO QUANGO SIGNS - THIS FRIDAYPosted: 2009-07-29, 10:57:19 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 I would be grateful if you could express my deep concern at the Homes & Commmunities Agency apparently seeking to deny public access over paths crossing the areas they are responsible for.

Henry Smith, Leader of West Sussex County Council

May I suggest the WSCC Leader & Deputy Leader had a little chat together...and then it would be appreciated if they could notify their taxpaying 'bankrollers' (us) exactly where the WSCC stands on this issue.

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - MEETING & RAMBLETTE (31 & 1)Posted: 2009-07-29, 11:28:42 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 Cllr Hodgson, WSCC Deputy Leader, is seriously misinformed on this issue - and should address his own arrogant ignorance of what democracy is all about, as soon as possible...for everybody's sake :

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=886&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=70
As I see it at the moment, there is a very simple way of immediately helping to protect this ancient area - and I encourage anyone who can do this to do it :
Phone the "Rights of Way" Dept at Chichester's County Hall (West Sussex County Council) - 01243 777579 - and say that people have been walking on this area for over 20 years - 50 years in some cases - and so you want any "unrecorded paths" legally recorded, under Section 53 of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981.

Clearly Cllr Hodgson (former Rights of Way Committee Member) knows more about Stalkers & The Protection from Harassment Act 1997, than Walkers & The Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981.
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=622&start=20

May I also suggest he takes a visit to Ifield Brook Meadows (not on expenses) to see for himself what dangerous nonsense he has in his party-political head- especially as WSCC Deputy Leader.

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - MEETING & RAMBLETTE (31 & 1)Posted: 2009-07-31, 11:22:53 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 The outcome of tonight's meeting at St Margaret's is that people have voted to 'put things on hold', while negotiations with HCA are in hand. There will be another meeting called in the first two weeks of September to consider the HCA response and decide what the next step is.

In the meantime there will be an opportunity to collect in footpath forms and check them. Members of IVCAAC have volunteered to help with the checking. They will then be ready, if it is deemed prudent to go down that route.

I had a 'strong, long (but not nasty) discussion' with a couple on my way home - accusing me of scare-mongering (St Margaret's could become like Horsham's St Mark's), and rudeness (towards Cllr John Denman & others).

If I came across that way - it wasn't meant - just trying to wake people up & raise awareness of the development threat. Even so, if WSCC's Cllr Hodgson was present I might well have been very rude...

The outcome of the meeting was fine - but I am still left with an uneasy feeling we are under-estimating what we are up against. This 'Landowner/Developer Consortium' is extremely powerful, and we had them 'on the ropes', but I fear we may be 'letting them off the hook' by delaying certain actions...which might allow them to re-group, 'divide & rule' etc.

I was much encouraged by the numbers - far more than anticipated. Well over 50 people at a guess.

Can't see that number coming to the Ramblette tomorrow morning - but you never can tell !

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - MEETING & RAMBLETTE (31 & 1)Posted: 2009-08-01, 04:52:11 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 The Ramblette took place this morning - numbers down to 7 of us - in contrast to the previous evening.

A few regulars were missing - let's hope they are OK.

Two 'camps' seem to be emerging :

Camp 1 - Those who are 100% CERTAIN Ifield Brook Meadows will NOT be built on...some of whom are very unhappy with certain people in Camp 2 for 'scaremongering' etc

Camp 2 - Those who are LESS THAN 100% certain....some of whom consider some of those in Camp 1 to be naively living in cloud cuckoo-land.

The majority appear to be in Camp 1

The minority appear to be in Camp 2.

I am firmly in Camp 2, especially when I strongly expressed a view at the meeting - on the basis of 10 years campaigning evidence - that Ifield Brook Meadows would definitely be developed, unless we ourselves (individually & collectively) did enough to prevent it from happening...and we couldn't rely on certain Councillors & an MP - alone - to prevent it from happening.

This has not made me very popular at all - especially with those in Camp 1 - who are accusing me of 'scaremongering' and being rude to certain Councillors & an MP.

My fear is that the 'controlling powers-that-be will attempt to regain full control by a tactic of 'divide & rule'.- such as setting one Camp against the other by rumour-spreading, character-slurs, false accusations, blame etc.

I would like to be in Camp 1 - but after 10 years campaigning on this issue - and finding myself extremely distrustful of the 'controlling powers-that-be' - I find myself in Camp 2.

The one thing these very powerful people fear most is that the opposition will grow into one collective powerful voice on a common platform.

I call it 'DEMOCRACY' which should be encouraged at all costs. 'They' would probably call it an "EXCESS OF DEMOCRACY" which should be controlled at all costs - or an 'EXCESS OF FREEDOM"....like an "EXCESS OF HAPPINESS"

Personally, I fear we are up against a 'Consortium of Bullies & Hangers-On' who are determined to get what they want, by any means at their disposal.

Top

34&rising Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - MEETING & RAMBLETTE (31 & 1)Posted: 2009-08-02, 10:46:42 am

Joined: 2007-09-11, 10:30:32 pm
Posts: 554
Location: The Parish of Bewbush Contaminated Dump Village Richard W. wrote:
My fear is that the 'controlling powers-that-be will attempt to regain full control by a tactic of 'divide & rule'.- such as setting one Camp against the other by rumour-spreading, character-slurs, false accusations, blame etc.

You've left out the most powerful and dangerous weapons in their armoury Richard W., SECRECY and SILENCE, both of which it seems are now being used by HDC, CBC, the HCA and IVCAAC.

Top

JohnL Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - MEETING & RAMBLETTE (31 & 1)Posted: 2009-08-02, 05:06:49 pm

Joined: 2009-07-16, 04:28:46 pm
Posts: 12
Location: Ifield 34&rising wrote:
Richard W. wrote:
My fear is that the 'controlling powers-that-be will attempt to regain full control by a tactic of 'divide & rule'.- such as setting one Camp against the other by rumour-spreading, character-slurs, false accusations, blame etc.

You've left out the most powerful and dangerous weapons in their armoury Richard W., SECRECY and SILENCE, both of which it seems are now being used by HDC, CBC, the HCA and IVCAAC.

Why are you including IVCAAC in this group 34&rising?

I was at the meeting on Friday evening and the committee members from IVCAAC who spoke gave out lots of new information that has not been reported here, regarding the environment agency bore holes, the proposed flood relief scheme and a summary of their meeting with the representative from HCA. They also handed out copies of their correspondence with the HCA and promised to keep everybody informed of any new developments.

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - MEETING & RAMBLETTE (31 & 1)Posted: 2009-08-02, 08:03:37 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 Yes I agree with you, JohnL, IVCAAC should be subtracted. But I would add one 'big' one - Welbeck Land (who have the 'option' on Ifield Brook Meadows).

"The possible development of this area ("West of Ifield" - Ed) is being promoted by a consortium of landowners/developers" (Crawley Times, July 17 2009 - Page 8)

We know one of the main "developers" is Welbeck Land - THE main developer in fact.
http://www.welbeckland.co.uk/
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=906&start=10

But is HCA one of the main "landowners" in this Consortium ?

If somebody knows, they're not telling.

It's difficult not to draw that conclusion, as much of the area threatened is 'owned' by the 'Public Landowner' HCA (a Govt. Quango). We now know exactly how much land they 'own' (previously unknown), because that is conveniently 'pegged out' by their signs around Ifield Brook Meadows and the rest of the Parish towards Ifield Golf Club !

Methinks there will be much obfuscation, 'divide & rule', 'decoys', secrecy, silence - and disinformation/misinformation - from the 'controlling powers-that-be' - whom I suspect is this "consortium of landowners/developers" & their 'hangers-on'.

Last edited by Richard W. on 2009-08-03, 06:25:27 am, edited 6 times in total.

Top

Display posts from previous: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by AuthorPost timeSubject AscendingDescending
Page 6 of 7
[ 67 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next

Board index » My first Category » GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM » Gatwick City (Crawley, Horley, Ifield, Airport & Beyond)
All times are UTC [ DST ]

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for: Jump to: Select a forum ------------------ My first Category GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM Business and Employment War and Global Conflicts GENERAL DISCUSSION - News & Comment Gatwick City (Crawley, Horley, Ifield, Airport & Beyond) The Best Question Ever Asked.......and The Best Answer Ever Given Politics and Elections Obituaries and Biography Sex, Sport, Humour and Stories Religion and Philosophies Education and Schools Health and Hospitals Planning and Transport Admin Notices Local Links - Global Links Suggestion Box

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Free Forum : phpbb3now.com

AUGUST 19 2009 - IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND (PART 5)

2009-08-08T15:40:00.000-07:00

THE 'GATWICK CITY OF IDEAS' DISCUSSION FORUM
Gatwick City Forum

Login Register FAQ Search

It is currently 2009-08-08, 11:41:25 pm

View unanswered posts | View active topics

Board index » My first Category » GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM » Gatwick City (Crawley, Horley, Ifield, Airport & Beyond)
All times are UTC [ DST ]

IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - "THE SPIRIT OF KINDER SCOUT"

Page 5 of 7
[ 67 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next
Print view Previous topic | Next topic

Author Message
Richard W. Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - MEETING & RAMBLETTE (31 & 1)Posted: 2009-07-28, 12:53:37 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 Deleted

Last edited by Richard W. on 2009-07-28, 01:53:52 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - MEETING & RAMBLETTE (31 & 1)Posted: 2009-07-28, 01:51:57 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 Dear Mr Watson

Thank you for your reply - it is appreciated.

I look forward to hearing from Richard Thomas.

Yours sincerely

Richard Symonds
THE IFIELD SOCIETY

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - MEETING & RAMBLETTE (31 & 1)Posted: 2009-07-28, 02:52:05 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 Richard

Thank you for your email. I understand my co-director, Alistair Watson, has responded already.

I am unable to make the meeting this Friday unfortunately but, whilst I recognise your previously held position in respect of the westward expansion of the built up area of Crawley, I would be happy to meet with you in the first instance to compare notes.

If you would like to do so, perhaps you would give me some suggested dates.

Regards

Richard Thomas

Director

richard.thomas@welbeckland.co.uk

Tel: 020 7529 3818

Welbeck Land Limited

13 Woodstock Street

London

W1C 2AG

http://www.welbeckland.co.uk

We have allocated a substantial proportion of our financial reserves to the promotion of Strategic Land and would be delighted to recognise introductions.

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - MEETING & RAMBLETTE (31 & 1)Posted: 2009-07-28, 03:08:22 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 Dear Richard (Thomas)

Many thanks for your email. As with Mr Watson's email, it is much appreciated.

I'm sorry Welbeck cannot be represented on Friday - it would have been valuable to those present as to your position on the 'West of Ifield'.

May I come back to you regarding arranging a date to "compare notes" - perhaps soon after the meeting this Friday.

Many thanks again.

Regards

Richard (Symonds)
THE IFIELD SOCIETY

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - MEETING & RAMBLETTE (31 & 1)Posted: 2009-07-28, 03:18:51 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 As we speak, HCA are building a new bridge at the entrance of Ifield Brook Meadows (South) - by the bridge which crosses Ifield Brook, at the back of the Church (Hat-Tip : Linda)

Interestingly, this bridge is being built at the start of an UNREGISTERED PATH (Permissive Path?) - at the Greenway route.

Last edited by Richard W. on 2009-07-28, 04:57:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top

34&rising Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - MEETING & RAMBLETTE (31 & 1)Posted: 2009-07-28, 04:52:03 pm

Joined: 2007-09-11, 10:30:32 pm
Posts: 554
Location: The Parish of Bewbush Contaminated Dump Village Is it a foot bridge or road bridge?

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - MEETING & RAMBLETTE (31 & 1)Posted: 2009-07-28, 04:58:47 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 34&rising, the comedian, strikes again !

Many a true word....

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - MEETING & RAMBLETTE (31 & 1)Posted: 2009-07-28, 05:42:45 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 CRAWLEY BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING

Thank you for your invite to the Ifield Brook Meadows meeting regarding the recently erected HCA signs.

On this occasion, it is considered that it is not appropriate for the Council to attend the meeting. This view is based on the fact that the Council continues to have dialogue with the HCA on this matter, in conjunction with IVCAAC, and are awaiting the outcome of this process. I understand...IVCAAC is intending to inform the meeting on Friday of this process.

Having consulted colleagues from Horsham District Council, they are also of the view that the Council should not attend the meeting until the outcome of the process outlined above is known.

If you have any queries regarding the above, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Regards

Last edited by Richard W. on 2009-07-28, 06:18:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - MEETING & RAMBLETTE (31 & 1)Posted: 2009-07-28, 06:16:49 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY

Thank you for your email referring to the westward expansion of Crawley and Welbeck Land Limited. I am sorry to advise you that I am not involved with any development proposals for Crawley so I would not be the right person to contact within HCA.

I would suggest that your contact within HCA would be either Abigail Raymond or Christopher Cain who both work within our Development Team at our Ashford office tel. 020 7881 1610.

Regards

Top

Lindyloo Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - MEETING & RAMBLETTE (31 & 1)Posted: 2009-07-28, 06:31:56 pm

Joined: 2009-07-28, 05:28:42 pm
Posts: 1 Hi I have some photographs of Ifield during the floods which I took in 1997 which could prove the 'Consortium' that building on Ifield Meadows would be disasterous for the buyers. I will bring them down to the meeting on Friday 31st July.

Top

Display posts from previous: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by AuthorPost timeSubject AscendingDescending
Page 5 of 7
[ 67 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next

Board index » My first Category » GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM » Gatwick City (Crawley, Horley, Ifield, Airport & Beyond)
All times are UTC [ DST ]

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for: Jump to: Select a forum ------------------ My first Category GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM Business and Employment War and Global Conflicts GENERAL DISCUSSION - News & Comment Gatwick City (Crawley, Horley, Ifield, Airport & Beyond) The Best Question Ever Asked.......and The Best Answer Ever Given Politics and Elections Obituaries and Biography Sex, Sport, Humour and Stories Religion and Philosophies Education and Schools Health and Hospitals Planning and Transport Admin Notices Local Links - Global Links Suggestion Box

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Free Forum : phpbb3now.com

AUGUST 18 2009 - IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND (PART 4)

2009-08-08T15:37:00.000-07:00

THE 'GATWICK CITY OF IDEAS' DISCUSSION FORUM
Gatwick City Forum

Login Register FAQ Search

It is currently 2009-08-08, 11:38:27 pm

View unanswered posts | View active topics

Board index » My first Category » GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM » Gatwick City (Crawley, Horley, Ifield, Airport & Beyond)
All times are UTC [ DST ]

IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - "THE SPIRIT OF KINDER SCOUT"

Page 4 of 7
[ 67 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next
Print view Previous topic | Next topic

Author Message
Richard W. Post subject: Re: THE COMMUNITY V THE CONSORTIUM - MEETING FRIDAY JULY 31 AT 7Posted: 2009-07-25, 09:33:52 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 Just had a Rambette Meeting this morning - discussing next Friday's Meeting at the Church.

We thought it would be a good idea to 'record' the proceedings.

Do you know of anyone who could do this - for free ?

Last edited by Richard W. on 2009-07-25, 09:39:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: THE COMMUNITY V THE CONSORTIUM - MEETING FRIDAY JULY 31 AT 7Posted: 2009-07-25, 09:38:17 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 Unfortunately, I only have a very early and ancient video camera, otherwise I would offer to record the event.

In the absence of anything more professional, I can record up to an hour of video on my phone, but it can’t be put on a tripod and the sound is very ‘tinny’.

J

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: THE COMMUNITY V THE CONSORTIUM - MEETING FRIDAY JULY 31 AT 7Posted: 2009-07-25, 09:42:44 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 This Saturday afternoon, I once again noticed a series of what seemed to be gunshots out in the fields west of Aldingbourne Close. After I had heard about 6 within 20 minutes, I walked out in the direction of gunfire.....

This took me across the river and along the public footpath towards Pound Cottages for about 100 metres where I saw an empty van (GX04 BLV) with at least one gun case inside and boxes of cartridges. A couple of people who passed told me that there were two men near an oak tree on the field boundary going south. They had set up a 'decoy pigeon' which was supposed to attract other birds who would then be shot at.

I walked in their direction keeping on the east side away from their evident line of fire and following the machinery tracks through a wheat field. A man appeared who told me I should not be there and I explained I was there because of the regular weekend disturbance of people in Aldingbourne Close by the sound of gunfire. The guns were being fired about 100 metres away from a public footpath. He said that he was not Mr Cook, the farmer, but had his permission to use guns to 'scare away the pigeons' presumably from his wheat crop.

So I suppose the explanation is relatively reassuring but I wonder whether guns should be being used so close to a public footpath with or without the landowner/tenants permission and within earshot of a residential area. I also wonder whether it is only pigeons being shot at - skylarks are common in that area I believe. Is it legal to shoot at wildlife in this way?

I understand that there is a Rusper Parish Council meeting this Wednesday evening in Rusper Village Hall. Does any resident of that Parish Council area fancy bringing it up at the start of the meeting - as you are entitled I believe? Perhaps it would also be a good idea to raise the Homes and Communities Agency issue there as well to ensure that they are aware.

G

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: THE COMMUNITY V THE CONSORTIUM - MEETING FRIDAY JULY 31 AT 7Posted: 2009-07-25, 09:46:23 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 It seems a very effective tactic to scare the .... out of dogs, so their owners don't use the footpaths in the area, and go elsewhere.

Killing birds - what next ? Rabbits, Deer, Dogs ?

Is it legal ? I can't believe so - but something can be legally right and morally wrong.

This, to me, is morally wrong.

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: THE COMMUNITY V THE CONSORTIUM - FRIDAY THE 31ST AT 7PMPosted: 2009-07-25, 11:41:34 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 All the objectives you mention are worthy, but on 31 July I suggest the main objective should be towards registering the paths and helping people with queries regarding the forms.

The initiative has rightly been taken to hand out footpath user forms in the face of the challenge/assertion by Homes and Communities that paths don't exist or, if in some cases they do, by the express permission of H & C - which may be withdrawn at any time.

Presumably however the paths have been used by the public at least since the land acquisition by the New Towns Commission in the 1950s and possibly earlier.
If the public in general has used the paths for over twenty years without challenge (such as the notices we now have) this is the main criterion for confirmation of the paths as public rights of way.

The more people that complete forms the stronger the case for confirmation. If we can get as many of the paths registered as possible it will then consequently strengthen the case for the other objectives you list.

All parties in selecting the Browns/Bewbush site for development seem to have recognised the existing registered path network as an argument against selecting 'West of Ifield'.
More footpaths would strengthen that case for the future.

If we fail to make our claims now, H & C could invoke their threats at any time. If they don't, then the impetus will be lost; people will regard the notices as empty words and carry on as before, but the 20 year period will still pre-date the challenge - the date the notices were erected.

I haven't mentioned it before because this is not the area I deal with and I don't wish to step on other people's toes but as a volunteer footpath rep for the Ramblers Assn I was involved in a similar case elsewhere.

I have contacted the Ramblers reps for Rusper parish and Crawley BC but have so far had no reply, but perhaps they may appear at the meeting.

P

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: THE COMMUNITY V THE CONSORTIUM - FRIDAY THE 31ST AT 7PMPosted: 2009-07-25, 11:56:36 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 I am somewhat bemused, and amused. neither the Council(s) or HCA could confirm (to someone I know) Welbeck's involvement in purchasing Ifield Golf Club and surrounding areas. Here's part of my evidence :

1. "Wreaths laid for threatened golf course", Crawley Observer, August 15 2007
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-170004153.html

And, more importantly :

2. "Consortium eyes up golf land for homes", Crawley Observer, April 15 2009
http://www.crawleyobserver.co.uk/news/C ... 5171903.jp

And, less importantly (perhaps?) :

3. Gatwick City Forum
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=907&start=20
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=886&start=90

Also, don't forget the Consortium pulled out of the JAAP at the last moment, concerning West of Ifield (Wednesday afternoon, 21st January 2009). I was there, fully prepared to 'do battle'.

There is also an extremely strong rumour - not yet confirmed as fact - that HCA (as landowner of Ifield Brook Meadows & beyond) is formally part of the (masonic?) "landowner/developer" Welbeck Consortium.

That wouldn't surprise me at all !

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: IFIELD AND BEYOND - RESPONSE TO QUANGO SIGNS - THIS FRIDAYPosted: 2009-07-26, 06:06:04 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 Here are a few suggestions as Guidelines for the Structure of the Meeting on Friday

1) To protest at Homes & Communities Agency bully-boy tactics of scare-mongering the public into keeping to registered footpaths, especially in the Ifield Village Conservation Area/Ifield Brook Meadows..

2) To raise public awareness of what could happen in the future within the Ifield community and beyond.

3) To advise people on how best to Keep the Public Ancient Footpaths Public i.e. registering all footpaths that are regularly walked daily.

L

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: IFIELD AND BEYOND - RESPONSE TO QUANGO SIGNS - THIS FRIDAYPosted: 2009-07-26, 06:19:38 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 Dear Richard

Thank you for the invitation to attend and speak at the meeting you have arranged this coming Friday evening at St Margaret's Church to discuss rights of way access on Homes & Communities Agency controlled land in Ifield.

Unfortunately I will be unable to join you as I will be away on holiday at that time, however, I would be grateful if you could express my deep concern at the Homes & Commmunities Agency apparently seeking to deny public access over paths crossing the areas they are responsible for.

With regards

Henry

Henry Smith, Leader of West Sussex County Council

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - MEETING REGARDING HCA SIGNSPosted: 2009-07-27, 11:27:33 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 I very much regret that I am unable to attend. I have a full day of engagements already in my diary in the constituency on Friday.

John Healey MP

Dear John Healey - Communities Minister,

May I formally invite you to a Meeting this Friday (31st) - "Ifield Brook Meadows & Beyond - Response To The Homes & Communities Signs".

This Meeting will take place at St Margaret's Church, Ifield Village, Crawley - at 7pm (to 9pm).

Would you be prepared to do a '5-Minute Presentation' ? I am also inviting Laura Moffatt (Crawley MP) & Henry Smith (WSCC Leader) to do the same, along with Philip Marsh (HCA) and Welbeck-De Walden - among others.

There will be Maps on display - and the Footpath Evidence Forms will be collected/distributed.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely.

Richard W. Symonds MCIPD
THE IFIELD SOCIETY

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - MEETING & RAMBLETTE (31 & 1)Posted: 2009-07-28, 12:51:39 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 Dear Mr. Symonds

Thank you for your email

My colleague Richard Thomas is responsible for this project and I understand is in contact with you

Accordingly I will not be attending the meeting

Yours sincerely

Alistair Watson

Managing Director

alistair.watson@welbeckland.co.uk

Tel: 020 7529 3800

Welbeck Land Limited

13 Woodstock Street

London

W1C 2AG

http://www.welbeckland.co.uk

We have allocated a substantial proportion of our financial reserves to the promotion of Strategic Land and would be delighted to recognise introductions.

Last edited by Richard W. on 2009-07-28, 01:50:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top

Display posts from previous: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by AuthorPost timeSubject AscendingDescending
Page 4 of 7
[ 67 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next

Board index » My first Category » GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM » Gatwick City (Crawley, Horley, Ifield, Airport & Beyond)
All times are UTC [ DST ]

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for: Jump to: Select a forum ------------------ My first Category GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM Business and Employment War and Global Conflicts GENERAL DISCUSSION - News & Comment Gatwick City (Crawley, Horley, Ifield, Airport & Beyond) The Best Question Ever Asked.......and The Best Answer Ever Given Politics and Elections Obituaries and Biography Sex, Sport, Humour and Stories Religion and Philosophies Education and Schools Health and Hospitals Planning and Transport Admin Notices Local Links - Global Links Suggestion Box

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Free Forum : phpbb3now.com

AUGUST 17 2009 - IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND (PART 3)

2009-08-08T15:32:00.000-07:00

THE 'GATWICK CITY OF IDEAS' DISCUSSION FORUM
Gatwick City Forum

Login Register FAQ Search

It is currently 2009-08-08, 11:34:53 pm

View unanswered posts | View active topics

Board index » My first Category » GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM » Gatwick City (Crawley, Horley, Ifield, Airport & Beyond)
All times are UTC [ DST ]

IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - "THE SPIRIT OF KINDER SCOUT"

Page 3 of 7
[ 67 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next
Print view Previous topic | Next topic

Author Message
Richard W. Post subject: Re: THE COMMUNITY V THE CONSORTIUM - MEETING FRIDAY JULY 31 AT 7Posted: 2009-07-21, 03:44:13 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 When they mention the 'consortium' they are talking about other landowners in the area west of Ifield Richard W, not HCA. The consortium consists of Welbeck Land, Rydon Homes, Wates Developments, and a few 'private' landowners along Rusper Road, some of whom have already submitted planning applications to HDC. HCA are not part of this consortium. The consortium has no interest in the Meadow.

Anon

.

Last edited by Richard W. on 2009-07-21, 03:45:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: THE COMMUNITY V THE CONSORTIUM - MEETING FRIDAY JULY 31 AT 7Posted: 2009-07-21, 03:45:14 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 I profoundly disagree with you, Anon.

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: THE COMMUNITY V THE CONSORTIUM - MEETING FRIDAY JULY 31 AT 7Posted: 2009-07-21, 05:52:42 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 Some of the communications you have copied to me make me very uneasy, especially the discussion website. There seems to be a lack of focus in the discussions. It seems to me that if we want to preserve Ifield, we need to start by defining our aims and objectives.

I would suggest that our principal aim is to preserve Ifield Meadows and the surrounding land as recreational open space.

That gives rise to 3 key objectives:
To prevent building on the land
To continue to have recreational access to the land
To have the land's recreational status recognised in the local plan
Objectives 2 & 3 are conditional on success in objective 1. I am a keen walker, but if we want to win the big fight we should focus on objective 1, not objective 2. Objective 3 is for the future when the dust has settled.

Taking objective 2 first, we must start by recognising that HCA has the power to limit access to public rights of way only. The problem is not them taking our rights away - we never had those rights in the first place. The problem is that they have changed the open access policy of their predecessors. We therefore need to engage them in a constructive dialogue about their policy, not our rights. We should start by getting them to admit that they have changed the policy and ask them why.

Turning to the really important objective 1, we need to understand the HCA's objectives. The HCA was set up with a big fanfare by the Government to get affordable housing built, and the bosses of HCA need to prove that they are earning their large salaries. If we just witter on about the rights of walkers, they will just see us a bunch of hysterical NIMBYs. If on the other hand we ensure that the London and Regional bosses of HCA understand the reasons why building on Ifield Meadows would be a daft idea, including the fact that it is a flood plain, we will bring them to the reality of their position, which is that they have inherited a lot of poor-quality land that will always be unsuitable for housing and there is not much they can do to change it.

Do you have a copy of the HCA's charter? It would be very useful to know what instructions the Government gave them when they were set up.

Peter

Top

34&rising Post subject: Re: THE COMMUNITY V THE CONSORTIUM - MEETING FRIDAY JULY 31 AT 7Posted: 2009-07-21, 09:39:48 pm

Joined: 2007-09-11, 10:30:32 pm
Posts: 554
Location: The Parish of Bewbush Contaminated Dump Village Richard W. wrote:
I would suggest that our principal aim is to preserve Ifield Meadows and the surrounding land as recreational open space.
Peter
At Last! Some sanity.

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: THE COMMUNITY V THE CONSORTIUM - MEETING FRIDAY JULY 31 AT 7Posted: 2009-07-22, 10:47:57 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 Two questions were asked (by me) at CBC's Full Council Meeting (Public Questions) tonight :

1. Would this Council consider turning Ifield Brook Meadows into a Country Park & Visitor Centre - along the lines of HDC's Southwater Country Park & Visitor Centre ?

2. (a) Is the Homes & Communities Agency (HCA) part of the landowner/developer Consortium for the West of Ifield ?
2. (b) If so, is Ifield Brook Meadows threatened with development ?

In the absence of the Cabinet Member for Leisure & Cultural Services (Lenny Walker), the Cabinet Member for Planning & Development (Claire Denman) was asked to reply to both questions.

As far as I could hear (which was very little cos of this wretched deafness), Cllr Denman was sympathetic to Q.1, but didn't give a direct 'yes or no' answer to Q.2 (a & b)

Hopefully, the local media who were present - Crawley Times/Observer ( alex.christie-miller@sussexnewspapers.co.uk ) and/or Crawley News ( alex.morrison@essnmedia.co.uk ) - will report my questions, and the Cabinet Member's answers, more fully.

Top

34&rising Post subject: Re: THE COMMUNITY V THE CONSORTIUM - MEETING FRIDAY JULY 31 AT 7Posted: 2009-07-22, 11:03:19 pm

Joined: 2007-09-11, 10:30:32 pm
Posts: 554
Location: The Parish of Bewbush Contaminated Dump Village I was under the impression this was supposed to be a FULL council meeting.

Can anything be read into the absence of Mr Walker, his registered interest as a freemason, and the 'alleged' masonic connections with Welbeck Land and the proposed developments west of Ifield?

Gauging the 'non-committal' response from councillor Denman, Ifield Brook Meadow will be developed.

Let's hope that the local journalists and editors are capable of some 'responsible' reporting here.

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: THE COMMUNITY V THE CONSORTIUM - MEETING FRIDAY JULY 31 AT 7Posted: 2009-07-23, 11:43:45 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 And here is Crawley Times (Friday July 24 2009)....

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: THE COMMUNITY V THE CONSORTIUM - MEETING FRIDAY JULY 31 AT 7Posted: 2009-07-24, 11:34:25 am

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 Zilch....except for my letter "Please come and make your views known", Crawley Times, July 24 - Page 10

Top

JohnL Post subject: Re: THE COMMUNITY V THE CONSORTIUM - MEETING FRIDAY JULY 31 AT 7Posted: 2009-07-25, 08:49:11 am

Joined: 2009-07-16, 04:28:46 pm
Posts: 12
Location: Ifield Richard W. wrote:
Some of the communications you have copied to me make me very uneasy, especially the discussion website. There seems to be a lack of focus in the discussions. It seems to me that if we want to preserve Ifield, we need to start by defining our aims and objectives.

I would suggest that our principal aim is to preserve Ifield Meadows and the surrounding land as recreational open space.

That gives rise to 3 key objectives:
To prevent building on the land
To continue to have recreational access to the land
To have the land's recreational status recognised in the local plan
Objectives 2 & 3 are conditional on success in objective 1. I am a keen walker, but if we want to win the big fight we should focus on objective 1, not objective 2. Objective 3 is for the future when the dust has settled.

Taking objective 2 first, we must start by recognising that HCA has the power to limit access to public rights of way only. The problem is not them taking our rights away - we never had those rights in the first place. The problem is that they have changed the open access policy of their predecessors. We therefore need to engage them in a constructive dialogue about their policy, not our rights. We should start by getting them to admit that they have changed the policy and ask them why.

Turning to the really important objective 1, we need to understand the HCA's objectives. The HCA was set up with a big fanfare by the Government to get affordable housing built, and the bosses of HCA need to prove that they are earning their large salaries. If we just witter on about the rights of walkers, they will just see us a bunch of hysterical NIMBYs. If on the other hand we ensure that the London and Regional bosses of HCA understand the reasons why building on Ifield Meadows would be a daft idea, including the fact that it is a flood plain, we will bring them to the reality of their position, which is that they have inherited a lot of poor-quality land that will always be unsuitable for housing and there is not much they can do to change it.

Do you have a copy of the HCA's charter? It would be very useful to know what instructions the Government gave them when they were set up.

Peter

Peter,

I am a newcomer to Ifield and have been following the discussions here over recent weeks, after joining one of Richard's 'Ramblettes'.

I am getting back into 'jogging', after a long break and was largely drawn to moving to Ifield as it was on the edge of open countryside (and has a very nice local pub ).

Having made several exploratory runs around Ifield Brook Meadows, I am keen to see what can be done to preserve the area as an open space. I think you are right in suggesting that our focus should be mainly on the unsuitability of building on a known flood plain.

Somebody on the Ramblette mentioned how Ifield Brook overflows in winter months. I notice that the gulley where the footbridge crosses the River Mole is also very deep.

Does anybody have any photogrphs of Ifield Brook or the local section of the River Mole in flood? This could be valuable evidence at any future Public Hearing.

Top

admin Post subject: Re: THE COMMUNITY V THE CONSORTIUM - MEETING FRIDAY JULY 31 AT 7Posted: 2009-07-25, 09:19:53 am

Joined: 2007-09-08, 05:18:52 pm
Posts: 65 Thank you "JohnL" - and a very warm welcome to you on this Forum.

Top

Display posts from previous: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by AuthorPost timeSubject AscendingDescending
Page 3 of 7
[ 67 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next

Board index » My first Category » GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM » Gatwick City (Crawley, Horley, Ifield, Airport & Beyond)
All times are UTC [ DST ]

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for: Jump to: Select a forum ------------------ My first Category GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM Business and Employment War and Global Conflicts GENERAL DISCUSSION - News & Comment Gatwick City (Crawley, Horley, Ifield, Airport & Beyond) The Best Question Ever Asked.......and The Best Answer Ever Given Politics and Elections Obituaries and Biography Sex, Sport, Humour and Stories Religion and Philosophies Education and Schools Health and Hospitals Planning and Transport Admin Notices Local Links - Global Links Suggestion Box

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Free Forum : phpbb3now.com

AUGUST 16 2009 - IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND (PART 2)

2009-08-08T15:29:00.000-07:00

THE 'GATWICK CITY OF IDEAS' DISCUSSION FORUM
Gatwick City Forum

Login Register FAQ Search

It is currently 2009-08-08, 11:28:47 pm

View unanswered posts | View active topics

Board index » My first Category » GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM » Gatwick City (Crawley, Horley, Ifield, Airport & Beyond)
All times are UTC [ DST ]

IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - "THE SPIRIT OF KINDER SCOUT"

Page 2 of 7
[ 67 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7 Next
Print view Previous topic | Next topic

Author Message
Richard W. Post subject: Re: THE HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY (HCA) & IFIELD BROOK MEADOWSPosted: 2009-07-13, 11:52:42 am

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 Dear Mr. Symonds,

Further to your email of 09/07/2009, I have noted your concerns about the works carried out to maintain the public rights of way at Ifield.

Regarding the paths on the ground which are not recorded on the definitive map and statement for this area, I am aware that you are considering making an application, or applications, for a Definitive Map Modification Order (DMMO), to add the paths as footpaths/bridleways. As part of the consultation and investigation into such a claim, the County Council would look at the evidence provided by the users of the paths, giving them an opportunity to communicate their local knowledge about the existence, or former existence of gates/stiles/footbridges etc along the claimed routes. The evidence of use provided by the applicant in support of a claim must, of course, be considered against any evidence opposing the claim, but the fact that physical structures on the ground have been removed/destroyed alone would not be enough to defeat it.

I hope you find these comments useful when considering whether to make an application for a DMMO.

Yours sincerely

Alison Poole
Alison Poole | Rights of Way Officer, West Sussex County Council | Location: County Hall, Chichester, PO19 1RQ
Internal: 77196 | External: 01243 777196 | E-mail: alison.poole@westsussex.gov.uk

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: THE HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY (HCA) & IFIELD BROOK MEADOWSPosted: 2009-07-16, 12:30:43 am

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 I noticed this on BBC Ceefax this morning :

CEEFAX - 15 JULY 2009 - 7.55AM - "SOLDIERS SPEAK OUT ON GAZA - BREAKING THE SILENCE"

THE "PERMISSIVE" LAW OF WAR FOR ISRAELI SOLDIERS - "Fire on any building, or person, that seems suspicious"

In other words, they have the "permissive" power to do what they like - to whoever - with immunity and impunity.

How does that relate to the Government Quango - the HCA ?

Work it out for yourself.

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: THE HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY (HCA) & IFIELD BROOK MEADOWSPosted: 2009-07-17, 09:43:10 am

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 http://www.wscountytimes.co.uk/district ... 5469452.jp

Date: 17 July 2009

A NEW TOWN could be built in West Sussex to accommodate some of the thousands of new homes imposed on Horsham district by Government targets.
Horsham District Council this week discussed potential development sites across the district in a bid to find space to satisfy the allocation for thousands more homes.

The latest massive allocation of greenfield development announced by the Government in its South East Plan, in May, is on top of the 2,000 to be built between Horsham and Broadbridge Heath and the 2,500 planned for the west of Bewbush.

For the full story see Friday's (July 17) West Sussex County Times.

What do you think about the plans? Contact the newsdesk. Email ct.letters@sussexnewspapers.co.uk or call us on 01403 751248.

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: THE COMMUNITY v THE CONSORTIUM - THE IFIELD PARISH LAND WARPosted: 2009-07-18, 06:00:36 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 Ah, after reading the Crawley Times this week, the 'bigger picture' is emerging :

There is a "LANDOWNER/DEVELOPER CONSORTIUM" which seeks to develop "The West of Ifield" (ie Ifield Brook Meadows AND Ifield Golf Club...and surrounding area).

The "LANDOWNER" is the Government Quango Homes & Communities Agency (HCA). The DEVELOPER is Welbeck Land (De Walden).

So, I'm calling it "THE PUBLIC-PRIVATE MASONIC CONSORTIUM".

The Community now has a real fight - tantamount to a 'land war'. Being nice and concilatory will not work - they'll walk all over us - as they have done already.

Why do I know it's MASONIC ?

Because Welbeck Land has as its logo the Compass & Square - exactly like the Compass & Square on either side of The Masonic Temple (sorry, Hall) at the junction of Ifield Green & Rusper Road (the old St Margaret's Parish Hall donated by a couple in Old Park House, Bonnetts Lane - within the ancient Parish of Ifield).

Roll on Friday July 31 at 7pm !

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: THE IFIELD COMMUNITY V THE PUBLIC-PRIVATE MASONIC CONSORTIUMPosted: 2009-07-19, 08:14:47 am

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 I’ve been out jogging quite a few times by Ifield Brook over the past weeks and have found two instances of registered footpaths, on Ordnance Survey maps, apparently being re-routed from their original courses.

This may be a legally acceptable practice to minimise wear and tear on a particular strip of soil, or it could be the result of walkers ignoring the official path and taking a short cut.

However, an original footpath across one of the contentious fields, leading from The Druids towards Ifield Brook, that has been ‘concealed’ by mowing, since the beginning of June, looks to me like it is being deliberately redirected several metres to one side, whereas before it was the shortest straight line route between the two gates.

Could it be that somebody has some provisional plans drawn up, on which the original footpath line was inconveniently located?

The aerial images on http://www.multimap.com are very useful when looking at this, as the four different ‘Birds Eye’ views of Ifield were taken at different times of the year, in 2007 and 2008.

John

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: THE IFIELD COMMUNITY V THE PUBLIC-PRIVATE MASONIC CONSORTIUMPosted: 2009-07-19, 08:20:37 am

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 Looks like things are hotting up over West of Ifield, Richard W.

Who's the Ifield Golf Club Treasurer ?

Anon.

Top

34&rising Post subject: Re: THE IFIELD COMMUNITY V THE PUBLIC-PRIVATE MASONIC CONSORTIUMPosted: 2009-07-20, 09:07:03 pm

Joined: 2007-09-11, 10:30:32 pm
Posts: 554
Location: The Parish of Bewbush Contaminated Dump Village Richard W. wrote:

Who's the Ifield Golf Club Treasurer ?
Anon.

That's a very good question Richard W.

According to files at the Land Registry, payments were/are paid to the Ifield Golf & Country Club in connection with rights associated with the land known as Ifield Brook Meadow.

Therefore, the Treasurer of Ifield Golf & Country Club will have a pretty good idea of what's going on with regard to any proposed development of the Golf Course and Ifield Brook Meadow.

Top

34&rising Post subject: Re: THE COMMUNITY V THE CONSORTIUM - MEETING FRIDAY JULY 31 AT 7Posted: 2009-07-20, 11:34:41 pm

Joined: 2007-09-11, 10:30:32 pm
Posts: 554
Location: The Parish of Bewbush Contaminated Dump Village ... and so the question remains...

WHO is the Treasurer of Ifield Golf & Country Club ?

The people of Ifield await the answer :

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: THE COMMUNITY V THE CONSORTIUM - MEETING FRIDAY JULY 31 AT 7Posted: 2009-07-21, 03:23:06 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 viewtopic.php?f=7&t=886&p=6939&hilit=Judith+Smallman+HCA#p6939

http://consult.horsham.gov.uk/portal/pl ... 67&do=view

Mrs Judith Smallman (ID: 58200) , Homes and Communities Agency (HCA)

Is your representation a Support for, or an Objection to, an Alternative Development Site?
Objection

Which part of the document does your Support or Objection relate to:
WoB ADS 7

Please state clearly the reasons you are objecting to or supporting an alternative development site or boundary change

EP (English Partnerships) seeks amendments to the boundary of WoB ADS7 as the site includes a parcel of land owned by EP. This should be omitted from WoB ADS 7 (a copy of a plan showing the physical extent of EP’s ownership to the west of Crawley is attached to the representation).

EP would like to clarify that it is not actively promoting its land at this stage.
However, EP has no objection to the allocation of its land for housing/mixed use development SHOULD the EiP Inspector determine that the JAAP is unsound, as currently drafted and wishes to implement changes to the document in order to make it sound based on a complementary/alternative allocation at West of Ifield.

(RWS NOTE - The EiP Inspector has declared the JAAP "sound")

Do you wish to be kept up to date with the progress of the document?
Yes

* Comment ID: WoBAlt53
* Response Date: 03/10/08 09:33
RWS NOTE : Note Response Date - 03.10/08. The Homes & Communities Agency (HCA) was formed 2 months later (Dec 2008). So, how is Mrs Smallman managing to write on behalf of HCA 2 months before HCA was established ?!

Last edited by Richard W. on 2009-07-21, 03:31:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: THE COMMUNITY V THE CONSORTIUM - MEETING FRIDAY JULY 31 AT 7Posted: 2009-07-21, 03:30:51 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 As I read the situation, Homes & Communities Agency (HCA) is part of the Welbeck Consortium...a kind of Public-Private Partnership (PPP)....or put it another way- "THE MASONIC CONSORTIUM"

Top

Display posts from previous: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by AuthorPost timeSubject AscendingDescending
Page 2 of 7
[ 67 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7 Next

Board index » My first Category » GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM » Gatwick City (Crawley, Horley, Ifield, Airport & Beyond)
All times are UTC [ DST ]

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for: Jump to: Select a forum ------------------ My first Category GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM Business and Employment War and Global Conflicts GENERAL DISCUSSION - News & Comment Gatwick City (Crawley, Horley, Ifield, Airport & Beyond) The Best Question Ever Asked.......and The Best Answer Ever Given Politics and Elections Obituaries and Biography Sex, Sport, Humour and Stories Religion and Philosophies Education and Schools Health and Hospitals Planning and Transport Admin Notices Local Links - Global Links Suggestion Box

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Free Forum : phpbb3now.com

AUGUST 15 2009 - IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND (PART 1)

2009-08-08T15:24:00.000-07:00

THE 'GATWICK CITY OF IDEAS' DISCUSSION FORUM
Gatwick City Forum

Login Register FAQ Search

It is currently 2009-08-08, 11:26:14 pm

View unanswered posts | View active topics

Board index » My first Category » GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM » Gatwick City (Crawley, Horley, Ifield, Airport & Beyond)
All times are UTC [ DST ]

IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - "THE SPIRIT OF KINDER SCOUT"

Page 1 of 7
[ 67 posts ] Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7 Next
Print view Previous topic | Next topic

Author Message
Richard W. Post subject: IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS & BEYOND - "THE SPIRIT OF KINDER SCOUT"Posted: 2009-06-30, 11:37:16 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 http://www.building.co.uk/story.asp?sec ... 143825&c=0

HCA to offer contractors land for housing

30 June, 2009

By Michael Willoughby

Agency to tempt new building firms into housing market with land for equity deal

The Homes and Communities Agency has announced plan to give contractors the chance to build an initial 500 homes on public land in exchange for an equity share in any development.

The announcement comes as part of a £1.5bn tranche of funding for social housing announced yesterday as part of Gordon Brown’s policy re-launch, Building Britain’s Future.

Bob Kerslake, HCA chief executive, said contractors including Bouygues, Skanska and Wates could take part. He said: “The model is where we go in as an equity partner and put land in as part of the equity.” The land could be that owned by the HCA or owned by other public sector bodies.

“We are looking for a development partner to take a lower level of risk because they are not funding the land upfront but we want them to take a lower rate of return.

“A number have said in the current market: ‘we definitely settle for a situation with less working capital tied up and working in joint partnership with you, but have more security albeit at a lower rate of return.’”

Kerslake added: “You know the sorts of companies that I am talking about – the Bouygues, the Skanskas and the Wates.”

He added: “Public sector landowners of all kinds have expressed interest and the HCA has major land ownings of its own to contribute that will ensure we make rapid progress.”

The HCA will hold workshops with interested parties “this side of the summer,” said Kerslake.

The money, which includes £750m for the National Affordable Housing Programme, £500m more for Kickstart schemes and £250m more for new local authority-led council homes, is to come from a mix of redirected communities department funding and cash from “capital underspend” in other departments during this and next year.

Related articles
HCA may be lead developer, says Kerslake
HCA's £100m council home initiative attracts first bidders
Government pledges £1.5bn to affordable homes

Last edited by Richard W. on 2009-08-02, 08:15:08 pm, edited 16 times in total.

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: HOMES AND COMMUNITIES AGENCY (IFIELD)Posted: 2009-07-01, 11:32:57 am

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 As I read it at the moment, HCA are Government Developers (as opposed to Private Developers), which hands out Public Land to Private Developers - at a price.

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: HOMES AND COMMUNITIES AGENCY (IFIELD)Posted: 2009-07-01, 04:33:41 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 CRAWLEY OBSERVER LETTER - TODAY - JULY 1 2009

http://www.crawleyobserver.co.uk/your-l ... 5414544.jp

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: HOMES AND COMMUNITIES AGENCY (IFIELD)Posted: 2009-07-09, 10:28:24 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 Dear All

I am forwarding this from Philip Marsh of the Homes and Communities Agency to Cllr Keith Blake (Borough for Gossops Green and County for Ifield & Gossops Green, and on the County Rights of Way Committee!) regarding the removal of a gate and its replacement by a fence at the rear of the Ifield Barn Car Park very recently.

Earlier today, I contacted Cllr Blake after talking to Mr Marsh about this (in response to an email from Linda Newman) and also pointed out various confusions eg that CBC's well publicised 'Greenway' south of the Church is not on the Public Right Of Way Map and nor are the network of footpaths regularly cut by CBC - the implication being that HCA would feel that we are not entitled to walk on them, and presumably that CBC should not be encouraging us to do so!

Geraint Thomas

PS Please feel free to forward this on
PPS Mr Marsh seems quite knowledgeable about the area and is approachable on the phone - his email address is immediately below:

From: Philip Marsh
To: keith.blake@westsussex.gov.uk

Dear Mr Blake,

Following a phone call received from Mr Geraint Thomas on your behalf regarding our signage at Ifield and asking why we have removed the swing gate located at the rear of Ifield Barn Theatre?, I thought it would be helpful if I responded to you direct.

The HCA inherited this land from the former English Partnerships on 1 April 2009 and it is our policy to sign the boundaries of HCA land holdings to make land ownership clear to our partners and local residents.

We are required also to make it clear that not withstanding any Public Rights of Way the land is owned by the Homes and Communities Agency. We can confirm also that public access is restricted to the public Rights of Way only crossing the land holding.

The reason for the removal of the swing gate from behind Ifield Barn Theatre is that the Public Right of Way is located the other side between the Theatre and the pond and the gated access at this point will remain in place.

Where Rights of Way exist HCA has undertaken improvement works and will continue to maintain these routes and in many areas the stiles have been replaced with gates in accordance with West Sussex County Councils' request and policy.

Regards

Philip Marsh
Assistant Land Manager - AMES
Milton Keynes
Tel. 01908 353624
Fax. 01908 353694
Mob. 07979 516444

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: HOMES AND COMMUNITIES AGENCY (IFIELD)Posted: 2009-07-09, 10:38:44 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 Richard W. wrote:
"It is our policy...to make land ownership clear...We are required also to make it clear that...the land is owned by the Homes and Communities Agency. We can confirm also that public access is restricted to the Public Rights of Way only...Where Rights of Way exist HCA...will continue to maintain these routes..."
Homes and Communities Agency

So however "approachable" HCA may be, they are not budging an inch from their official position - already made clear by the wording of their "Private Land" signs, littered about this ancient Parish.

As I read it, this newly-created Government Quango is clearly saying to us "the law" is what they decide, and can interpret that "law" as it chooses.

That, ladies & gentlemen, is TOTALITARIANISM - not Democracy...and the last I heard, we were aspiring to the latter - not the former.

"Don't let it happen. It depends on you" (the last-known words of George '1984' Orwell).

We, in this community, have a choice. We can either let them take control - especially the space between our ears. Or we can take control - especially the space between our ears...and fight them legally every which way.

Please email me at any time - with comments, ideas, suggestions, criticisms etc : richardsy5@aol.com

You can, of course, register on this Forum if you wish (but there has been a few problems with registration). If problems, please just email me.

Thanks

Richard Symonds
THE IFIELD SOCIETY

Further Information
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=886&start=90

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: THE HOMES AND COMMUNITIES AGENCY (HCA) - IN IFIELD PARISHPosted: 2009-07-09, 11:47:05 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 For those interested, my personal view is that Ifield Brook Meadows is NOT Private Land - it's Public Land (& maybe even parts being Common Land).

If this ancient area - with its 1000-year recorded history - is Public Land, then the HCA signs are legally illegitimate - and should be taken down with immediate effect.

Also, a powerful legal case could be made that the instruction to keep dogs on the lead, on "marked" (?) paths - especially in Ifield Brook Meadows - is totally "unreasonable". We might be required to obey "reasonable" instructions from those with power over us, but not instructions which are "unreasonable".

Also, HCA (& 'Partners') appear to be indulging in highly questionable activities at present - 'sprucing up' Registered WSCC Footpaths/Footbridges/Stiles, but 'destroying evidence' on Unregistered Footpaths, by dismantling Footbridges & Stiles - especially those made by the Horley & Crawley Project and Greenway.

The completion of these Forms - to register unregistered footpaths which have been used for centuries - therefore becomes the very highest priority in this community.

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: THE HOMES AND COMMUNITIES AGENCY - IN IFIELD BROOK MEADOWSPosted: 2009-07-10, 10:46:33 am

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 Dear Richard,

I assume you have read this quote on the H&CA website in relation to Crawley?

http://www.englishpartnerships.co.uk/crawley.htm

“English Partnerships is committed to the ongoing regeneration of Crawley and continues to work with Crawley Borough Council to identify opportunities for redevelopment and expansion.

The agency has other significant landholdings in the Crawley area, which includes the north-east sector, Ifield Court Farm and Rowley Farm. Two of these landholdings provide an opportunity for major residential development, which would benefit from the town centre expansion.”

I was apparently wrong in assuming they would not build houses in the area where BAA will offer to compensate home owners for ‘blight’, if the second runway goes ahead after 2019.

It now occurs to me that if all houses built within the potential 2019 airport noise zone are ‘social housing’ as opposed to freehold, perhaps it will be the freeholder, i.e. Homes and Communities Agency, who will be eligible for the compensation.

John

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: THE HOMES AND COMMUNITIES AGENCY - IN IFIELD BROOK MEADOWSPosted: 2009-07-10, 11:24:56 am

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 WHY DO I GET THIS FEELING THE COUNCILS' (WSCC/HDC/CBC) - UNDER THEIR FORTHCOMING CORE STRATEGY REVIEWS - WILL NOW DECLARE THEY ARE LOOKING TO DEVELOP THE WHOLE OF "WEST OF IFIELD" (INCL. IFIELD GOLF CLUB/WELBECK & IFIELD BROOK MEADOWS/HCA) ?

AS PER WSCC LOCAL STRUCTURE PLAN 10 YEARS AGO - FUNNY THAT

PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS ?

YEAH, RIGHT.

MASONIC CONNECTIONS MORE LIKE.

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: THE HOMES AND COMMUNITIES AGENCY - IN IFIELD BROOK MEADOWSPosted: 2009-07-10, 11:20:25 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 I lost our rough collie, "Lucy", in Ifield Brook Meadows this evening. She bolted when loud bangs rang out - Shooting Clay-Pigeons ? Shooting Rabbits ? Automated Shooters - such as those used at Gatwick to clear birds from the runway ?

I don't know - but I'm going to find out.

I know our dog is not alone in totally 'losing it', when shots are heard - or fireworks explode. Last week she was literally 'climbing the walls' in our front room when some fireworks went off. She was shaking uncontrollably, absolutely petrified.

If I find this is another tactic to clear the area of dog-walkers, I will take whoever's responsible to court - whatever it takes.

We have spent the whole evening trying to find our dog. Lucy has just been returned home by some teenagers - she had a tag - who found her wandering aimlessly around.

I didn't ask where. We are just eternally thankful to the teenagers - and beyond delighted to have her back home safe.

Top

Richard W. Post subject: Re: THE HOMES AND COMMUNITIES AGENCY - IN IFIELD BROOK MEADOWSPosted: 2009-07-11, 01:16:52 pm

Joined: 2007-10-31, 11:00:34 am
Posts: 4373 Oh dear, we had the 'ramblette' this morning - looking at the destruction of stiles/gates/bridges on unregistered paths - and someone has managed to uproot one of the HCA signs and dump it in the river.

Whilst I do not condone such action, I can understand the reasons why someone should take such action.

Anyway, a meeting has been organised on Friday July 31 at 7pm - outside the Plough. It will be an opportunity to bring along the WSCC Rights of Way "Evidence Forms' - among other things.

Top

Display posts from previous: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by AuthorPost timeSubject AscendingDescending
Page 1 of 7
[ 67 posts ] Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7 Next

Board index » My first Category » GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM » Gatwick City (Crawley, Horley, Ifield, Airport & Beyond)
All times are UTC [ DST ]

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for: Jump to: Select a forum ------------------ My first Category GATWICK CITY IDEAS AND DISCUSSION FORUM Business and Employment War and Global Conflicts GENERAL DISCUSSION - News & Comment Gatwick City (Crawley, Horley, Ifield, Airport & Beyond) The Best Question Ever Asked.......and The Best Answer Ever Given Politics and Elections Obituaries and Biography Sex, Sport, Humour and Stories Religion and Philosophies Education and Schools Health and Hospitals Planning and Transport Admin Notices Local Links - Global Links Suggestion Box

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Free Forum : phpbb3now.com

AUGUST 14 2009 - THE MORAL INSTINCT (PART 7)

2009-08-08T15:17:00.001-07:00

CONCLUSION

AUGUST 13 2009 - THE MORAL INSTINCT (PART 6)

2009-08-08T15:13:00.000-07:00

To be continued...

AUGUST 12 2009 - THE MORAL INSTINCT (PART 5)

2009-08-08T15:05:00.000-07:00

MORAL INSTINCT THEORY- SEVEN VALUES FOR HUMANITY'S SURVIVAL

Why are our troops not destroying those poppy fields run by the Taliban?

I'm certainly not convinced the Taliban are controlling the poppy fields. Before the occupation for the sake of gas/oil concerns the Taliban had just about wiped out the poppy fields for religious reasons, I don't see those changing. Meantime there are strong rumours that quantities of opium leave Afghanistan in the holds of USA cargo planes.

The 'String-Pullers' don't really need drugs from Afghanistan, or wherever, to control the masses. They primarily control us, of course, through financial debt - but also through our TV.

We VOLUNTARILY sit alone in a relaxed state in front of a box in the corner of the room, and WITHOUT THINKING get put in an hypnotic trance, & then indoctrinated by what we see - especially the corporate advertising propaganda (otherwise known as 'commercial breaks).

We are bombarded & force-fed by media images (& subliminal messages) every milli-second - with these advertising agencies using every trick in the 'Manipulation Book' to persuade us to buy its clients goods, services & 'news' (ideas & prejudices).

This reminds me of John Lennon's "Working Class Hero" :

"Keep you doped with religion and sex and tv
And you think you're so clever and classless and free
But you're still fuckin' peasants, as far as I can see.

"There is room at the top, they are telling you still
But first you must learn how to smile as you kill
If you want to be like the folks on the hill..."

CHOMSKY AND THE MORAL INSTINCT

http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show ... nd_a_saint

CHOMSKY - PINKER - BROWN - THE LANGUAGE INSTINCT - THE MORAL INSTINCT - SOCIOBIOLOGY

http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2009/ ... -magazine/

Sociobiology in the Nation Magazine

A few weeks ago I received an invitation to get a trial subscription to the Nation Magazine. What the hell, I said. This would give me a chance to see what the red-baiters were up to first-hand, as well as work on their nifty crossword puzzles.

When my last subscription was winding down during the beginning of Clinton’s second term, the puzzles and Cockburn’s column were the only things that kept me going. When they cut Cockburn back to one page and then went into a full-tilt boogie for Clinton, I said to hell with them.

When I got my first complementary copy this morning, I was reminded why I let this awful magazine lapse. Starting out with an editorial admonition to its readers against wasting a vote for the Green Party in tomorrow’s elections, it then proceeds to a defense of sociobiology of a kind that I’ve never seen in a left publication.

In Steven Johnson’s review of Steven Pinker’s “The Blank Slate”, we discover that E.O. Wilson, Stephen Pinker and Richard Dawkins were right all along. Biology is destiny. Women’s brains differ from men’s, hence accounting possibly for men’s superiority in theoretical physics among other things. (Don’t worry, gals, your brains might just as easily prepare you for “social interactions” and “empathy”.)

While reading through this crapola, one gets no sense of what Pinker stands for politically. Johnson assures us that Pinker presents his views on the political and social implications of neo-Darwinism with his characteristic “eloquence” and “humor” but one would get no sense from the review what ideas this humor and eloquence is actually mustered to support.

Let’s look at a few of them:

Males have a stronger tolerance for physical risk and a stronger drive for anonymous sex.
Women have stronger emotions and are better at reading emotions on the faces of others.
Pinker states “A variety of sexual motives, including taste in men, vary with the menstrual cycle.”
He also states that “in a sample of mathematically talented students, boys outnumbered girls by 13 to one” but that women maintain more eye-contact, and smile and laugh more often.
Humans are hard-wired to think in stereotypes and to prefer kin.
Some people, most of them men, are born with criminal tendencies.

Turning to the big questions of social transformation that have vexed Great Thinkers for the millennium, we learn from Pinker that “Biological facts are beginning to box in plausible political philosophies.”

Communism may work for insects, but humans are programmed for economic exchange and “reciprocal altruism.” (Is that the reason I used to climb across the ceilings and consume a pound of sugar at a time when I was in the Trotskyist movement, I wonder?)

When you stop and think about it, the title of Pinker’s book sets up a straw man, namely that radicals of one sort or another believe that the mind is a “blank slate” and that human nature is infinitely malleable.

It is of no small importance that Pinker ultimately finds backing in Noam Chomsky’s linguistic theories, mediated through anthropologist Donald Brown who adapted Chomsky’s idea of a “universal grammar” to “social patterns, beliefs and categories” shared by all human societies.

We discover that Pinker (and presumably the feckless reviewer) are so impressed by Brown that he devotes an entire appendix to such categories worked out in alphabetical order. The c’s include cooking, cooperation, and copulation (all of my favorite activities, it turns out.)

With such basic activities underpinning all human societies, and human nature implicitly, one might easily conclude that it is risky business to tamper with the eternal nature of things, like sending your daughter to MIT. You might end up with Pol Pot, Stalin, the Animal Farm or women running around burning their bras. Pinker quotes Chomsky just to show that this kind of hostility to revolution has respectable defenders:

A vision of a future social order is based on a concept of human nature. If, in fact, man is an indefinitely malleable, completely plastic being, with no innate structures of mind and no intrinsic needs of a cultural or social character, then he is a fit subject for the ’shaping of behavior’ by the State authority, the corporate manager, the technocrat, or the central committee. Those with some confidence in the human species will hope this is not so and will try to determine the intrinsic characteristics that provide the framework for intellectual development, the growth of moral consciousness, cultural achievement and participation in a free community.

While respect must be paid to Chomsky for his fearless critique of US foreign policy, it would be a big mistake to write a blank check for his ideas on human nature, etc. As his biographer Robert Barsky has pointed out, many of Chomsky’s ideas on human nature and society owe much more to 18th century rationalism than any more recent emancipatory philosophies, including Marxism. Indeed, what permeates much of sociobiology and Chomsky on his worst days is a kind of Hobbesian skepticism about the human animal, who would need to be restrained from wanton violence, rape and warfare by a protective state...

In my opinion philosophical theories are nothing but that: theories, and they are always subjective, not objective. In the course of the life of a philosopher many occurrences may happen that will change her/his philosophy on the particular topic she/he is studying. Reactions from the studied topic will always alter her/his sense in connection with the subject's behaviour.

Nothing in human behaviour is stable, the human being is erratic by nature. Her/his experience every day would change her/his perception of life.

I repeat this is my opinion only.

_________________
Jose+++

Hesperidean wrote:
Nothing in human behaviour is stable, the human being is erratic by nature. Her/his experience every day would change her/his perception of life.

I take that to mean, Jose, that you believe there are no "absolutes" in human nature - such as "moral absolutes" ?

No, Richard. I mean to say stable, that is there are always nuances, swaying from one point to the other and back to the original point and again the same thing. I sometimes think that we humans are never completely sane. There is some or other degree of insanity in our selves.

Perhaps it is instinctive, because I think education will always give us a layer that may be more or less deep and in the innermost of ourselves the monster lurks.

And, always in my opinion, Chomsky is no exception.

Absolutely moral is a way to being fanatical.

_________________
Jose+++

Hesperidean wrote:
ithe monster lurks.

"The Dark Side" (Star Wars) ? Original Sin (Bible) ? "The Monster Within" (Jose) ?

Sound like pretty "absolute" moral terms to me.

Hesperidean wrote:
in the innermost of ourselves the monster lurks.

Well, if you could explain more fully what you mean by the statement above, Jose, we can go on from there...

AUGUST 11 2009 - THE MORAL INSTINCT (PART 4)

2009-08-08T14:59:00.000-07:00

MORAL INSTINCT THEORY- SEVEN VALUES FOR HUMANITY'S SURVIVAL

As for you both describing yourselves, 34&rising & Jose, as "Liberal Socialists" - may you be very happy together.

As for me, I'm with Orwell - a "Democratic Socialist" - but I'm not an "Orwellite". I'm a "Democratic Socialist With An Anarchic/Independent Streak"...who believes - like Tielhard de Chardin - that we are Spiritual Beings having human experiences, rather than Human Beings having spiritual experiences.

In other words, I haven't really worked out who the hell I am yet - even after 55 years of hurtling around a ball of fire, in the middle of a space somewhere, on the crust of a large rock.

As for you both describing yourselves, 34&rising & Jose, as "Liberal Socialists" - may you be very happy together.

As for me, I'm with Orwell - a "Democratic Socialist" - but I'm not an "Orwellite". I'm a "Democratic Socialist With An Anarchic/Independent Streak"...who believes - like Tielhard de Chardin - that we are Spiritual Beings having human experiences, rather than Human Beings having spiritual experiences.

In other words, I haven't really worked out who the hell I am yet - even after 55 years of hurtling around a ball of fire, in the middle of a space somewhere, on the crust of a large rock.

The greatest fear is the fear of the 'unknown'.

If we didn't fear the unknown, we would probably kill ourselves at the drop of a hat.

There is also the fear of punishment. If there was no punishment, people would go about killing each other simply because they wanted to, or for financial gain... or economic gain... or political gain...

oh,

'Mega' Theory - The Moral Instinct - can be applied to Politics :

This 'Moral Sense' to human affairs can be called 'The 7th Sense' of Values

7 Senses :

1. Sight
2. Hearing
3. Smell
4. Touch
5. Taste
6. Intuition eg "The Sixth Sense" Film
7. Values eg "The Seventh Sense" (aka "The Moral Sense", or "The Moral Instinct") - Beauty, Freedom, Happiness, Life, Love, Peace, Truth.

If these 7 senses are applied to Politics, and represented by the 7 Colours of the Rainbow, we have this :

1. Red - Labour Party
2. Orange - UKIP, Democrat, BNP ?!
3. Yellow - Liberal Democrat Party
4. Green - Green Party
5. Blue (Light Blue) - Conservative Party
6. Indigo (Dark Blue) - Tory Party
7. Violet (Purple) - Independent - "Purple Politics".

So, just as the Green Party uses the colour Green to represent Environmental Values, we can have an Independent (such as myself) using the colour Purple to represent Moral Values...."Purple (Moral) Politics". Why not ?

This would embrace the idea that all people - especially in the world of politics (& beyond) - are using their 'Mega (Moral) Instinct', or 'Moral (Common?) Sense'...whether aware of it or not (just as we are unaware of the air we breathe when using language, etc)...

Just a few thoughts thinking out loud...what do others think ?

"Master Puppeteers" spend billions to control the independence of Humanity's Moral Instinct - the greatest ever collective threat to their power.

WAR AGAINST THE MORAL INSTINCT ?

"In Protocol II of the Protocols of Zion we read: "Through the press we have gained the power to influence while remaining ourselves in the shade." Protocol VII states that:

‘We must compel the government of the Goyim to take action in the direction favoured by our widely conceived plan, already approaching the desired consummation, by what we shall represent as public opinion, secretly prompted by us through the means of that so-called Great Power – the Press, which with a few exceptions that may be disregarded, is already in our hands.’

The Khazar Jew-controlled Hollywood film industry sends out a constant stream of..."

Kenneth McKilliam

-THE BATTLE FOR THE MIND - INCLUDING THE MORAL MIND

Top

It is my contention that certain 'powers-that-be' (aka Master Puppeteers ? Big Brother?) are consciously attempting to destroy our Moral Instinct - our Collective Moral Conscience, if you like.

Our Collective Moral Instinct (our Humanity ?) are the greatest of all threats to their power & control.

Philosophically, I call it a conflict between Moral Relativism & Moral Realism.

Could it be called the 'War between Right & Wrong' - Good v Evil ?

It is also my contention that this Moral Instinct is an intuitive, collective sense - a 7th sense if you will - independently transcendent of (but also independently immanent within) humanity's own unique genetic and environmental make-up.

This 7th Sense can intuitively discern Right from Wrong, Good from Evil, Truth from Lies, Peace from War, Beauty from Ugliness, Love from Hate, Happiness from Misery, Freedom from Slavery...

So is it any wonder this Moral Sense is such a threat to those who have power over us, and control us ?

They want to kill it dead - but as they can't, it must be 'atomised', strictly controlled and kept in check...through propaganda, fear, terror, pleasures (including sex), distraction masquerading as TV entertainment & sport, etc

"Don't let it happen. It depends on you" (Orwell's last-known published words)

Last edited by Richard W. on 2009-07-07, 02:16:39 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Using drugs to control people for instance ?

(See: 'Brave New World' - SOMA).

Is it not surprising that the UK and the US are fighting in Afghanistan - one of the largest growers of opium poppies!

Why are our troops not destroying those poppy fields run by the Taliban?

Could it be that our governments are quite happy to allow massive quantities of opium and heroin to enter the US and Europe?

Could it be that our government is actually receiving substantial revenue from illegal drug imports and drug-dealing in the UK?

AUGUST 10 2009 - THE MORAL INSTINCT (PART 3)

2009-08-08T14:51:00.000-07:00

MORAL INSTINCT THEORY- SEVEN VALUES FOR HUMANITY'S SURVIVAL

"MEGA THEORY" - THE MORAL INSTINCT & REALITY - HYPOTHESIS 2

HYPOTHESIS 2

.10 The Theory states we have a Moral Instinct within our human nature which controls all others, including the sexual, territorial & language instincts.

.11 Seven Values form the basis of this Moral Instinct - The Mega Instinct - foundational principles which manifest themselves in the reality of our personality, in our relationships with others, and in the world.

.12 The Seven Values of the Mega Instinct are :

1. BEAUTY
2. FREEDOM
3. HAPPINESS
4. LIFE
5. LOVE
6. PEACE
7. TRUTH

"MEGA THEORY" - THE MORAL INSTINCT & REALITY - HYPOTHESIS 3

.12 The Theory states there is a "Collective Moral Instinct" - a unity of common moral thought - similar to Carl Jung's Collective Unconscious".

.13 There are many examples of the "Collective Moral Instinct" at work in global & local politics (especially regarding democracy, freedom, crime & punishment, war & peace etc) :

1. THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION & DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE (July 4 1776) : "We hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men are created equal; and they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights; that among those are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness"

2. THE FRENCH REVOLUTION & DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF MAN(July 14 1789) : "Liberty ! Egalite ! Fraternite ! (Liberty ! Equality ! Brotherhood !)

3. THE UNITED NATIONS DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS (December 10 1948) : "Everyone has the Right to Life, Liberty and Security of Person"

4. THE POST-WAR "ENGLISH REVOLUTION" (1945) & Labour's Election victory

5. THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT (1962) & Martin Luther King

6. MANDELA'S 'TRUTH & RECONCILIATION' COMMISSION (1994) & the ending of Apartheid in South Africa.

7. THE SECOND AMERICAN REVOLUTION (2008) & the election of a first black President.

8. INDEPENDENT ELECTION DECLARATION
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=736

Chomsky asked the question :

"How do children learn a language so fast ?

And he came up essentially with 'The Language Instinct (Pinker)

I ask the question :

"How have we survived for so long, as human animals, without killing more of each other ?

And I have come up essentially with "The Moral Instinct" (aka "The Mega Instinct").

"THE MEGA INSTINCT" (AS APPLIED TO DEMOCRACY & POLITICS - THE INDEPENDENT ELECTION DECLARATION)

viewtopic.php?f=9&t=736

SEVEN REASONS NOT TO KILL OURSELVES - OR OTHERS

1. BEAUTY

2. FREEDOM

3. HAPPINESS

4. LIFE

5. LOVE

6. PEACE

7. TRUTH

"THE SPIRIT" BY JOSE

http://canarislander.wordpress.com/2009 ... he-spirit/

February 14, 2009

The Spirit

An English dictionary: The intelligent or immaterial part of “man” as distinguished from the body//the animating or vital principle in living things.

So far so good. There are other definitions of what a spirit is, but I am very much afraid that they have been taken out of religious texts. Soul is the differentiating trait in human attitudes, as differentiating are the traits in the physiognomy of them, because the rest of the body may present traits which are not standard but this is just not the normal natural aspect of persons.

What does the spirit of a person represent? And how the spirit is achieved? Yes, achieved. Is it a trait God gives to each of us?

I am not intending to mix religions in this post, it would be very daring of me and it would most probably molest many of the potential readers.

Apart from the macho definition of that dictionary I have had for many years now, I am inclined to believe spirit is the part of the human being - woman or man - that concerns their attitude towards life and their fellow persons, or animals or plants within their surroundings, or even themselves.

What one thinks of other is a conception that is derived from one’s spirit. What one feels for another is a sentiment that is derived from the spirit. When one is angry, the spirit is working negatively, when one loves then the work is positive.

Is this the product of education? Yes, in a way. But no, in another way. Education in most times is responsible fo what one thinks is good or is bad. But who or what has decided what is good or bad? In my opinion, nobody or nothing. Yes, good or bad may not have come out of religious doctrines, it is a spiritual sentiment that compels us to feel in a particular way towards our fellow humans, or things or animals or plants.

Religions have those two aspects of our nature in all their teachings, but this has not been because their doctors have come to that conclusion out of their intelligence. Their intelligence is shared by us, normal persons of the street. Trying to impersonate God has also always been one of these doctors’ traits who have believed themselves to be owners of truth, but truth is independent, free and cannot be anybody’s weapon.

God is intangible, God cannot be touched, or understood, anyone that dares to say the contrary is outright wrong.

Who is wrong or who is right? Are men wrong or right? Are women wrong or right? Is sex right or wrong? Which type of sex is right or wrong? Who are we humans to dictate what our spirits decide regarding anything?

These are questions that occur to me very often. The definitive answer has not yet come to my mind - or is it spirit?

Perhaps "The Spirit" is the "Moral Instinct" - or "The Mega Instinct" ?

There will always be different types of people in the world, which is why communism will never work. In all societies there will be found both the industrious and lazy, clever and stupid, rich and poor, fat and thin, tall and short and all between. It is this wide variety of individual personalities that goes to make up our different cultures, and should be celebrated.

I see myself as a ‘Liberal Socialist’ (if there is such a thing), and believe that prosperity and the accumulation of personal wealth is not a bad thing, as long as that wealth is put to good use and is not acquired at the expense of others. Unfortunately, this is rarely true.

My opinion coincides with 34&rising, but I differ on the issue of wealth, accumulating wealth will invariably lead to a change in the personality of the wealthy.

Respect through good judgement should be the logical aim, utopian of course. Which must start by self-respect. All the rest is aleatory and always depending on circumstances and personal attitudes.

In the list given by Richard of the seven reasons why we don't kill one another or ourselves, I miss FEAR.

_________________
Jose+++

Richard W. wrote:
SEVEN REASONS NOT TO KILL OURSELVES - OR OTHERS

1. BEAUTY
2. FREEDOM
3. HAPPINESS
4. LIFE
5. LOVE
6. PEACE
7. TRUTH

Jose asks why "FEAR" is not included.

Good point. I think it's because I see the above Values/Motivators as 7 POSITIVE reasons for NOT killing ourselves (or others). Fear is a NEGATIVE - and can also be cited as a reason FOR killing ourselves (or others).

I see FEAR as a form of PAIN. Much of our behaviour (but not all) can be explained by the simple Hedonistic principle of "the pursuit of pleasure, and the avoidance of pain."

Many people kill themselves, I sense, to stop the pain (eg of fear)...but also many people do NOT kill themselves because of the pain (eg of fear).

Does this make sense

AUGUST 9 2009 - THE MORAL INSTINCT (PART 2)

2009-08-08T14:43:00.000-07:00

MORAL INSTINCT THEORY- SEVEN VALUES FOR HUMANITY'S SURVIVAL

HERMENEUTICS (Hat-tip : 'Moderne' - CIF)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermeneutics

INTERVIEW WITH MARC "MORAL MINDS" HAUSER :

http://bhascience.blogspot.com/2008/04/ ... enter.html

MORAL POLITICS & EMPATHY

http://armybarmyremix.blogspot.com/2008 ... of-it.html

A COMMON HUMANITY - A SHARED CULTURE - DIFFERENCE IS ONLY SKIN-DEEP

http://blogs.psychologytoday.com/blog/t ... an-culture

THE WAR ON CHOMSKY'S PHILOSOPHY OF LANGUAGE

http://prosario-2000.blogspot.com/2008/ ... gs-on.html

"THE FUTURE OF MORALS - THRASYMACHUS" BY CEM JOAD
http://pw20c.mcmaster.ca/node/37139

1925 Reprint 2008 ?

THE MEGA INSTINCT - A 'RAINBOW' THEORY OF REALITY - A CHANCE TO SHINE THROUGH THE RAIN ?

Although clearly biased, what I find personally very exciting about 'The Mega Instinct' (& other like it such as the Language & Moral Instinct) is that, through such Theories, it might be possible to describe the complex mysteries of inner & outer Reality, as easily as describing the complex mysteries of the human eye & the Rainbow.

To my mind, Reality (like Consciousness) cannot be EXPLAINED by our young fallible human mind - it's simply not possible yet - but it can be DESCRIBED & ILLUSTRATED by it...especially by the use of theories, metaphors, conjectures etc.

The Mega Instinct - A Theory of Reality - Why not ?

A 'Rainbow' Theory of Reality ?

HOW MORALITY EVOLVED
http://aolsearch.aol.co.uk/aol/search?q ... Type=sb_uk

-LANGUAGE & POLITICAL "SALESPEAK"

http://www.commiesutra.com/?p=203

"MEGA THEORY" : THE MORAL INSTINCT & REALITY - HYPOTHESIS 1
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=578

BY RICHARD W. SYMONDS

(BASED ON CEM JOAD'S "IMMANENCE-TRANSCENDENCE" THEORY OF REALITY)(CHOMSKY'S "TRANSFORMATIVE-GENERATIVE" THEORY OF LANGUAGE)(PINKER'S "LANGUAGE INSTINCT")(TARSKI'S "CORRESPONDENCE THEORY OF TRUTH")(AND SYMONDS "MEGA MOTIVATION" THEORY OF VALUES)

HYPOTHESIS 1

.1 The Theory states that for any language to have meaning, it must correspond to reality.

.2 "Any language" includes the Language of the Mind, which includes
(a) Human Science, Linguistics & Psycho-Biology - Music & The Arts (Body + Mind)
(b) Physical Science, Linguistics & Biology - Mathematics & Logic (Body + Mind)
(c) Morals & Linguistics - Values, Philosophy & Religion (Mind + Spirit)

.3 "Reality" includes :
(a) The Inner Universe (The World Inside Ourselves)(Immanent Reality)(eg Psychology)
(b) The Outer Universe (The World Outside Ourselves)(Transcendent Reality)(eg Physics)
(c) The Universe of Values (The World of Values)("MEGA - The Moral Instinct")(Immanent & Transcendent Reality)(eg Beauty, Freedom, Happiness, Life, Love, Peace, Truth)

INTRODUCTION

.4 Consider Beethoven's Ninth Symphony - one of the best examples of a language (music) in the mind of a great artist :
"It is a collection of musical sounds, notes and phrases which" the language of (physical) science "analyses into vibrations in the atmosphere.
Such analysis does not, however, give a complete account of it; for it is also a series of notes and phrases arranged in a particular pattern.
This pattern prescribes the order in which the notes are arranged, and the intervals between them.

.5 "The pattern is imposed by the mind of the composer", Beethoven.
"The sounds as arranged in the pattern are at once the expression, and the embodiment, of the musical idea which the composer conceives.

.6 "Many would say that the sounds as arranged in the pattern constitute a unity or whole.
In using such an expression they would, I think, wish to imply, first, that the whole is more than the arithmetical sum total of the different sounds; secondly, that the sounds, when heard in the context of the whole are, precisely because of their relation to the whole and to one another, different from what they would have been, if they were taken out of their context and heard in isolation.

.7 "It is because of the immanence of the musical idea that the sounds are arranged as they are, and sound as they do.
If it were not immanent, the arrangement would not occur and the sounds would sound differently.
Nevertheless, most people would agree, the immanent idea is not exhausted, or used up by, any one embodiment of it in a particular set of sounds.
For a musical idea is more than any particular rendering of it, more, indeed, than any number of renderings of it.

.8 "It would still exist in the composer's mind, even if the music which embodied it were never written down.
This could be put by saying that it transcends the renderings of it."

CONCLUSION

.9 Beethoven's Ninth Symphony has so much meaning for us, because it corresponds both to immanent and transcendent reality.

Last edited by Richard W. on 2008-12-01, 12:30:56 am, edited 5 times in total.

AUGUST 8 2009 - THE MORAL INSTINCT (PART 1)

2009-08-08T14:33:00.000-07:00

MORAL INSTINCT THEORY- SEVEN VALUES FOR HUMANITY'S SURVIVAL

I'm getting pretty 'burnt out' with all this 'killing for democracy' by global gangsters, and my disastrous personal life, so I'm off on a 'philosophical holiday' - to the land of Plato...

Yes, it's a way of 'escape'...'therapy' if you prefer...a form of relaxation and release from the brutal, insane realities of the present moment.

I make no apology for this - my mind is refreshed and re-invigorated after such a 'brain holiday'...and gives me an extraordinarily wonderful illusion of personal sanity and creativity.

http://www.britannica.com/eb/topic-4649 ... le-9060438
http://www.philosophyprofessor.com/phil ... tonism.php
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoplatonism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platonic_realism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recollection
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=381&p=1901#p1901
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=366
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2

"MEGA - THE MORAL INSTINCT"
http://booksbycslewis.blogspot.com/2008 ... f-man.html
http://pinker.wjh.harvard.edu/books/stuff/index.html

"It is important to remember that language itself is a moral medium, almost all uses of language convey value.
This is one reason why we are almost always morally active.

"Life is soaked in the moral, literature is soaked in the moral.
If we attempted to describe this room, our descriptions would naturally carry all sorts of values.

"Value is only artificially, and with difficulty, expelled from language for scientific purposes".

Iris Murdoch (1919-1999). Novelist & Oxford Tutor in Philosophy
(Source : "Men of Ideas" by Bryan Magee - 'Philosophy and Literature' - BBC 1978)

Every human soul has seen,
Perhaps even before their birth,
Pure Forms, such as Justice, Temperance, Beauty
And all the great moral qualities
Which we hold in honour

We are moved to what is Good
By the faintest memory of these Forms
Simple, and calm, and blessed
Which we once saw in a pure, clear light
Being pure ourselves"

(Iris Murdoch - "Iris" Film)

'MEGA' - THE MORAL INSTINCT
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=381

THE MEGA INSTINCT - THE SYMONDS MEGA MOTIVATION THEORY OF MORAL CONSCIOUSNESS

http://crawleyindependent.blogspot.com/ ... moral.html

THE 'MEGA' THEORY OF MORAL CONSCIOUSNESS states that moral Values exist objectively and independently of the human mind (Moral Realism) - and our subjective actions, thoughts, ideas and beliefs discover (rather than create) those moral Values - Plato's Recollection Theory.

Thus, our actions, thoughts, ideas and beliefs can be objectively right or wrong - independently good or bad - whether we subjectively believe they are, or not.

The 'Mega' Theory states that Values are objectively real - such as Truth, Beauty and Goodness - and we are subjectively conscious of these Values through our Mega Instinct - a kind of 'seventh sense'.

What is 'real' serves as an objective 'other' - independent of ourselves - against which we can test and measure our subjective actions, thoughts, ideas and beliefs.

It is, therefore, always possible that our actions, thoughts, ideas and beliefs could be wrong, mistaken, and in error...

Tarski's Correspondence Theory of Truth, Popper's Scientific Method and Joad's Immanence-Transcendence (IT) Theory, are closely associated with this 'Mega' Theory of Moral Consciousness.

THE SYMONDS MEGA MOTIVATION THEORY ('THE MEGA THEORY') states that we are motivated by seven ultimate Values (Mega Motivations), of which we can conceive of nothing greater :

Beauty
Freedom
Happiness
Life
Love
Peace
Truth

The Theory further states that we are motivated by that which we most value; if we discover what we value, we will discover what motivates us. 'The Anselm Acid Test' is used to discover what we most value; and thus we can discover what motivates us.

According to the 'Mega' Theory. we value that which motivates us - and we are motivated by that which we value.

Therefore, it follows that if we value "death", then we are motivated by it.

As I see it, most of the human species believe - as did Freud, Jung et al - that we are motivated in some way (consciously or unconsciously) by death - and/or the thought of death.
Therefore, according to the Theory, we value death in some way (consciously or unconsciously) - and/or the thought of death.

But the 'Mega' Theory goes one stage further...

To discover if "death" is that which we value THE MOST (& motivates us the most) at any particular time - ie that which is the most important to us - we simply apply 'The Anselm Acid Test', by asking this question to ourselves :

"CAN I CONCEIVE OF ANYTHING GREATER, OR MORE IMPORTANT, THAN...DEATH"

If you cannot, then death is that which you most value (at that time), and which motivates you the most (at that time) -according to the Theory.

Personally, I can conceive in my mind something more important than death (at this time), so it is something that I value - and am motivated by - but not the most (at this time).

Does that help, Jose ?

Any other contributions/criticisms from others would also be most welcome - we are navigating uncharted waters here...and it needs to be remembered that this is a Theory.

UNIVERSAL MUSICAL PRINCIPLES - UNIVERSAL GRAMMAR - UNIVERSAL MORAL PRINCIPLES ?

http://www.umd.edu/fyi/index.cfm?id=17360

NEURO-PHILOSOPHY
http://metapsychology.mentalhelp.net/po ... 199&cn=394

AUGUST 3 2009 - WEST OF IFIELD - FREEMASONRY - WELBECK LAND - MASONIC COUNCILLORS

2009-08-03T14:20:00.000-07:00

No Masonic Councillors can participate, by law, in matters pertaining to the "West of Ifield" because Welbeck Land (who are seeking developmental control in this Parish) is a well-known Masonic Corporation (look at its Logo) in the City of London

MAY 12 2009 - INDEPENDENT IS AN "EXTREMIST", SAYS / SUGGESTS LOCAL TORY DEPUTY LEADER

2009-05-11T14:39:00.000-07:00

MAY 8 2009 - TORY DEPUTY LEADER OF CRAWLEY BOROUGH COUNCIL - CLLR DUNCAN CROW :

"Outside of the recognisable political parties, and some would say the realms of reality, there is...ONE 'INDEPENDENT' WHO IS A FAR-LEFT EXTREMIST WHO SUBSCRIBES TO CONSPIRACY THEORIES."

MAY 11 2009 - TORY DEPUTY LEADER OF CRAWLEY BOROUGH COUNCIL - CLLR DUNCAN CROW :

"Outside of the recognisable political parties, and some would say the realms of reality, there is...ONE 'INDEPENDENT' WHOSE INTERNET RAMBLINGS SUGGEST IS A FAR-LEFT EXTREMIST WHO SUBSCRIBES TO CONSPIRACY THEORIES."

MAY 11 2009 - FRANCIS MAUDE - HORSHAM MP - DAILY TELEGRAPH FRONT PAGE

2009-05-10T14:31:00.000-07:00

HORSHAM MP, FRANCIS MAUDE, HEADLINES THE DAILY TELEGRAPH FRONT PAGE - MAY 11 2009

The Daily Telegraph is a ToryCon broadsheet newspaper; so it is with considerable personal astonishment they are now focussing on ToryCon Expenses - especially those of the Horsham MP, Francis "£35,000" Maude.

So, is there a catch here - or not ? We shall see soon enough.

With elections round the corner, I remain very sceptical and suspicious...the rest of the national broadsheets & tabloids - especially Rupert's - are obsessed with bringing down this Labour Government under Gordon Brown.

Who's pulling the strings ? I could make a few guesses...

SEPTEMBER 5 2008 - THE RWS LETTERS

2008-09-05T01:10:00.000-07:00

SEPT 5 2008

There can be no better example of OCEANIA's UK being the 'Satellite Totalitarian State' of OCEANIA's US Empire - "The World's Leading State Terrorist" - by the media coverage of the US 'McElections'...especially by the UK State Broadcaster, the BBC - and, of course, Murdoch's Media Empire

The BBC is making this headline news every day now - planted (as I see it) by the 'USraelUK' Government Security Services - much like the UK Government Security Services planted Northern Ireland/IRA headline news on the BBC, during the 1970's & 80's - especially during the Thatcherite regime.

Any person who has the ability to think for themselves knows this is 'Orwellian Propaganda' at its worst (or best). We are being tutored to love the US 'Big Brother' - the US Republicans and/or Democrats (but of course it makes little difference).

As well as this wall-to-wall UK propaganda for the US being totally obscene, especially in terms of democracy, it is a media circus - a complete joke.

Also, it's as interesting as watching paint dry. The US media would take little to no interest in covering preparations in UK General Elections - except perhaps the result.

Why can't we do the same, and be allowed to ignore this nonsense ? All that will be of interest to us might be the result - but the 'permanent wars', control through fear, threat of pain, killings etc will continue...whoever is elected - with a nuclear holocaust always a nightmare possibility (especially if 'GI Joe & Barbie' win)

But we have to suffer this orgasmic media propaganda, because the Government Security Services require it - and the likes of Murdoch demand it.

It's called mind-control - mass hypnosis - brainwashing...but most of us are pitifully unaware what's being done to us.

Wake up, wise up and grow up - fast - before it's too late for any of us.

"DON'T LET IT HAPPEN", says Orwell.

Just unplug the TV, I say, and get a life of your own....with the ability to think for yourself - and clearly...and go smell the roses and tell one person you love that you love them.

Television has been hijacked by corporate marketing monsters - it is no longer a democratizing tool to 'educate, inform & entertain'. It is now solely a propaganda tool to sell, persuade & control.

If we are not careful, exactly the same will happen to the internet.

AUGUST 30 2008 - THE RWS LETTERS

2008-08-28T00:47:00.000-07:00

AUGUST 30 2008

Dear All

Orwell calls it "that lunatic dislocation in the mind"

I call it "collectively blocking out what we don't want to hear" (technical term : "in denial")

"DOUBLETHINK" - 'the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them' (Nineteen Eighty-Four)

OCEANIA'S UK State Broadcaster, the BBC, is controlled by DOUBLETHINK - and passes that on - like a virus - to its listeners and viewers.

For example : BBC TV BREAKFAST NEWS - two-bit actors/actresses playing with News....News as Propaganda (NOT News as Truth). It is an insult to our intuitive intelligence - but we are pitifully, and lethally, unaware of it.

Headline News : Baruch Obama and the Democratic Convention (US elections are in 2 months time) - a perfect example of the UK news agenda being dominated by the US news agenda.

Ummm...that's rather like having, as a headline on US NBC/CBC News, that the Conservative Opposition is choosing its candidate for the next UK General Election. It would never happen there - why the hell do we let it happen here !?

Meanwhile, we are at present being tutored (by OCEANIA wall-to-wall media propaganda) to make 'Enemy No. 1' the Russians. The so-called 'War on Terror' in Iraq & Afghanistan is now totally off the news agenda.

'DOUBLETHINK' at work - working overtime. And there's OCEANIA'S US Elections in two months time. Let's put a smile on our faces, and enjoy the circus...forget about all those nasty killings over in the Middle East...forget about our 'terror' we inflict on many across the world. Only nice, smiley, happy news in the run-up to an 'election irrelevance' - if Obama wins he will only be the 'lesser of two evils' - nothing fundamental will change - and we intuitively know that deep down within ourselves - "lunatic dislocation in the mind"...

Insane. Totally insane. And collectively we go along with this 'totalitarian' insanity - especially with the help of the BBC. It is beyond shame and hypocrisy - it is criminally insane.

We only have ourselves to blame. Wake up, wise up, and grow up - fast - before it's too late for any of us.

Best

Richard W.

AUGUST 28 - THE RWS DIARIES (2008)

2008-08-27T16:09:00.000-07:00

OCEANIA'S UK Foreign Secretary, David 'Millipede', seeks support from a small, dodgy EURASIA ally - the Ukraine ('Millipede' is the monkey. US is the organ-grinder).

EURASIA'S Russian President, Dmitri Medvedev, seeks support from EASTASIA'S China.

Are we to 'sleepwalk' into nuclear oblivion with a whimper - by letting these insane tossers (especially US tossers) control the globe - completely out of control (& out of their tiny minds) ?

OCEANIA'S media (especially Murdoch's) also has much to answer for - but if we're not fucking careful, none of us will be around to bring these 'totalitarian clowns' to justice.

"Rage, rage..."

AUGUST 27 - THE JOAD DIARIES (1948)

2008-08-26T15:27:00.000-07:00

There was current in my world another explanation of evil, in terms of early psychological maltreatment, and consequential psychological maladjustment.

In a spate of books published in the 'twenties, psychologists and psycho-analysts revealed to us the hidden springs that worked our natures.

And the sources of the springs lay, it seemed, outside our control in the unconscious.

AUGUST 27 - THE RWS DIARIES (2008)

2008-08-26T14:41:00.000-07:00

Oh dear, here they come...OCEANIA'S propaganda machines are working overtime tonight to 'manufacture consent' for war, telling us who the 'enemy' is this month for our 'Two Minutes Hate'...forget about the 'War of Terror' elsewhere, Osama Bin Laden (not to be confused with Obama), The Taliban, Iran, "Terrorists et al...it's the Russians we hate now.

Headlines :

"THE WEST condemns Russia"..."THE WORLD condemns Russia"..."EUROPE condemns Russia". I've yet to see the headline : "THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY condemns Russia"...perhaps tomorrow.

It does not need Einstein to de-code this nonsense - put simply, OCEANIA'S US regime is provoking, intimidating, threatening and war-mongering in EURASIA. It is an attempt to de-stabilize the region - using the tensions as an excuse to intervene, invade and/or occupy.
Why ? OIL, of course - the same reason for invading & occuping Iraq, "contrary to international law". Oh sorry, I forgot, US-controlled OCEANIA own the world - so they are a law unto themselves.

In other words, US-controlled OCEANIA wants to control a de-stabilized EURASIA (EASTASIA'S too powerful - and too stable - to control).
It's officially called 'FULL SPECTRUM DOMINANCE'(FSD).
I call it 'GLOBAL TOTALITARIANISM'.

AUGUST 26 - THE RWS DIARIES (2008)

2008-08-25T12:51:00.000-07:00

There seems to be a temporary 'stand-off' between OCEANIA'S US and EURASIA'S Russia.

EURASIA'S Russia has told OCEANIA'S US-controlled NATO to 'bugger off' - but has stopped short of cutting off permanent links. That is cause for some optimism I suppose - allowing a kind of 'cooling off' period.

Certainly OCEANIA'S UK state broadcaster, BBC, is reporting events with less pro-US/Georgia spin - which is another cause of optimism :

"Russia's parliament has backed a motion urging the president to recognise the independence of Georgia's breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

"The US (& now UK - parrot-like) said any move to recognise independence of the two regions would be contrary to international law (Ummmm, the US invasion & occupation of Iraq was "contrary to international law" - RWS Ed).

"Russia and Georgia fought a brief war this month over the two provinces...which already had de facto independence".

That last sentence is (surprisingly) made even more clear by the BBC elsewhere : "Russia fought a brief war after Georgia tried to retake South Ossetia by force."

Do I detect a slight 'distancing' by OCEANIA'S UK Government (thru' its State Broadcaster), away from OCEANIA'S 'Big Brother Bully' - the US ?

If the tabloids and broadsheets of the string-pulled US 'puppet', Rupert Murdoch, are full of front page crap this week; telling its gullible readers that Gordon Brown is either totally incompetent and/or the face of evil...then there must be some truth in the 'distancing' idea.

About time too.

AUGUST 26 - THE JOAD DIARY (1948)

2008-08-25T12:31:00.000-07:00

Brought up in the Socialist movement, I had been taught to think of evil as a consequence of bad social conditioning.
For these being the cause of human wretchedness were also the cause of human wickedness.
Poverty, Shaw, my teacher, had insisted with unmatched force and incomparable eloquence, was the supreme sin - if only it because it was the source of all the others.
If poverty was the root of all evil, money was the source of all virtue.
'Money', wrote Shaw, 'is the most important thing in the world. It represents health, strength, honour, generosity, and beauty, as conspicuously and undeniably as the want of it represents illness, weakness, disgrace, meanness, and ugliness.'

And the moral ? That evil is due to bad social conditions.

Now you can reform bad social conditions by Act of Parliament, substituting comfort, cleanliness, security, and financial competence, for discomfort, dirt, insecurity, and want.

Therefore, presumably, you can make men virtuous, or at any rate as virtuous as makes no matter, by Act of Parliament.

AUGUST 25 - THE RWS DIARY (2008)

2008-08-24T07:44:00.000-07:00

THE OLYMPIC MEDALS TABLE (FINAL)

GOLD - EASTASIA (CHINA)
SILVER - OCEANIA (UNITED STATES)
BRONZE - EURASIA (RUSSIA)

Emmanuel Goldstein was right.

AUGUST 25 - THE JOAD DIARIES (1948)

2008-08-23T17:29:00.000-07:00

This brings me to the second turning-point (the first being 'pacifism').

The war opened my eyes to a fact which the whole of my previous training and connections had conspired to make me ignore, the fact, namely, that evil is not accidental, a mere by-product of circumstance, but is endemic and, I should add, ineradicable, in the heart of man - the doctrine, in fact, of original sin.

AUGUST 24 - THE JOAD DIARIES (1948)

2008-08-22T14:13:00.000-07:00

As a pacifist, I had rightly urged that the value of the free mind and the compassionate heart, that love of truth and respect for human personality, that kindliness, gentleness, compassion and mercy, are all endangered by war.

But if the Nazis had won, they would have been not merely endangered but destroyed, destroyed so completely that Europe would have entered upon a new Dark Age comparable with that which succeeded the break-up of the Roman Empire.

If there was ever again to be good and secure living in Europe, if civilized ways of thinking and behaving were ever to be restored to us, then this horrible rule of gangsters and thugs had, I felt, to be overthrown.

Could it be overthrown except by force ? Things had reached a point at which I had come to believe that it could not.

You may think that this is an old story scarcely worth the re-telling.
In this last year (1948 - Ed) it has assumed a topical significance.

For what I felt then to be true of an England over-run by the Nazis, I feel today would be true of an England over-run by the Russians; true, perhaps less drastically, true perhaps less horribly, but, so far as the suppression of free institutions, the destruction of our traditional way of life are concerned, true in substance.

My pacifism would, then, remain in abeyance if - which God forbid - such an eventuality were to threaten.

RWS NOTE 2008 - Two years later, in 1950 (5 months after Orwell's death), CEM Joad took part in an Oxford Union Debate - and won it : "THAT THIS HOUSE REGRETS THE INFLUENCE EXERCISED BY THE US, AS THE DOMINANT POWER AMONG THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONS".
So, Joad's position in 1950 was very similar to that of Orwell in 1949 : both Englishmen warned against the inherent danger of 'totalitarianism', within Right-Wing Capitalism (eg US) AND Left-Wing Communism (eg Soviet Russia).
This made Joad & Orwell very unpopular from both ends of the political spectrum...much like Chomsky today.
Their clear warnings have therefore been silenced and/or deliberately misunderstood, by propaganda, from both sides

AUGUST 24 - THE RWS DIARIES (2008)

2008-08-22T14:00:00.000-07:00

The Olympic Gold Medal Table looks a fair reflection of the 'balance of power' within the 3 Super States in 2008 AD :

1. EASTASIA (China)(47)

2. OCEANIA (United States)(31)

3. OCEANIA (Great Britain)(18)

4. EURASIA (Russia)(17)

5. EURASIA (Germany)(14)

AUGUST 23 - THE RWS DIARIES (2008)

2008-08-21T15:21:00.000-07:00

EURASIA'S Russia has told OCEANIA's US-controlled NATO to 'bugger off' from its 'turf' - thus giving the clear message that the Little Bully (Russia & its Gang) isn't scared of the Big Bully (US & its Bigger Gang).

Two things might happen - as in any Mafia-styled Turf War. Either the Big Bully (US) backs off and keeps away from the Little Bully's 'turf' - or there's Gang Warfare & a lot of killing.

Big Bully (US) is clearly pushing its luck, in an attempt to take over more of the Little Bully's 'patch' (OCEANIA has already taken control of one territory in EURASIA - Poland).

Looking into my crystal ball, I think the Little Bully (Russia) will get bigger in EURASIA, and the Big Bully will get smaller in EURASIA.

In other words, US-controlled OCEANIA will fail to take control of EURASIA - thus still leaving 3 Superstates (Oceania, Eurasia & Eastasia) in a permanent state of war between themselves...as Orwell outlined in 'Nineteen Eighty-Four' (in 1948).

AUGUST 23 - THE JOAD DIARIES (1948)

2008-08-21T14:45:00.000-07:00

For, with the Nazis at the gate, I had a sudden vision of what would happen in England, if England were over-run.

I saw that a Nazi victory would not be like the victories of other nations in other wars; that the Nazis would not be content to impose an indemnity, to rob us of territory, to cripple our trade, but to leave our way of life substantially undisturbed.

On the contrary, they would destroy utterly and irretrievably the life which, in the course of the last three hundred years, we had built up in this country.

AUGUST 22 - THE RWS DIARIES (2008)

2008-08-20T15:16:00.000-07:00

EURASIA'S Poland has just signed missile deal with OCEANIA's US - which, along with Georgia (& possibly Czechoslovakia), is another example of US-controlled OCEANIA trying to control and dominate EURASIA though NATO - much like a bully makes 'friends' in a school playground.

This is a very dangerous game which is being played out - and the end won't be pretty.

When Eurasia's Poland is part of NATO, Oceania's US will 'protect' them if threatened (like Georgia) - just like a bully will 'protect' members of his gang if 'threatened'.

Eurasia's Russia is none too pleased (& I don't blame them) - pointing out that Poland will make itself very vulnerable to nuclear attack from its 'enemies' (whoever they may be at the time). A nuclear warhead is no respecter of boundaries, so if there is a nuclear attack it will devastate not just Poland.

Not wishing to point out the obvious, but wasn't the Nazi invasion of Poland the start of the Second World War (& wasn't Serbia in the First World War?).

As I said earlier, I believe the US-controlled (Capitalist) OCEANIA Empire seeks domination & control of (Capitalist) EURASIA - leaving just themselves and the China-controlled (Communist) EASTASIA Empire...with the MIDDLE EAST as a 'buffer-zone'.

I hope and pray I am wrong in this belief. God help us all if I am right.

AUGUST 22 - THE JOAD DIARIES (1948)

2008-08-20T14:59:00.000-07:00

You must forgive this egotistical talking about myself. I am indulging in it because I want to try to make you realize how these were, I suppose, the strongest and deepest of all my feelings and convictions. They were certainly the most vocal.

I retained and maintained my pacifism at the outbreak of the last war, maintained it, albeit with increasing difficulty, through the early months of 1940.

Then came the invasion of the Low Countries, the capitulation of France, Dunkirk, and with the Nazis at the gate came THE TURNING POINT.

I came to see that there could be something worse than war, and that was the Nazi domination of Europe.

AUGUST 21 - THE RWS DIARIES (2008)

2008-08-19T13:33:00.000-07:00

Well, I am increasing in the conviction that US global planners in Washington's Pentagon were required to read and re-read George Orwell's 'Nineteen Eighty-Four', especially in the early 1950's - seeing it as a 'textbook' for future 'foreign policy' strategy...

In the book, Orwell's nightmare vision was the existence of 3 Superstates (aka Empires) permanently at war with each other :

1. OCEANIA (US & its Satellite States, such as 'Airstrip One' UK)
2. EURASIA (Russia & its Satellite States)
3. EASTASIA (China & its Satellite States)

In the light of what's happening at present, it seems the US Pentagon planners (aka OCEANIA war-mongers bent on total power)(aka 'Full Spectrum Dominance' - FSD) are going one insane step further than Orwell's nightmare :

They want to control EURASIA through NATO, which will then just leave themselves, OCEANIA, against EASTASIA (eg China), with the Middle East acting as a 'Buffer-Zone between the two.

As it has already been pointed out elsewhere, if Georgia HAD been a NATO member, US-controlled OCEANIA would probably now be at war with EURASIA Russia - with nuclear warheads likely to be flying to & fro.

We're certainly not out of the (nuclear) wood yet - far, far, far from it.

AUGUST 21 - THE JOAD DIARIES (1948)

2008-08-19T13:13:00.000-07:00

And so I used such influence as I possessed to persuade young people against taking part in war.
You may remember a resolution which the Oxford Union passed in the early thirties, affirming that in no circumstances would members of the Union consent to fight for king and country.
Well, I was the visiting speaker at the Oxford Union on that occasion.
A week or so after the Oxford Resolution was passed, the Nazis seized power in Germany.
In the light of what happened afterwards, there was, I can't help feeling, something symbolic in the sequence of these two events, for it was the latter which was presently to make nonsense of the former.

AUGUST 20 - THE RWS DIARIES (2008)

2008-08-18T15:33:00.000-07:00

EASTASIA'S China is surging ahead of OCEANIA'S'S United States in the Olympic Gold Medal Table...and the propaganda war for hearts and minds around the world.

OCEANIA'S US (& its Satellite States) continue to war-monger against EURASIA'S Russia...and I sense they are losing the propaganda war for hearts and minds around the world.

The 'message' coming across seems to be : If you want a war (& nuclear oblivion) join OCEANIA'S US. If you want peace (& survival) join EASTASIA'S China.

In other words, Chinese Communism is 'better' than American Capitalism.

Ummmmm....I believe George '1984' Orwell would say that both the US (Oceania) and China (Eastasia) are 'totalitarian states' - and that goes for Russia (Eurasia) too...and we are pitifully and lethally unaware of it.

SEPT 10 - THE JOAD DIARIES (1948)

2008-08-18T15:14:00.000-07:00

First, pacifism. Ever since I can remember I had been a pacifist. In the 1914-18 war I was a conscientious objector, and during the twenty years that elapsed between the end of that war, and the beginning of the next, scarcely a week passed in which I did not write an article or make a speech against war, urging in season and out that war was the greatest of evils that could possibly assail a people, and that no injury real, or supposed to the State, no loss of glory, power, prestige, or privilege could weigh in the scale against the brute human suffering, against the outpouring of men's blood and women's tears, that were the price of their retention by war.

The gains of war were at best problematical; its losses were certain.
The gains were to the State, a juggernaut which, in pursuit of its fancied interests, trampled on the lives of its citizens; the losses were to individual men and women.

AUGUST 19 - THE RWS DIARIES (2008)

2008-08-17T14:31:00.000-07:00

A very enjoyable family day was spent together today (Sunday), at the Borde Hill Gardens Country Fair near Haywards Heath, West Sussex. This week's local Crawley Observer kindly reported there were to be Daleks on display in a 'Dr Who' stand. Our 'cool' 16 year old son - who still loves Daleks with a passion - came along in very moody reluctance (we didn't tell him about the Daleks). The look on his face when he saw...can't put it in words. It just made the day a very special day for us.
Thank you Crawley Observer.

The 'credit crunch' looks set to crush us very soon - and I'm now getting really anxious and depressed. This is in addition to the anger, because I know it's being orchestrated by 'Master Puppeteers' who don't give a damn about people like us.

And as for the continuing OCEANIA versus EURASIA conflict...that just makes me more anxious, depressed and angry on a global scale.

SEPT 8 - THE JOAD DIARIES (1948)

2008-08-17T11:42:00.000-07:00

In my own life I can detect three such changes of direction which, though they seemed dramatic enough at the time, are seen in retrospect only as a culmination of a gradual shift which had long preceded them.
Two were, for me, immensely serious; the third I have never been able to take with the seriousness which people in general, and women in particular, seem to think it deserves.
I will begin with the two serious ones.

AUGUST 18 - THE RWS DIARY (2008)

2008-08-16T16:46:00.000-07:00

A good way of concealing the gathering storm of a total economic collapse at home in OCEANIA (eg US & UK) is to have another war away from home (eg against EURASIA's Russia).

Our leaders are totally insane - but yet they remain in power - thanks to our impotence to act, home comforts, acute stupidity...

If we don't wake up, wise up, and grow up - fast - we'll be looking over the precipice to nuclear oblivion - whimpering helplessly.

"Rage, rage..."

SEPT 5 - THE BOOK OF JOAD (1948)

2008-08-16T16:34:00.000-07:00

SEPT 5 1948 - "THE TURNING POINTS IN MY LIFE" BY C.E.M. JOAD (1891-1953)

.1 Of most lives the direction is changing imperceptibly all the time; every now and then the accumulated effect of these continuous changes becomes great enough to attract our attention, and we hail a turning-point.
But the so called turning-point is no more than the final twist to a screw which has never ceased to turn.

AUGUST 17 - THE RWS DIARIES (2008)

2008-08-15T15:37:00.000-07:00

AUGUST 17

A GLOBAL 'WAR GAME' IN LOCAL TERMS - HYPOTHETICALLY

West Sussex (Georgia) becomes independent from UKEngland (Russia), with the financial & military support of Texas (US).
Crawley & Horsham (South Ossetia & Abkhazia) don't want to be part of an independent West Sussex (Georgia) but want to remain part of UKEngland (Russia).
West Sussex (Georgia) completely destroys Ifield in Crawley (Tskhinvali in South Ossetia) by sending bombs from Chichester in West Sussex (Gorin in Georgia), with the military support of Texas (US).
UKEngland (Russia) takes military action against West Sussex (Georgia) by taking control of Chichester (Gorin), and militarily protects Crawley & Horsham (South Ossetia & Abkhazia).
Texas (US) sends troops into West Sussex (Georgia), warning UKEngland (Russia) not to take any further military action in West Sussex (Georgia)...or else.
UKEngland (Russia), with Crawley & Horsham (South Ossetia & Abkhazia) stay on military alert...
Texas (US) comes to West Sussex (Georgia) with a 'peace plan', and a message to UKEngland (Russia) - get out of West Sussex (Georgia)...or else.
A 'Representative' of UKEngland (A 'Representative' of Russia) supports the message from Texas (US) to UKEngland (Russia) - get out of West Sussex (Georgia)...or else.
Crawley & Horsham (South Ossetia & Abkhazia) are none too happy with the 'Representative' of UKEngland (A 'Representative' of Russia), seeing his support of Texas (US) & West Sussex (Georgia) as an act of betrayal & treachery.
Crawley & Horsham (South Ossetia & Abkhazia), as well as Chichester in West Sussex (Gorin in Georgia), also become very tense and dangerous places to live.

In the meantime, nearby Isle Of Wight (Poland) signs a defence deal with Texas (US), allowing the installation of nuclear weapons on its island.
UKEngland (Russia) respond by threatening the Isle of Wight (Poland) that it will use its nuclear weapons against them, if Texas (US) threaten to launch its nuclear weapons from their island.

(The 'War Game' continues)
http://crawleyindependent.blogspot.com/
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=631&start=20

AUGUST 17 - THE JOAD DIARIES (1948)

2008-08-15T14:57:00.000-07:00

"WHO WAS CYRIL JOAD...?"

PHILOSOPHY PATHWAYS ISSUE 47

In response to a copy of November press release from Richard Symonds
publicizing the planned 2003 South Stoke Festival of Thought (see 'Philosophy
Pathways' Issue 32, 19th May 2002) I invited Mr Symonds to answer my question,
'Who was Cyril Joad and what did he contribute to Philosophy?' In a series of
e-mails Mr Symonds responded at far too great a length to include in the 'Ask a
Philosopher' pages. Joad is a much-maligned philosopher. In 'A Hundred Years of
Philosophy' (2nd ed. 1966) John Passmore writes about Joad's 1929 book 'Matter,
Life and Value':

"Within a seam-bursting eclecticism, Russell, Bergson and Plato had somehow all
to make room for themselves, as the representatives, respectively, of matter,
life and value. The result was a conglomeration of considerable popular appeal
but little philosophical consequence. The fact remains that Joad - an
invigoratingly polemical broadcaster, essayist and lecturer at a time when the
ideal of 'good taste' was threatening to destroy personality - represented
'philosophy' to a large segment of the British public. What this proves, either
about philosophy or about the British public, I should not care to say" ('A
Hundred Years of Philosophy' p. 278).

In other words, Joad was a radio and television celebrity whom the British
public mistook for a 'philosopher'. Mr Symonds does not agree, and has sought
to set the record straight...

---

C.E.M. JOAD

Dr. Cyril Joad (1891-1953) (Teacher, Philosopher, Writer, Broadcaster, Outcast)
is best remembered, if remembered at all, as the wartime Brains Trust
'Professor' with the famous catchphrase "It all depends what you mean by...",
who popularized philosophy for millions, and "quickened the sluggish mind of
the nation" (London Evening Standard, 1953).

C.E.M. Joad published over 70 books in this country, nearly 30 in America, over
80 Papers, and countless newspaper and magazine articles. He was Head of
Philosophy at Birkbeck College, University of London for 23 years, until his
death in 1953, aged 61.

Cyril Edwin Mitchinson Joad (CEMJ) was a very gifted, but very fallible, human
being. His private life appears to be 'a disaster area', and celebrity hubris
ended with a nemesis in 1948. His popularity and reputation were destroyed by
Winston Churchill in 'Gathering Storm', by the media in a train ticket
'scandal', and by the cruel humiliations of Bertrand Russell, and his
professional disciples. Joad was sacked from the BBC, and the chances of a
Peerage from Clement Attlee, or a Professorship at Birkbeck, were lost.

Cyril Joad's life and work can be usefully divided into three main phases - its
beginning, middle and end - each of which can be sub-divided into 3 main areas:

Joad the Political Philosopher, Pacifist and Atheist

(a) "The Diary of a Dead Officer". Edited by CEMJ in 1919
(re: war poet and friend, Arthur Graeme West).

(b) Federation of Progressive Societies and Individuals,
F.P.S.I. (1933).

(c) The 1933 Oxford Union Debate "That under no
circumstances will we fight for King and Country". [Joad
proposed the motion and won the debate, an event which was
later cited by Churchill as one of the reasons for Hitler's
belief that Britain would never go to war.]

Joad the Wartime Celebrity Philosopher and Brains Trust Man of Reason

(a) The BBC Brains Trust (1941-1948).

(b) 'Teach Yourself Philosophy' (1944).

(c) The fare-dodging scandal (1948).[Joad was successfully
prosecuted for failing to buy a train ticket.]

Joad the Moral Philosopher and Man of Faith

(a) The 1950 Oxford Union Debate "That this house regrets
the influence exercised by the US as the dominant power
among the democratic nations", with the young Robin day
presiding.

(b) 'Shaw and Society' (1953).

(c) 'Recovery of Belief' (1952) and posthumous 'Folly Farm'
(1954).

It is primarily to the third phase we must look, for an answer the second part
of the question.

Joad also made an original contribution to philosophy; that of Christian
Philosophy - a contribution almost entirely disregarded in the late 20th
Century. Cyril Joad said in 1943: "If you object that Christ was not a
philosopher, I can only beg you to wait until you know as much philosophy as I
do before venturing to contradict."

Joad wrote 'The Recovery of Belief - A Restatement of Christian Philosophy', a
year before his death. In this, he clearly explains with great originality, his
Christian 'Transcendence- Immanence' Theory of the Universe.

Joad's Christian Theory of the Nature of Values

Joad adhered to the 'philosophia perennis', which affirms that Values are
Objective not Subjective, and can reduce themselves to Truth, Goodness and
Beauty.

These three Values are "OBJECTIVE in the sense that they are found by the human
mind - found as 'given' in things - and not projected into things or contributed
to them by our own minds, and ULTIMATE, in the sense that whatever we value can
be shown to be valued because of the relation of the thing valued to some one
or other of the three Values. Thus, while other things are valued as means to
one or other of these three, they are valued as ends in themselves.

"Moreover, these Values are not just arbitrary, pieces of cosmic furniture
lying about, as it were, in the universe without explanation, coherence or
connection, but are revelations of a unity that underlies them; are, in fact,
the ways in which God reveals Himself to man. Hence, those human activities
which consist in, or which arise out of, the pursuit of Truth, the cultivation
of moral goodness, or the creation and enjoyment of Beauty, are such that we
cannot help but value and revere them."

"What we call the Values - and it is under this term that the Forms may, I
think, be most appropriately referred to in respect of their most outstanding
manifestations, as Truth, Goodness and Beauty - are the modes of God's
revelation of His Nature to man. For if this is indeed the case, the revelation
must be regarded as the IMMANENCE of a TRANSCENDENT Being in a medium which,
though it manifests, is itself other than, the Being manifested. Now, we
cannot, I suggest, expect to achieve a 'know-how' of the mode of manifestation
of a Divine Being ..."

The Cartesian Mind-Body Problem and Joad's Christian Mind-Body-Soul Theory.

Joad believed that the relation between Mind and Body (Brain) is
"indescribable" because it is "incomprehensible", and therefore rejects the
Cartesian 'Mind-Body' Theory. He puts forward an alternative Christian
'Mind-Body-Soul' Theory.

"The Mind is, it is clear, constantly interacting with the Body and Brain, yet
all attempts to envisage the mode of this interaction have been lamentable
failures. I venture to develop, in an admittedly purely speculative direction,
the hypothesis that there is included, in the make-up of the human personality,
a timeless element. The traditional division of the human being is not twofold
into mind and body, but threefold into mind, body and soul (or spirit). I
suggest that this (threefold) division may approximate more closely to the
truth than any other."

Classic Joad on the difficulty of philosophy

"Philosophy is an exceedingly difficult subject, and most books on philosophy
are unintelligible to most intelligent people. This is partly, but not wholly,
due to the difficulty of the subject matter, which, being the universe, is not
surprisingly complex and obscure. There is no reason, at least I know of none,
why the universe should necessarily be intelligible to the mind of a
twentieth-century human being, and I...remind him how late a comer he is upon
the cosmic scene, and how recently he has begun to think...

"If we put the past of life at one hundred years, then the past human life
works out at about a month, and of human civilisation (giving the most generous
interpretation to the term "civilisation") at about one-and-three-quarter hours.
On the same time-scale, the future of "civilisation" - that is to say, the
future during which it may be supposed that man will continue to think - is
about one hundred thousand years.

"By any reckoning, then, the human mind is very young, and it is not to be
expected that it should, as yet, understand very much of the world in which it
finds itself. Indeed, there is a sense in which the more we know, the more we
become aware of the extent of our ignorance. Suppose, for example, that we
think of knowledge as a little lighted patch, the area of the known, set in a
sea of environing darkness, the limitless area of the unknown. Then, the more
we enlarge the area of the lighted patch, the area of the known, the more also
we enlarge the area of contact with the environing darkness of the unknown. In
philosophy, then, as in daily life, cocksureness is a function of ignorance,
and dunces step in where sages fear to tread. The wise man is he who realises
his limitations."

Joad on the function of philosophy

"It is the business of philosophy, as I conceive it, to seek to understand the
nature of the universe as a whole, not, as do the sciences, some special
department of it, but the whole bag of tricks to which the moral feelings of
the Puritan, the herd instinct of the man in the street, the religious
consciousness of the saint, the aesthetic enjoyment of the artist, the history
of the human race and its contemporary follies, no less than the latest
discoveries of science, contribute.

"He looks for a clue to guide him through the labyrinth, for a system wherewith
to classify, or a purpose in terms of which to make meaningful. Has the
universe, for example, any design, or is it merely a fortuitous concourse of
atoms? Is mind a fundamental feature of the universe, in terms of which we are
ultimately to interpret the rest, or is it a mere accident, an eddy in the
primeval slime, doomed one day to finish its pointless journey with as little
noise and significance as it began it? Are good and evil real and ultimate
principles existing independently of men, or are they merely the names we give
to the things of which we happen to approve and to disapprove?"

(c) Richard Symonds 2002

E-mail: rwsymonds@hotmail.co.uk

AUGUST 16 - THE RWS DIARIES (2008)

2008-08-14T14:01:00.000-07:00

AUGUST 16

It has crossed my mind that all this lethal sabre-rattling (aka war-mongering) by OCEANIA'S 'USraelUK' serves another purpose, other than the conquest/control of EURASIA :

It is a major distraction from the invasion & occupation of Iraq - part of the permanent 'War on Terror' (including Afghanistan) which is an on-going catastrophe for OCEANIA's 'President'...and not a good election-winner for November.

It is also a major distraction from a possible invasion & occupation of Iran - and not likely to be a good election-winner either.

It was Chomsky who said something like : If the media headlines change to sex & corruption scandals (or a McCann-type story - Ed), "CHECK YOUR WALLET"...there's something else going on which 'they' don't want us to know about - and which we are paying for.

It seems that can also hold true for wars...

Get the OCEANIA MEDIA to hype up a possible nuclear war with Russia (to scare us shitless once again); fill the Front Pages & Sky News with US flag-waving in Georgia (instead of that not-good-for-election Middle East business) - and then we won't get bothered with that anymore - it's not on the front pages.

In other words, it's a propaganda con-trick - a Big Lie - to 'manufacture consent' and magic 'necessary illusions'.

It's also a massive gamble on the part of the 'Master Puppeteers' of Oceania, who have a lot riding on this. There is a feeling (I get) of complete desperation in OCEANIA'S media mainstream - Murdoch-BBC-CNN etc - to pump us up with propaganda bullshit.

This suggests (to me) that the hold they have over us is becoming very fragile - and could fall apart at any time. In other words, we (the mass of people) will 'rumble' what they are doing to us, and take action - even if we are trapped & enslaved by debt, especially due to the manufactured 'credit crunch'.

But, at present, it seems OCEANIA continues on course with its pre-planned 'New World Order' - especially with EURASIA'S Poland signing up on this insane Defence Shield with OCEANIA's 'USraelUK'. Eurasia's France & Czechoslovakia have already been 'bought' by the US - stuffing money & 'goodies in their pockets in exchange for Airbases etc. Of course, the UK became a US satellite state some time ago (aka Airstrip One').

Maybe the Washington-Pentagon planners were already very familiar with Orwell's 1948 Book - Nineteen Eighty-Four. Orwell prophesied 3 Super States - OCEANIA, EURASIA, EASTASIA. Maybe the planners are wanting only two Global Super States - OCEANIA (US) and EASTASIA (China)...much like the Olympic Medals table ?

Anyway, I think the present sabre-rattling with Russia (over Georgia) is being seen as a possible election-winner by McBush & their mafia-styled gangster regime.

And if that doesn't work - there's always the actual use of nuclear weapons far away from home, to secure an election victory at home.

It worked well in Hiroshima & Nagasaki.

A GLOBAL CONFLICT EXPLAINED IN A (HYPOTHETICAL) LOCAL CONTEXT
http://gatwickcity.phpbb3now.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=134&start=250

West Sussex (Georgia) becomes an independent state from England (Russia), with the help of Texas (US).
Crawley & Horsham (South Ossetia & Abkhazia) don't want to be part of an independent West Sussex (Georgia) but want to remain part of England (Russia).
West Sussex (Georgia) completely destroys Ifield in Crawley (Tskhinvali in South Ossetia) by sending bombs from Chichester in West Sussex (Gorin in Georgia), with the help of Texas (US).
England (Russia) takes military action against West Sussex (Georgia) by taking control of Chichester (Gorin), and militarily protects Crawley & Horsham (South Ossetia & Abkhazia).
Texas (US) sends troops into West Sussex (Georgia), warning England (Russia) not to take any further military action in West Sussex (Georgia)...or else.
England (Russia), with Crawley & Horsham (South Ossetia & Abkhazia) stay on military alert...
Texas (US) comes to West Sussex (Georgia) with a 'peace plan', and a message to England (Russia) - get out of West Sussex (Georgia)...or else.
Chichester (Gorin) becomes a very tense and dangerous place to live.

The 'War Game' continues...

AUGUST 15 - THE RWS DIARIES (2008)

2008-08-14T01:17:00.000-07:00

"WE EXPECT RUSSIA TO MEET ITS COMMITMENT TO CEASE ALL MILITARY ACTIVITIES IN GEORGIA" (US PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH/SECRETARY OF STATE CONDOLEEZZA RICE - AUGUST 13 & 14)

PURE DOUBLETHINK
http://gatwickcity.phpbb3now.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=631&start=20

AUGUST 14 - THE RWS DIARIES (2008)

2008-08-13T13:56:00.000-07:00

AUGUST 14

Remember Mikhail Gobachev - last President of the Soviet Union and Nobel Peace Prize winner ?

Well, he had this to say about OCEANIA-backed Georgia and EURASIA's RUSSIA :

"What happened on the night of Aug. 7 is beyond comprehension. The Georgian military attacked the South Ossetian capital of Tskhinvali with multiple rocket launchers designed to devastate large areas. Russia had to respond. To accuse it of aggression against "small, defenseless Georgia" is not just hypocritical but shows a lack of humanity.

Mounting a military assault against innocents was a reckless decision whose tragic consequences, for thousands of people of different nationalities, are now clear. The Georgian leadership could do this only with the perceived support and encouragement of a much more powerful force. Georgian armed forces were trained by hundreds of U.S. instructors, and its sophisticated military equipment was bought in a number of countries. This, coupled with the promise of NATO membership, emboldened Georgian leaders into thinking that they could get away with a "blitzkrieg" in South Ossetia.

In other words, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili was expecting unconditional support from the West, and the West had given him reason to think he would have it. Now that the Georgian military assault has been routed, both the Georgian government and its supporters should rethink their position..."
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20493.htm

The writer was the last president of the Soviet Union. He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1990 and is president of the Gorbachev Foundation, a Moscow think tank. A version of this article, in Russian, will be published in the Rossiyskaya Gazeta newspaper tomorrow.

And now the lunatic 'PRESIDENT OF OCEANIA' - USraelUK - is sending US troops into EURASIA'S Georgia :
http://news.aol.co.uk/bush-sends-us-troops-to-georgia/article/2008081311413054822576

That's rather like Russia sending EURASIA'S troops to OCEANIA'S Cuba - just off the US mainland. No guesses what the US response to that would be - so what will be the Russian response ?

A war-mongering cult of insane gangsters at the White House & Pentagon have seized control of the US Government, and is now provoking a nuclear war - not just in Iran, but now in & around Russia.

God help us all if we can't stop them.

Let's hope and pray it's just a simple case of 'adolescent attention seeking' by an all-powerful OCEANIA capitalist bully, who just can't stand an all-powerful EASTASIA communist China stealing the limelight on the global Olympic stage.

In my dreams...

AUGUST 13 - THE RWS DIARIES (2008)

2008-08-13T00:43:00.000-07:00

AUGUST 13 2008

Looking at the Olympic Gold Medals Table politically, it looks like "WAR MINUS THE SHOOTING" (ORWELL) between AMERICAN CAPITALISM (ie the falling Superpower of Oceania), and CHINESE COMMUNISM (ie the rising Superpower of Eastasia) :

GOLD MEDAL TABLE (as at 08.51 13 Aug)
1. CHINA - 16
2. USA - 10

3. SOUTH KOREA - 5
(I was looking for NORTH KOREA, and they have had a name-change - it's now the DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF KOREA ("Dem P Rep Korea" according the BBC Sport's Medals Table)

I thought China used to be called the "Democratic People's Republic of China ? Now, it seems, they just call themselves "China". Less of a mouthful, for sure.

Pity Korea can't call themselves "Korea" (or Ireland just "Ireland"), but that's politics for you.

EURASIA'S Germany managed it (remember East Germany & West Germany & THAT Wall?).

EURASIA'S Russia managed it (remember the Soviet USSR ?)

Can you imagine the United States of America calling themselves the Democratic People's Republic of America, or the United Kingdom calling themselves...

AUGUST 12 - THE RWS DIARIES (2008)

2008-08-12T00:35:00.000-07:00

AUGUST 12 2008

Things are now really hotting up in the New Cold War/Old Media Propaganda War between OCEANIA (eg The US, UK, Israel - 'USraelUK') - EU (?), NATO, UN & 'The International Community') and EURASIA (eg RUSSIA, South Ossetia & Abkhazia).

BBC CEEFAX today ("New Georgia clashes mar UN moves", August 12) : "Russian-backed rebels in Abkhazia say they have begun an operation against Georgian forces..."

We have to keep our eye on the ball here, or we will drown in obfuscation - a very effective propaganda weapon...so we mustn't give up on this - that's what 'they' want (whoever 'they' might be).

The BBC propaganda spin should at least read : Russian-backed Abkhazia say they have begun an operation against US-backed Georgia - a former Russian state.

But even that can be too simplistic. Can you imagine Russian forces playing lethal war games like this in, say, Cuba - just off the US coast ?

I can't help feeling this is analogous to the Northern Ireland conflict - but worse : The British Empire (Russian Empire) colonised Ireland (Georgia). Ireland wanted independence & gets it (Southern Ireland/Eire), with the help of the European Union (Georgia/American Empire), but Northern Ireland did not (South Ossetia). The British Empire (Russian Empire) comes to the help of Northern Ireland (South Ossetia), and the European Union (American Empire) comes to the help of Eire (Georgia)...and that's when the analogy stops clarifying and starts getting confusing, so I'll stop.

Let's take an example from the 'real world' - this is a report from "MS" on January 30 2002 - "West tightens grip on Uzbekistan" :

"The United States and the European Union unveiled harsher controls on Uzbekistan yesterday, ordering the Central Asian state to adopt a 'market economy'.

"US Assistant Secretary of State for Eurasian Affairs, Elizabeth Jones, signed 'a comprehensive and far-reaching' declaration with Uzbek Foreign Minister Abdulaziz Kamilov, which included security issues.

"Uzbek President Islam Karimov has alloed the deployment of 1,500 troops at the country's Khanabad airbase, as part of the US military push in the resource-rich region.

"Brussels praised Uzbekistan for its role in the US-led attacks on Afghanistan, and urged it to embrace a market economy.

" 'The situation in and around Afghanistan offers the opportunity for renewed co-operation with Uzbekistan and Central Asia', the EU said in a statement"

Seems to me like a 2002 example of US foreign policy - FULL SPECTRUM DOMINANCE-FSD (aka Global Totalitarianism)(aka Global Bully).

It appears I'm not alone...

Monday, August 11, 2008

"COLOSSAL DAMAGE TO THE ENTIRE REGION"
http://rastibini.blogspot.com/2008/08/colossal-damage-to-entire-region.html

"I think there is a good reason why the propaganda system works that way. It recognizes that the public will not support the actual policies. Therefore it is important to prevent any knowledge or understanding of them."
~ Noam Chomsky.

Here's Bush's take on the ass-kicking that Russia's applying to Georgia:

"Russia has invaded a sovereign neighboring state and threatens a democratic government elected by its people. Such an action is unacceptable in the 21st century."

Let's change one word and see what we get:

"Turkey has invaded a sovereign neighboring state and threatens a democratic government elected by its people. Such an action is unacceptable in the 21st century."

Isn't that what Bush should have said in February, when Turkey invaded Iraq? But, during that invasion, it was HPG that was doing the ass-kicking.

In another fine example of hypocrisy, we have former Unocal "advisor" and Afghan neocon toady Zalmay Khalilzad making the same kind of stupid statements as his boss:

"Is your government's objective regime change in Georgia, the overthrow of the democratically elected government of Georgia?" Khalilzad asked Vitaly Churkin, the Russian ambassador.

He said the days of overthrowing leaders by military means in Europe were gone and that Russia's nostalgia about the past was being reflected in the present conflict.

Churkin's replied that "regime change is an American expression. We do not use such an expression".

But he added: "But sometimes there are occasions, and we know from history, that there are different leaders who come to power, either democratically or semi-democratically, and they become an obstacle."

Western media lies about the Russia/Georgia conflict is certainly another case for the application of Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman's Propaganda Model, as outlined in Manufacturing Consent. Within 24 hours from initial news reports, in which Georgia invaded South Ossetia, the capitalist corporate media immediately ran headlines saying "Russia invades Georgia".

The reality is that the headlines should have read "US invades Russia".

AUGUST 11 - THE RWS DIARIES (2008)

2008-08-11T01:37:00.000-07:00

AUGUST 11 2008

More truth is beginning to emerge, as the manufacturers' of illusions of truth (eg the mainstream media) desperately attempt to stir the OCEANIA masses against the Russians - especially in the UK.

It appears Georgia (within EURASIA & formerly part of USSSR-Russia) is 'in the pocket' of the US (OCEANIA), and are seeking independence from Russia. On the other hand, South Ossetia (which is within Georgia) doesn't want independence from Russia - it wants to continue to be part of EURASIA - and doesn't like the pro-Oceania/pro-US leanings of Georgia (presumably).

EURASIA'S Russia is, unsurprisingly, deeply worried that OCEANIA's US will encroach on part of its territory in Eurasia (eg military bases in Georgia) - so understandably is taking action to 'protect' its South Ossetians.

This all reminds me of Goldstein and part of 'War Is Peace' :

"None of the three super-states ever attempts any maneuver which involves the risk of serious defeat. When any large operation is undertaken, it is usually a surprise attack against an ally. The strategy that all three powers are following, or pretend to themselves that they are following, is the same. The plan is, by a combination of fighting, bargaining, and well-timed strokes of treachery, to acquire a ring of bases completely encircling one or other of the rival states, and then to sign a pact of friendship with that rival and remain on peaceful terms for so many years as to lull suspicion to sleep. During this time rockets loaded with atomic bombs can be assembled at all the strategic spots; finally they will all be fired simultaneously, with effects so devastating as to make retaliation impossible. It will then be time to sign a pact of friendship with the remaining world-power, in preparation for another attack. This scheme, it is hardly necessary to say, is a mere daydream, impossible of realization. Moreover, no fighting ever occurs except in the disputed areas round the Equator and the Pole: no invasion of enemy territory is ever undertaken. This explains the fact that in some places the frontiers between the superstates are arbitrary. Eurasia, for example, could easily conquer the British Isles, which are geographically part of Europe, or on the other hand it would be possible for Oceania to push its frontiers to the Rhine or even to the Vistula. But this would violate the principle, followed on all sides though never formulated, of cultural integrity. If Oceania were to conquer the areas that used once to be known as France and Germany, it would be necessary either to exterminate the inhabitants, a task of great physical difficulty, or to assimilate a population of about a hundred million people, who, so far as technical development goes, are roughly on the Oceanic level. The problem is the same for all three super-states. It is absolutely necessary to their structure that there should be no contact with foreigners, except, to a limited extent, with war prisoners and coloured slaves. Even the official ally of the moment is always regarded with the darkest suspicion. War prisoners apart, the average citizen of Oceania never sets eyes on a citizen of either Eurasia or Eastasia, and he is forbidden the knowledge of foreign languages. If he were allowed contact with foreigners he would discover that they are creatures similar to himself and that most of what he has been told about them is lies. The sealed world in which he lives would be broken, and the fear, hatred, and self-righteousness on which his morale depends might evaporate. It is therefore realized on all sides that however often Persia, or Egypt, or Java, or Ceylon may change hands, the main frontiers must never be crossed by anything except bombs."

AUGUST 10 - THE RWS DIARIES (2008)

2008-08-10T09:48:00.000-07:00

AUGUST 10 2008

Can't help feeling this conflict in EURASIA between Russia & Georgia is being hyped-up by the media in OCEANIA (eg US, Israel & here in 'Airstrip One' UK) - to turn our hearts & minds against the Russians.

The Pentagon string-pullers are mostly old Cold War Warriors, so this should come as no surprise.

The unholy catastrophic mess which is Iraq, the insanity of a possible attack on Iran, and the Communist Chinese in EASTASIA holding the Olympics - appear too complicated for these Cold War lunatics.

They seem to be saying to themselves : "Let's just have a Neo-Cold War against our old enemy - the Russian Commies - we can control that situation".

These 'War Games' played by the US are becoming globally lethal - and threaten the survival of not just humanity, but also our species.

Lest we forget - Orwell's 'Nineteen Eighty-Four' nightmare vision was set in Oceania AFTER an atomic/nuclear attack...

AUGUST 9 - THE RWS DIARIES (2008)

2008-08-09T08:53:00.000-07:00

THE RWS BLOG DIARY

AUGUST 9 2008

"OCEANIA" (eg US-UK-ISRAEL) are looking with envy at "EASTASIA" (China), as the latter start the Olympics in Beijing with a wonderful welcome to all-comers around the world - including Iraq and the US of A.

I didn't know there were 56 ethnic groups in China - the diversity of which was openly celebrated in the opening Olympic ceremony (pity about Tibet).

"EURASIA" looking unstable, with Russia, South Ossetia & Georgia at war - but I'm not at all clear what's going on - despite orgasmic media coverage here in the UK...and this is worrying :
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20469.htm

"RWS" HAS NOW MOVED TO "GATWICK CITY"

2008-06-02T08:29:00.000-07:00

"RWS NEWS - COMMENT - ANALYSIS" has now moved to "GATWICK CITY OF IDEAS DISCUSSION FORUM" :

http://gatwickcity.phpbb3now.com/viewforum.php?f=2

You are most welcome at this new Discussion Forum.

THE BRAINS TRUST

2007-10-20T14:57:00.000-07:00

I have the seed of a big idea, and I'm just 'thinking out loud' here - putting my thoughts into words - 'jamming'...

I was in Marks and Sparks today, and noticed this up the elevator :

"PLAN A. BECAUSE THERE IS NO PLAN B."

Plan A, to me, is for humanity ('the people') to prevent a nuclear holocaust - THE pre-condition for humanity's survival.

Can we prevent it ? We must. It's as simple as that.

The American Government, under Franklin Roosevelt, brought together a "Brain Trust" after the 1930's Wall Street 'Crash' :
http://www.nps.gov/archive/elro/glossary/brains-trust.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_Trust

The British Government, via the BBC, brought together a 'Brains Trust' when the Nazis were on the point of invading and occupying this precious Isle :
http://www.whirligig-tv.co.uk/radio/brainstrust.htm
http://thecyriljoadsociety.wordpress.com/2007/06/02/the-on-line-brains-trust-june-2007/

We need a Brains Trust, of the people, to prevent a nuclear holocaust.

THE GATWICK CITY 'IDEAS AND DISCUSSION' FORUM (aka 'THE GATWICK FORUM')

2007-09-08T08:48:00.000-07:00

A small group of us are setting this up - with a little help - please register and discuss your ideas !

THE GATWICK CITY 'IDEAS AND DISCUSSION' FORUM (aka 'The Gatwick Forum')

http://gatwickcity.phpbb3now.com/viewforum.php?f=2&sid=92aa80bbafa38e34a0c98d1f06f392c1

WHAT WE AIM TO DO :

This Gatwick City Forum will discuss ideas - any ideas - without constraint. It will be open to anyone who can think - and does not want others to do the thinking for them.

THIS FORUM - THE REASON WHY :

Our inability to discuss ideas freely - and without constraint - has reached such dangerous levels that it now threatens humanity's survival.

A war on muddled thinking must now be declared as a pre-condition of that survival.
If it is thinkable, it is winnable.

The Gatwick City 'Ideas and Discussion' Forum is set up for anybody to discuss any idea freely and without constraint - so that humanity can survive and thrive in the 21st century.

And, hopefully, it will be seriously enjoyable to all concerned.

SIX AFFAIRS TO RAISE A SMILE

2007-09-07T01:32:00.000-07:00

The 1st Affair:

A married man was having an affair with his secretary.

One day they went her place and made love all afternoon. Exhausted,

they fell asleep and woke up at 8 PM ..

The man hurriedly dressed and told his lover to take his shoes outside

and rub them in the grass and dirt.

He put on his shoes and drove home.

"Where have you been?" his wife demanded.

"I can't lie to you," he replied, "I'm having an affair with my

secretary. We had sex all afternoon."

"You lying bastard, I saw your shoes, You've been playing golf!"

The 2nd Affair:

A middle-aged couple had two beautiful daughters but always talked

about having a son.

They decided to try one last time for the son they always wanted.

The wife got pregnant and delivered a healthy baby y boy.

The joyful father rushed to the nursery to see his new son.

He was horrified at the ugliest child he had ever seen.

He told his wife, "There's no way I can be the father of this baby. Look

at the two beautiful daughters I fathered! Have you been fooling around

behind my back?"

The wife smiled sweetly and replied, "Not this time!"

The 3rd Affair:

A mortician was working late one night

He examined the body of Mr.. Schwartz, about to be cremated, and made

a startling discovery. Schwartz had the largest private part he had ever

seen!

"I'm sorry Mr.. Schwartz," the mortician commented, "I can't allow you to be

cremated with such an impressive private part. It must be saved for

posterity."

So, he removed it, stuffed it into his briefcase, and took it home.

"I have to show you something you won't believe," he said to his wife,

opening

his briefcase.

"My God!" the wife exclaimed, "Schwartz is dead?!?!"

The 4th Affair:

A woman was in bed with her lover when she heard her husband opening the

front door.

"Hurry," she said, "stand in the corner."

She rubbed baby oil all over him, then dusted him with talcum powder.

"Don't move until I tell you," she said. "Pretend you're a statue."

"What's this?" the husband inquired as he entered the room.

"Oh it's a statue." she replied. "The Smith's bought one and I liked it

so much I got one for us, too."

No more was said, not even when they went to bed.

Around 2 AM the husband got up, went to the kitchen and returned with a

sandwich and a beer.

"Here," he said to the statue, "have this. I stood like that for

two days at the Smith's and nobody offered me a damned thing."

The 5th Affair:

A man walked into a cafe, went to the bar and ordered a beer.

"Certainly, Sir, that'll be one cent."

"One Cent?" the man thought.

He glanced at the menu ! and asked, "How much for a nice juicy

steak and a bottle of wine?"

"A nickel," the barman replied.

"A nickel?" exclaimed the man "Where's the guy who owns this place?"

The bartender replied, "Upstairs, with my wife."

The man asked, "What's he doing upstairs with your wife?"

The bartender replied, "The same thing I'm doing to his business down

here."

The 6th Affair:

Jake was dying. His wife sat at the bedside.

He looked up and said weakly, "I have something I must confess."

"There's no need to," his wife replied.

"No," he insisted, "I want to die in peace. I slept with your sister,

your best friend, her best friend, and your mother!"

"I know, I know," she replied. "Now just rest and let the poison work."

(Hat-tip : My wife)

NEWS FLASH - ANCIENT PARISH OF IFIELD SAVED FROM PREDATORY DEVELOPERS ?

2007-09-06T08:45:00.000-07:00

Just this minute received news - via The Brighton Argus - that the ancient Parish of Ifield (including Ifield Golf Club) may have been saved from predatory developers...will need to confirm...will keep you posted.

BANNED FROM THE CRAWLEY ON-LINE FORUM

2007-09-06T08:24:00.000-07:00

Oh dear, I've been banned from the Crawley On Line Forum

http://www.crawleyonline.org/portal.php

And I didn't even swear either !

Fu...Fun times of censorship we live in these days.

LIES AND LIARS

2007-09-04T15:37:00.000-07:00

A man died and went to heaven.

As he stood in front of St. Peter at the Pearly Gates, he saw a huge wall of clocks behind him.

He asked, "What are all those clocks?"

St. Peter answered, "Those are Lie-Clocks. Everyone on Earth has a Lie-Clock.
"Every time you lie, the hands on your clock will move."

"Oh," said the man, "whose clock is that?"

"That's Mother Teresa's. The hands have never moved, indicating she never told a lie."

"Incredible," said the man. "And whose clock is that one?"

St. Peter responded, "That's Abraham Lincoln's clock. The hands have moved twice, telling us that Abe told only two lies in his entire Life."

"Where's President Bush's clock ?" asked the man.

"That's in Jesus' office...... He's using it as a ceiling fan".

(Hat-tip : Ben Trovato - chez 'Anticant')

"PROLIXITY" = LONGWINDEDNESS = VERBAL DIARRHOEA = BULLSHIT

2007-09-02T09:50:00.000-07:00

George Orwell, Noam Chomsky, The Guardian, Blogging...and Prolixity :

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2160684,00.html
"Would Orwell have been a Blogger" - Guardian Comment is Free - September 2 2007

PROGRESSIVE BI-LATERAL SENSORI-NEURAL NERVE DEAFNESS

2007-08-31T14:17:00.000-07:00

This is a special kind of deafness which is very difficult - almost impossible - to correct with (even the best) hearing aids.

It is a dis-ability - which I have - and it's getting worse.

Tonight I have not been coping with this dis-ability at all well...and that would be an under-statement.

"Self-pity", I hear some of you say..."Snap out of it".

No comment.

I have lost my job - which I loved - confidence, self-worth and sense of humour are 'shot through', as is my bank account. I am becoming very anxious - and almost impossible to live with at the moment....it's tough on the family

Why am I writing about this here ?

Why indeed.

It is said that Man is primarily motivated by the pursuit of pleasure, and the avoidance of pain. Well, writing gives me enormous pleasure, and pain is avoided, so perhaps that is why I am writing this...to ease the pain and seek the pleasure ?

Maybe so - maybe not.

Whatever - I just want to feel happier than I'm feeling now.

And when I look at the idiots who govern us....ooooh, let's write about that...and divert attention from the inside out.

NOAM CHOMSKY (GLOBAL POLITICAL ANALYST ET AL) IN FINE FORM - YET AGAIN

2007-08-28T02:55:00.000-07:00

Tuesday, August 28, 2007

Comprehensive Chomsky article on Cold War II versus Iran

These are exciting days in Washington, as the government directs its energies to the demanding task of "containing Iran" in what Washington Post correspondent Robin Wright, joining others, calls "Cold War II."[1]

During Cold War I, the task was to contain two awesome forces. The lesser and more moderate force was "an implacable enemy whose avowed objective is world domination by whatever means and at whatever cost." Hence "if the United States is to survive," it will have to adopt a "repugnant philosophy" and reject "acceptable norms of human conduct" and the "long-standing American concepts of `fair play'" that had been exhibited with such searing clarity in the conquest of the national territory, the Philippines, Haiti and other beneficiaries of "the idealistic new world bent on ending inhumanity," as the newspaper of record describes our noble mission.[2] The judgments about the nature of the super-Hitler and the necessary response are those of General Jimmy Doolittle, in a critical assessment of the CIA commissioned by President Eisenhower in 1954. They are quite consistent with those of the Truman administration liberals, the "wise men" who were "present at the creation," notoriously in NSC 68 but in fact quite consistently.

In the face of the Kremlin's unbridled aggression in every corner of the world, it is perhaps understandable that the US resisted in defense of human values with a savage display of torture, terror, subversion and violence while doing "everything in its power to alter or abolish any regime not openly allied with America," as Tim Weiner summarizes the doctrine of the Eisenhower administration in his recent history of the CIA.[3] And just as the Truman liberals easily matched their successors in fevered rhetoric about the implacable enemy and its campaign to rule the world, so did John F. Kennedy, who bitterly condemned the "monolithic and ruthless conspiracy," and dismissed the proposal of its leader (Khrushchev) for sharp mutual cuts in offensive weaponry, then reacted to his unilateral implementation of these proposals with a huge military build-up. The Kennedy brothers also quickly surpassed Eisenhower in violence and terror, as they "unleashed covert action with an unprecedented intensity" (Wiener), doubling Eisenhower's annual record of major CIA covert operations, with horrendous consequences worldwide, even a close brush with terminal nuclear war.[4]

But at least it was possible to deal with ..:NAMESPACE PREFIX = ST1 />Russia, unlike the fiercer enemy, China. The more thoughtful scholars recognized that Russia was poised uneasily between civilization and barbarism. As Henry Kissinger later explained in his academic essays, only the West has undergone the Newtonian revolution and is therefore "deeply committed to the notion that the real world is external to the observer," while the rest still believe "that the real world is almost completely internal to the observer," the "basic division" that is "the deepest problem of the contemporary international order." But Russia, unlike third word peasants who think that rain and sun are inside their heads, was perhaps coming to the realization that the world is not just a dream, Kissinger felt.

Not so the still more savage and bloodthirsty enemy, China, which for liberal Democrat intellectuals at various times rampaged as a "a Slavic Manchukuo," a blind puppet of its Kremlin master, or a monster utterly unconstrained as it pursued its crazed campaign to crush the world in its tentacles, or whatever else circumstances demanded. The remarkable tale of doctrinal fanaticism from the 1940s to the '70s, which makes contemporary rhetoric seem rather moderate, is reviewed by James Peck in his highly revealing study of the national security culture, Washington's China.

In later years, there were attempts to mimic the valiant deeds of the defenders of virtue from the two villainous global conquerors and their loyal slaves – for example, when the Gipper strapped on his cowboy boots and declared a National Emergency because Nicaraguan hordes were only two days from Harlingen Texas, though as he courageously informed the press, despite the tremendous odds "I refuse to give up. I remember a man named Winston Churchill who said, `Never give in. Never, never, never.' So we won't." With consequences that need not be reviewed.

Even with the best of efforts, however, the attempts never were able to recapture the glorious days of Cold War I. But now, at last, those heights might be within reach, as another implacable enemy bent on world conquest has arisen, which we must contain before it destroys us all: Iran.

Perhaps it's a lift to the spirits to be able to recover those heady Cold War days when at least there was a legitimate force to contain, however dubious the pretexts and disgraceful the means. But it is instructive to take a closer look at the contours of Cold War II as they are being designed by "the former Kremlinologists now running U.S. foreign policy, such as Rice and Gates" (Wright).

The task of containment is to establish "a bulwark against Iran's growing influence in the Middle East," Mark Mazzetti and Helene Cooper explain in the New York Times (July 31). To contain Iran's influence we must surround Iran with US and NATO ground forces, along with massive naval deployments in the Persian Gulf and of course incomparable air power and weapons of mass destruction. And we must provide a huge flow of arms to what Condoleezza Rice calls "the forces of moderation and reform" in the region, the brutal tyrannies of Egypt and Saudi Arabia and, with particular munificence, Israel, by now virtually an adjunct of the militarized high-tech US economy. All to contain Iran's influence. A daunting challenge indeed.

And daunting it is. In Iraq, Iranian support is welcomed by much of the majority Shi'ite population. In an August visit to Teheran, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki met with the supreme leader Ali Khamenei, President Ahmadinejad and other senior officials, and thanked Tehran for its "positive and constructive" role in improving security in Iraq, eliciting a sharp reprimand from President Bush, who "declares Teheran a regional peril and asserts the Iraqi leader must understand," to quote the headline of the Los Angeles Times report on al-Maliki's intellectual deficiencies. A few days before, also greatly to Bush's discomfiture, Afghan President Hamid Karzai, Washington's favorite, described Iran as "a helper and a solution" in his country.[5] Similar problems abound beyond Iran's immediate neighbors. In Lebanon, according to polls, most Lebanese see Iranian-backed Hezbollah "as a legitimate force defending their country from Israel," Wright reports. And in Palestine, Iranian-backed Hamas won a free election, eliciting savage punishment of the Palestinian population by the US and Israel for the crime of voting "the wrong way," another episode in "democracy promotion."

But no matter. The aim of US militancy and the arms flow to the moderates is to counter "what everyone in the region believes is a flexing of muscles by a more aggressive Iran," according to an unnamed senior U.S. government official – "everyone" being the technical term used to refer to Washington and its more loyal clients.[6] Iran's aggression consists in its being welcomed by many within the region, and allegedly supporting resistance to the US occupation of neighboring Iraq.

It's likely, though little discussed, that a prime concern about Iran's influence is to the East, where in mid-August "Russia and China today host Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at a summit of a Central Asian security club designed to counter U.S. influence in the region," the business press reports.[7] The "security club" is the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which has been slowly taking shape in recent years. Its membership includes not only the two giants Russia and China, but also the energy-rich Central Asian states Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Tajikistan. Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan was a guest of honor at the August meeting. "In another unwelcome development for the Americans, Turkmenistan's President Gurbanguly Berdymukhammedov also accepted an invitation to attend the summit," another step its improvement of relations with Russia, particularly in energy, reversing a long-standing policy of isolation from Russia. "Russia in May secured a deal to build a new pipeline to import more gas from Turkmenistan, bolstering its dominant hold on supplies to Europe and heading off a competing U.S.-backed plan that would bypass Russian territory."[8]

Along with Iran, there are three other official observer states: India, Pakistan and Mongolia. Washington's request for similar status was denied. In 2005 the SCO called for a timetable for termination of any US military presence in Central Asia. The participants at the August meeting flew to the Urals to attend the first joint Russia-China military exercises on Russian soil.

Association of Iran with the SCO extends its inroads into the Middle East, where China has been increasing trade and other relations with the jewel in the crown, Saudi Arabia. There is an oppressed Shi'ite population in Saudi Arabia that is also susceptible to Iran's influence – and happens to sit on most of Saudi oil. About 40% of Middle East oil is reported to be heading East, not West.[9] As the flow Eastward increases, US control declines over this lever of world domination, a "stupendous source of strategic power," as the State Department described Saudi oil 60 years ago.

In Cold War I, the Kremlin had imposed an iron curtain and built the Berlin Wall to contain Western influence. In Cold War II, Wright reports, the former Kremlinologists framing policy are imposing a "green curtain" to bar Iranian influence. In short, government-media doctrine is that the Iranian threat is rather similar to the Western threat that the Kremlin sought to contain, and the US is eagerly taking on the Kremlin's role in the thrilling "new Cold War."

All of this is presented without noticeable concern. Nevertheless, the recognition that the US government is modeling itself on Stalin and his successors in the new Cold War must be arousing at least some flickers of embarrassment. Perhaps that is how we can explain the ferocious Washington Post editorial announcing that Iran has escalated its aggressiveness to a Hot War: "the Revolutionary Guard, a radical state within Iran's Islamic state, is waging war against the United States and trying to kill as many American soldiers as possible." The US must therefore "fight back," the editors thunder, finding quite "puzzling...the murmurs of disapproval from European diplomats and others who say they favor using diplomacy and economic pressure, rather than military action, to rein in Iran," even in the face of its outright aggression. The evidence that Iran is waging war against the US is now conclusive. After all, it comes from an administration that has never deceived the American people, even improving on the famous stellar honesty of its predecessors.

Suppose that for once Washington's charges happen to be true, and Iran really is providing Shi'ite militias with roadside bombs that kill American forces, perhaps even making use of the some of the advanced weaponry lavishly provided to the Revolutionary Guard by Ronald Reagan in order to fund the illegal war against Nicaragua, under the pretext of arms for hostages (the number of hostages tripled during these endeavors).[10] If the charges are true, then Iran could properly be charged with a minuscule fraction of the iniquity of the Reagan administration, which provided Stinger missiles and other high-tech military aid to the "insurgents" seeking to disrupt Soviet efforts to bring stability and justice to Afghanistan, as they saw it. Perhaps Iran is even guilty of some of the crimes of the Roosevelt administration, which assisted terrorist partisans attacking peaceful and sovereign Vichy France in 1940-41, and had thus declared war on Germany even before Pearl Harbor.

One can pursue these questions further. The CIA station chief in Pakistan in 1981, Howard Hart, reports that "I was the first chief of station ever sent abroad with this wonderful order: `Go kill Soviet soldiers'. Imagine! I loved it." Of course "the mission was not to liberate Afghanistan," Tim Wiener writes in his history of the CIA, repeating the obvious. But "it was a noble goal," he writes. Killing Russians with no concern for the fate of Afghans is a "noble goal." But support for resistance to a US invasion and occupation would be a vile act and declaration of war.

Without irony, the Bush administration and the media charge that Iran is "meddling" in Iraq, otherwise presumably free from foreign interference. The evidence is partly technical. Do the serial numbers on the Improvised Explosive Devices really trace back to Iran? If so, does the leadership of Iran know about the IEDs, or only the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. Settling the debate, the White House plans to brand the Revolutionary Guard as a "specially designated global terrorist" force, an unprecedented action against a national military branch, authorizing Washington to undertake a wide range of punitive actions. Watching in disbelief, much of the world asks whether the US military, invading and occupying Iran's neighbors, might better merit this charge -- or its Israeli client, now about to receive a huge increase in military aid to commemorate 40 years of harsh occupation and illegal settlement, and its fifth invasion of Lebanon a year ago.

It is instructive that Washington's propaganda framework is reflexively accepted, apparently without notice, in US and other Western commentary and reporting, apart from the marginal fringe of what is called 'the loony left." What is considered "criticism" is skepticism as to whether all of Washington's charges about Iranian aggression in Iraq are true. It might be an interesting research project to see how closely the propaganda of Russia, Nazi Germany, and other aggressors and occupiers matched the standards of today's liberal press and commentators..

The comparisons are of course unfair. Unlike German and Russian occupiers, American forces are in Iraq by right, on the principle, too obvious even to enunciate, that the US owns the world. Therefore, as a matter of elementary logic, the US cannot invade and occupy another country. The US can only defend and liberate others. No other category exists. Predecessors, including the most monstrous, have commonly sworn by the same principle, but again there is an obvious difference: they were Wrong, and we are Right. QED.

Another comparison comes to mind, which is studiously ignored when we are sternly admonished of the ominous consequences that might follow withdrawal of US troops from Iraq. The preferred analogy is Indochina, highlighted in a shameful speech by the President on August 22. That analogy can perhaps pass muster among those who have succeeded in effacing from their minds the record of US actions in Indochina, including the destruction of much of Vietnam and the murderous bombing of Laos and Cambodia as the US began its withdrawal from the wreckage of South Vietnam. In Cambodia, the bombing was in accord with Kissinger's genocidal orders: "anything that flies on anything that moves" – actions that drove "an enraged populace into the arms of an insurgency [the Khmer Rouge] that had enjoyed relatively little support before the Kissinger-Nixon bombing was inaugurated," as Cambodia specialists Owen Taylor and Ben Kiernan observe in a highly important study that passed virtually without notice, in which they reveal that the bombing was five times the incredible level reported earlier, greater than all allied bombing in World War II. Completely suppressing all relevant facts, it is then possible for the President and many commentators to present Khmer Rouge crimes as a justification for continuing to devastate Iraq

But although the grotesque Indochina analogy receives much attention, the obvious analogy is ignored: the Russian withdrawal from Afghanistan, which, as Soviet analysts predicted, led to shocking violence and destruction as the country was taken over by Reagan's favorites, who amused themselves by such acts as throwing acid in the faces of women in Kabul they regarded as too liberated, and then virtually destroyed the city and much else, creating such havoc and terror that the population actually welcomed the Taliban. That analogy could indeed be invoked without utter absurdity by advocates of "staying the course," but evidently it is best forgotten.

Under the heading "Secretary Rice's Mideast mission: contain Iran," the press reports Rice's warning that Iran is "the single most important single-country challenge to...US interests in the Middle East." That is a reasonable judgment. Given the long-standing principle that Washington must do "everything in its power to alter or abolish any regime not openly allied with America," Iran does pose a unique challenge, and it is natural that the task of containing Iranian influence should be a high priority.

As elsewhere, Bush administration rhetoric is relatively mild in this case. For the Kennedy administration, "Latin America was the most dangerous area in the world" when there was a threat that the progressive Cheddi Jagan might win a free election in British Guiana, overturned by CIA shenanigans that handed the country over to the thuggish racist Forbes Burnham.[11] A few years earlier, Iraq was "the most dangerous place in the world" (CIA director Allen Dulles) after General Abdel Karim Qassim broke the Anglo-American condominium over Middle East oil, overthrowing the pro-US monarchy, which had been heavily infiltrated by the CIA.[12] A primary concern was that Qassim might join Nasser, then the supreme Middle East devil, in using the incomparable energy resources of the Middle East for the domestic. The issue for Washington was not so much access as control. At the time and for many years after, Washington was purposely exhausting domestic oil resources in the interests of "national security," meaning security for the profits of Texas oil men, like the failed entrepreneur who now sits in the Oval Office. But as high-level planner George Kennan had explained well before, we cannot relax our guard when there is any interference with "protection of our resources" (which accidentally happen to be somewhere else).

Unquestionably, Iran's government merits harsh condemnation, though it has not engaged in worldwide terror, subversion, and aggression, following the US model – which extends to today's Iran as well, if ABC news is correct in reporting that the US is supporting Pakistan-based Jundullah, which is carrying out terrorist acts inside Iran.[13] The sole act of aggression attributed to Iran is the conquest of two small islands in the Gulf – under Washington's close ally the Shah. In addition to internal repression – heightened, as Iranian dissidents regularly protest, by US militancy -- the prospect that Iran might develop nuclear weapons also is deeply troubling. Though Iran has every right to develop nuclear energy, no one – including the majority of Iranians – wants it to have nuclear weapons. That would add to the threat to survival posed much more seriously by its near neighbors Pakistan, India, and Israel, all nuclear armed with the blessing of the US, which most of the world regards as the leading threat to world peace, for evident reasons.

Iran rejects US control of the Middle East, challenging fundamental policy doctrine, but it hardly poses a military threat. On the contrary, it has been the victim of outside powers for years: in recent memory, when the US and Britain overthrew its parliamentary government and installed a brutal tyrant in 1953, and when the US supported Saddam Hussein's murderous invasion, slaughtering hundreds of thousands of Iranians, many with chemical weapons, without the "international community" lifting a finger – something that Iranians do not forget as easily as the perpetrators. And then under severe sanctions as a punishment for disobedience.

Israel regards Iran as a threat. Israel seeks to dominate the region with no interference, and Iran might be some slight counterbalance, while also supporting domestic forces that do not bend to Israel's will. It may, however, be useful to bear in mind that Hamas has accepted the international consensus on a two-state settlement on the international border, and Hezbollah, along with Iran, has made clear that it would accept any outcome approved by Palestinians, leaving the US and Israel isolated in their traditional rejectionism.[14]

But Iran is hardly a military threat to Israel. And whatever threat there might be could be overcome if the US would accept the view of the great majority of its own citizens and of Iranians and permit the Middle East to become a nuclear-weapons free zone, including Iran and Israel, and US forces deployed there. One may also recall that UN Security Council Resolution 687 of 3 April 1991, to which Washington appeals when convenient, calls for "establishing in the Middle East a zone free from weapons of mass destruction and all missiles for their delivery."

It is widely recognized that use of military force in Iran would risk blowing up the entire region, with untold consequences beyond. We know from polls that in the surrounding countries, where the Iranian government is hardly popular -- Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan -- nevertheless large majorities prefer even a nuclear-armed Iran to any form of military action against it.

The rhetoric about Iran has escalated to the point where both political parties and practically the whole US press accept it as legitimate and, in fact, honorable, that "all options are on the table," to quote Hillary Clinton and everybody else, possibly even nuclear weapons. "All options on the table" means that Washington threatens war.

The UN Charter outlaws "the threat or use of force." The United States, which has chosen to become an outlaw state, disregards international laws and norms. We're allowed to threaten anybody we want -- and to attack anyone we choose.

Washington's feverish new Cold War "containment" policy has spread to Europe. Washington intends to install a "missile defense system" in the Czech Republic and Poland, marketed to Europe as a shield against Iranian missiles. Even if Iran had nuclear weapons and long-range missiles, the chances of its using them to attack Europe are perhaps on a par with the chances of Europe's being hit by an asteroid, so perhaps Europe would do as well to invest in an asteroid defense system. Furthermore, if Iran were to indicate the slightest intention of aiming a missile at Europe or Israel, the country would be vaporized.

Of course, Russian planners are gravely upset by the shield proposal. We can imagine how the US would respond if a Russian anti-missile system were erected in Canada. The Russians have good reason to regard an anti-missile system as part of a first-strike weapon against them. It is generally understood that such a system could never block a first strike, but it could conceivably impede a retaliatory strike. On all sides, "missile defense" is therefore understood to be a first-strike weapon, eliminating a deterrent to attack. And a small initial installation in Eastern Europe could easily be a base for later expansion. Even more obviously, the only military function of such a system with regard to Iran, the declared aim, would be to bar an Iranian deterrent to US or Israel aggression.

Not surprisingly, in reaction to the "missile defense" plans, Russia has resorted to its own dangerous gestures, including the recent decision to renew long-range patrols by nuclear-capable bombers after a 15-year hiatus, in one recent case near the US military base on Guam. These actions reflect Russia's anger "over what it has called American and NATO aggressiveness, including plans for a missile-defense system in the Czech Republic and Poland, analysts said" (Andrew Kramer, NYT).[15]

The shield ratchets the threat of war a few notches higher, in the Middle East and elsewhere, with incalculable consequences, and the potential for a terminal nuclear war. The immediate fear is that by accident or design, Washington's war planners or their Israeli surrogate might decide to escalate their Cold War II into a hot one – in this case a real hot war.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] Wright, WP, July 29 07

[2] Correspondent Michael Wines, NYT, June 13, 1999. Doolittle report, Tim Weiner, Legacy of Ashes: the History of the CIA, Doubleday 2007

[3] Ibid., 77.

[4] Ibid., 180.

[5] Paul Richter, LAT, Aug. 10, 2007. Karzai, CNN, Aug. 5, 2007.

[6] Robin Wright, "U.S. Plans New Arms Sales to Gulf Allies," WP, July 28, 2007.

[7] Henry Meyer, Bloomberg, Aug. 16, 2007.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Hiro

[10] Weiner

[11] Schmitz, Weiner.

[12] Weiner. Failed States.

[13] Brian Ross and Christopher Isham, "ABC News Exclusive: The Secret War Against Iran," April 3, 2007; Ross and Richard Esposito, ABC, "Bush Authorizes New Covert Action Against Iran," May 22, 2007.

[14] On Iran, see Gilbert Achcar, Noam Chomsky, and Stephen Shalom, Perilous Power (Paradigm, 2007), and Ervand Abrahamian, in David Barsamian, ed., Targeting Iran (City Lights, 2007). On Hamas, among many similar statements see the article by Hamas's most militant leader, Khalid Mish'al, "Our unity can now pave the way for peace and justice," Guardian, February 13, 2007. Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah has repeatedly taken the same position. See among others Irene Gendzier, Assaf Kfoury, and Fawwaz Traboulsi, eds., Inside Lebanon (Monthly Review, 2007).

[15] Kramer, "Recalling Cold War, Russia Resumes Long-Range Sorties," Aug. 18, 2007.

INTERNATIONAL BANKING SCANDAL - A CONSPIRACY OF SILENCE ?

2007-08-27T16:46:00.001-07:00

Watch this space...

AN ODE TO BAD TEACHERS

2007-08-27T14:16:00.000-07:00

Lieutenant Cable in South Pacific (Hat-tip : "Anticant")

“You’ve got to be taught to hate and fear,
You’ve got to be taught from year to year,
It’s got to be drummed in your dear little ear,
You’ve got to be carefully taught.

“You’ve got to be taught to be afraid
Of people whose eyes are oddly made,
And people whose skin is a different shade,
You’ve got to be carefully taught.

“You’ve got to be taught before it’s too late,
Before you are six or seven or eight
To hate all the people your relatives hate.
You’ve got to be carefully taught.”

FREEMASONRY IN IFIELD AND WEST SUSSEX - IS IT A PROBLEM ?

2007-08-26T13:09:00.000-07:00

I'm not sure - but if there is a problem, it will be related to that precious word called "democracy"....of, by and for the people...all people.

Crawley's Mark Lemon was a "famous" Freemason (Globe Lodge No 23)...if you are unfamiliar with that name, look it up.

The Duke of Richmond - who lives in West Sussex's Goodwood Estate - even has his own Lodge (No 3143)...if you are unfamiliar with that name, look it up.

There are many other Freemasons in Ifield and West Sussex - the 'great & the good' and also the 'not-so-great & not-so-good' - past and present.

Freemasonry and Ifield appear to be inextricably linked historically, just as Quakers and Ifield are inextricably linked historically.

In 1962, St Margaret's Church Hall (Rusper Road/Ifield Green) was somehow sold off to become a Masonic Hall - which now appears to be the 'HQ' for the following :

Forest Oak Lodge (No 5240)
Crawley Lodge (No 7763)
Worth Lodge (No 7496)
Ifield Lodge (No 7931)
Handcross Lodge (No 8104)
Manor Royal Lodge (No 8296)

There also appears to be links with Freemasons in the United States...George W. Bush is one, I understand.

As I said, I'm not sure if this is a problem - but if it is...you'll know.

As always, contributions are more than welcome.

IT ALL DEPENDS WHAT YOU MEAN BY "UNSOUND", MR INSPECTOR

2007-08-26T12:08:00.000-07:00

IT ALL DEPENDS WHAT YOU MEAN BY "UNSOUND", MR INSPECTOR

I have now read the Inspector's Report of the Crawley Borough Council (CBC) Core Strategy - which will have a significant impact on the Horsham District Council (HDC) Core Strategy - as it relates to Ifield Golf Club - and the WSCC/HDC/CBC Joint Area Action Plan (JAAP) - as it relates to Ifield Brook Meadows/Ifield Village Conservation Area.

I will quote the Inspector's Report directly - no further comment is necessary :

INSPECTOR'S REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION INTO THE CRAWLEY CORE STRATEGY (CS) - DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENT (DPD) - 20 AUGUST 2007

Para. 7
I have found aspects of unsoundness against tests iv, vi, vii & viii (4 out of 9 - Ed)...I have considered whether this...requires me to recommend withdrawal of the CS as unsound.

Para. 65
If housing were the only consideration to be placed in the balance, I would have been driven to the conclusion that the CS should be withdrawn as unsound.

Para. 66
In the circumstances, I find the housing provisions of the CS sound, but only in a heavily-qualified way.

Para. 128
I find it inappropriate for the Crawley CS not to include the Horsham reference to new development protecting the setting of Ifield Conservation Area* - especially as the Conservation Area is within Crawley, and the Study Area will now cover much of it
* "Ensure that new development protects and, where possible, enhances the setting of the Ifield Conservation Area" (HDC CP6)

Overall Conclusion

Para. 169
I have found the CS (Core Strategy) sound. However, I have identified some serious failures of soundness...Crawley's particular circumstances require that a firm foundation is provided...and moves securely ahead...Those two important requirements could not be met if the CS were withdrawn.

"UNAVAILABLE FOR COMMENT" - ON HOLIDAY

2007-08-17T01:06:00.000-07:00

On holiday for a week - with not a laptop in sight - from tomorrow (Sat 17th) for a week.

So you can post anything you like here - criticisms, praise, insults, nonsense, jokes, titbits (which are more than welcome)...but I will be unable to benefit from such wisdom - or reply.

Toodle-pip.

THE IFIELD GOLF CLUB SCANDAL - PART 3

2007-08-15T16:49:00.000-07:00

CRAWLEY OBSERVER - "WREATHS LAID FOR THREATENED GOLF COURSE"

By Stacia Baldock

August 15 2007

A LOCAL campaigner laid Remembrance Day wreaths outside Ifield Golf and Country Club to protest against the threat of redevelopment.

Ifield conservationist Richard Symonds found the wreaths dumped on a tip in Lowfield Heath last year.

He placed them outside the club to symbolise that the land 'was dead' because he believed the company who owns the land, Ifield Golf Club Ltd, had sold it to big shot developers Taylor Woodrow.

But Ifield Golf Club Ltd Secretary, Richard Dawborn said: "It's a load of old rubbish, there's lots of rumours going around at the moment, lots of people stirring things up.

"The truth is we had a meeting that day to decide whether or not to begin talks with developers (not Taylor Woodrow) in allowing them to take options on the land. It's definitely not sold - nowhere near.

"In terms of the wreaths, I only saw them briefly, but I assume they were taken down fairly quickly".

The process of taking options means a developer will offer a lump-sum of money to the land owner in order to get first pickings of the site if it is eventually chosen for development.

Currently the land at Ifield Golf Course has been highlighted as a possible area for 60 per cent of Horsham's housing quota, along with shops, a primary school, doctors surgery and supporting infrastructure.

Other areas including Ifield Court Farm brownfield site and area near Ifield wood have also been highlighted but a proffered decision is set to be made on September 9.

What do you think?

BLOODY HELL

2007-08-14T02:00:00.000-07:00

China and Russia Begin Teasing Washington

By Linda Heard
ARAB NEWS

Moscow and Beijing have teamed up and appear determined to send a message to the White House, singly and together, which translated could mean, “Don’t mess with us” and “Stay clear of our allies.”

The two countries are currently playing war games together with Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, all members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), considered a buffer to US oil and gas ambitions in the Caspian.

The SCO claims its mission is counterterrorist but while Iran, India, Pakistan and Mongolia have been invited to attend an associated Aug. 16 summit, the US has been rebuffed.

This comes hard on the heels of a not subtle Chinese threat to the American economy.

Last week, two Chinese officials made statements, which did nothing to settle market jitters.

In essence, they warned the US to quit pressuring China to revalue its yuan or else it could decide to dump its dollar reserves, worth $1,330 billion and cash in its US Treasury bonds, roughly valued at $900 billion.

In the unlikely event of China following through on the implied threat, the ensuing economic carnage could make the 1929 Wall Street Crash look like a picnic because other countries would be panicked into following suit.

Incredibly, some 45 percent of America’s foreign debt is held by foreigners, which leaves the US in an extremely vulnerable position.

Not to be outdone in the audacity-stakes, Russia claims to have buzzed a US airbase on the Pacific island of Guam in a show of its military resurgence.
According to the Russian military, two of its bombers were intercepted by US jets.
The pilots smiled at one another, says Russia, before going their separate ways. The Pentagon denies any such interception ever took place.

Russia’s new confidence derives from its friends in powerful places plus the fact it is swimming in oil and gas wealth, partly because Bush’s wars and aggressive Middle East foreign policy has driven up prices.

Its recent foray into the Arctic where divers erected rustproof titanium Russian flag on the seabed of the North Pole was interpreted by some as Russia having laid claim to some of the world’s largest untapped petrochemical reserves.

In the past, the logistics of tapping into those reserves were daunting, not to mention uneconomical, but now that ice caps are melting and prices are rising, Russia sees an opportunity.

It seems so does Canada and Denmark.

Last week Canada announced the opening of two military bases in the region, while a group of 40 Danish scientists are traveling to the Arctic on an icebreaker to stake Denmark’s claim.

Now Georgia has stepped into the fray by asserting a Russian military aircraft has violated its airspace, leaving behind a missile that failed to explode in a farmer’s field, near the disputed region of Ossetia.

Russia has denied the incident and accused Georgia of putting on a “theatrical presentation” aimed at canceling scheduled talks over the breakaway area’s future status.

Russia has further made it crystal clear that it does not approve of George Bush’s anti-missile defense shield being erected in Poland and the Czech Republic out of concern it could be directed at it rather than Iran and North Korea, as claimed. President Vladimir Putin initially proposed a joint missile defense venture with the US — an idea that was not well received.

And so he has decided to beef up his own defense system, modernize his army and navy and, in the event Bush’s star wars plan proceeds on his doorstep, he has threatened to direct his missiles toward Europe.

Russia’s relations with Britain have also gone south. Their erosion began when people Russia termed as British spies working under cover of the British Embassy in Moscow were filmed concealing a telecommunications device inside a dummy rock, through which secret messages could be transmitted via a palm-sized computer.

Diplomacy succeeded in papering over that embarrassing incident that was shown to viewers around the world on Russian TV. But nothing could put a lid on the mysterious death of

Alexander Litvinenko who was poisoned by Polonium-210 after meeting with two former KGB agents and an Italian friend in London.

Following investigation, Britain’s director of public prosecutions requested the extradition of Andrei Lugovoi, a Russian citizen and was told in no uncertain terms that Article 61 of Russian Constitution forbids the extradition of Russian citizens to foreign countries and any such trial must take place within Russia. Russia also accuses Britain of refusing to extradite Russian citizens wanted by Moscow.

The contretemps is still ongoing and has thus far resulted in the tit-for-tat expulsions of both Russian and British diplomats.

This is all a far cry from those cozy post-Cold War years when President Bush said he looked his Russian counterpart in the eye and sensed his soul. The only looks they’ll be giving one another nowadays would be decidedly shifty.

It seems to be a terrible shame that such a wealth of goodwill has been so cavalierly wasted.

If the Bush administration hadn’t been so intent on pushing its global weight around to fulfill a neocon agenda of full spectrum dominance we might have enjoyed a world where major powers worked together for the good of all.

Together they could have striven toward alleviating poverty and disease, reducing conflict and tackling climate change.

Instead, untold billions will go toward weapons of death and destruction. This is Cold War Mark II folks — a deadlier sequel to Mark I now that China is on board.

Fasten your seatbelts for an uncomfortable ride ahead!

"POLITICS AND THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE" BY GEORGE ORWELL

2007-08-12T13:47:00.000-07:00

Politics and the English Language

Essay - 1946

Most people who bother with the matter at all would admit that the English language is in a bad way, but it is generally assumed that we cannot by conscious action do anything about it. Our civilization is decadent, and our language--so the argument runs--must inevitably share in the general collapse.

It follows that any struggle against the abuse of language is a sentimental archaism, like preferring candles to electric light or hansom cabs to aeroplanes. Underneath this lies the half-conscious belief that language is a natural growth and not an instrument which we shape for our own purposes.

Now, it is clear that the decline of a language must ultimately have political and economic causes: it is not due simply to the bad influence of this or that individual writer. But an effect can become a cause, reinforcing the original cause and producing the same effect in an intensified form, and so on indefinitely. A man may take to drink because he feels himself to be a failure, and then fail all the more completely because he drinks.

It is rather the same thing that is happening to the English language. It becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts. The point is that the process is reversible.

Modern English, especially written English, is full of bad habits which spread by imitation and which can be avoided if one is willing to take the necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary first step towards political regeneration: so that the fight against bad English is not frivolous and is not the exclusive concern of professional writers.

I will come back to this presently, and I hope that by that time the meaning of what I have said here will have become clearer. Meanwhile, here are five specimens of the English language as it is now habitually written. These five passages have not been picked out because they are especially bad--I could have quoted far worse if I had chosen--but because they illustrate various of the mental vices from which we now suffer. They are a little below the average, but are fairly representative samples. I number them so that I can refer back to them when necessary:

(1) I am not, indeed, sure whether it is not true to say that the Milton who once seemed not unlike a seventeenth-century Shelley had not become, out of an experience ever more bitter in each year, more alien (sic) to the founder of that Jesuit sect which nothing could induce him to tolerate. PROFESSOR HAROLD LASKI (Essay in FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION)

(2) Above all, we cannot play ducks and drakes with a native battery of idioms which prescribes such egregious collocations of vocables as the Basic PUT UP WITH for TOLERATE or PUT AT A LOSS for BEWILDER. PROFESSOR LANCELOT HOGBEN (INTERGLOSSA)

(3) On the one side we have the free personality; by definition it is not neurotic, for it has neither conflict nor dream. Its desires, such as they are, are transparent, for they are just what institutional approval keeps in the forefront of consciousness; another institutional pattern would alter their number and intensity; there is little in them that is natural, irreducible, or culturally dangerous. But ON THE OTHER SIDE, the social bond itself is nothing but the mutual reflection of these self-secure integrities. Recall the definition of love. Is not this the very picture of a small academic? Where is there a place in this hall of mirrors for either personality or fraternity? Essay on psychology in POLITICS (New York)

(4) All the "best people" from the gentlemen's clubs, and all the frantic fascist captains, united in common hatred of Socialism and bestial horror of the rising tide of the mass revolutionary movement, have turned to acts of provocation, to foul incendiarism, to medieval legends of poisoned wells, to legalize their own destruction of proletarian organizations, and rouse the agitated petty-bourgeoisie to chauvinistic fervor on behalf of the fight against the revolutionary way out of the crisis. Communist pamphlet

(5) If a new spirit is to be infused into this old country, there is one thorny and contentious reform which must be tackled, and that is the humanization and galvanization of the B.B.C. Timidity here will bespeak canker and atrophy of the soul. The heart of Britain may lee sound and of strong beat, for instance, but the British lion's roar at present is like that of Bottom in Shakespeare's MIDSUMMER NIGHT'S DREAM--as gentle as any sucking dove. A virile new Britain cannot continue indefinitely to be traduced in the eyes, or rather ears, of the world by the effete languors of Langham Place, brazenly masquerading as "standard English." When the Voice of Britain is heard at nine o'clock, better far and infinitely less ludicrous to hear aitches honestly dropped than the present priggish, inflated, inhibited, school-ma'am-ish arch braying of blameless bashful mewing maidens. Letter in TRIBUNE

Each of these passages has faults of its own, but quite apart from avoidable ugliness, two qualities are common to all of them. The first is staleness of imagery; the other is lack of precision.

The writer either has a meaning and cannot express it, or he inadvertently says something else, or he is almost indifferent as to whether his words mean anything or not. This mixture of vagueness and sheer incompetence is the most marked characteristic of modern English prose, and especially of any kind of political writing.

As soon as certain topics are raised, the concrete melts into the abstract and no one seems able to think of turns of speech that are not hackneyed: prose consists less and less of WORDS chosen for the sake of their meaning, and more and more of PHRASES tacked together like the sections of a prefabricated hen-house.

I list below, with notes and examples, various of the tricks by means of which the work of prose-construction is habitually dodged:

DYING METAPHORS.

A newly-invented metaphor assists thought by evoking a visual image, while on the other hand a metaphor which is technically "dead" (e.g., IRON RESOLUTION) has in effect reverted to being an ordinary word and can generally be used without loss of vividness.

But in between these two classes there is a huge dump of worn-out metaphors which have lost all evocative power and are merely used because they save people the trouble of inventing phrases for themselves.
Examples are: RING THE CHANGES ON, TAKE UP THE CUDGELS FOR, TOE THE LINE, RIDE ROUGHSHOD OVER, STAND SHOULDER TO SHOULDER WITH, PLAY INTO THE HANDS OF, AN AXE TO GRIND, GRIST TO THE MILL, FISHING IN TROUBLED WATERS, ON THE ORDER OF THE DAY, ACHILLES' HEEL, SWAN SONG, HOTBED.

Many of these are used without knowledge of their meaning (what is a "rift," for instance?), and incompatible metaphors are frequently mixed, a sure sign that the writer is not interested in what he is saying. Some metaphors now current have been twisted out of their original meaning without those who use them even being aware of the fact. For example, TOE THE LINE is sometimes written TOW THE LINE. Another example is THE HAMMER AND THE ANVIL, now always used with the implication that the anvil gets the worst of it. In real life it is always the anvil that breaks the hammer, never the other way about: a writer who stopped to think what he was saying would be aware of this, and would avoid perverting the original phrase.

OPERATORS, or VERBAL FALSE LIMBS.

These save the trouble of picking out appropriate verbs and nouns, and at the same time pad each sentence with extra syllables which give it an appearance of symmetry. Characteristic phrases are: RENDER INOPERATIVE, MILITATE AGAINST, PROVE UNACCEPTABLE, MAKE CONTACT WITH, BE SUBJECTED TO, GIVE RISE TO, GIVE GROUNDS FOR, HAVING THE EFFECT OF, PLAY A LEADING PART (RÔLE) IN, MAKE ITSELF FELT, TAKE EFFECT, EXHIBIT A TENDENCY TO, SERVE THE PURPOSE OF, etc., etc.

The keynote is the elimination of simple verbs. Instead of being a single word, such as BREAK, STOP, SPOIL, MEND, KILL, a verb becomes a PHRASE, made up of a noun or adjective tacked on to some general-purposes verb as PROVE, SERVE, FORM, PLAY, RENDER. In addition, the passive voice is wherever possible used in preference to the active, and noun constructions are used instead of gerunds (BY EXAMINATION OF instead of BY EXAMINING).

The range of verbs is further cut down by means of the '-IZE' AND 'DE-' formations, and banal statements are given an appearance of profundity by means of the NOT 'UN-' formation.
Simple conjunctions and prepositions are replaced by such phrases as WITH RESPECT TO, HAVING REGARD TO, THE FACT THAT, BY DINT OF, IN VIEW OF, IN THE INTERESTS OF, ON THE HYPOTHESIS THAT; and the ends of sentences are saved from anti-climax by such resounding commonplaces as GREATLY TO BE DESIRED, CANNOT BE LEFT OUT OF ACCOUNT, A DEVELOPMENT TO BE EXPECTED IN THE NEAR FUTURE, DESERVING OF SERIOUS CONSIDERATION, BROUGHT TO A SATISFACTORY CONCLUSION, and so on and so forth.

PRETENTIOUS DICTION.

Words like PHENOMENON, ELEMENT, INDIVIDUAL (as noun), OBJECTIVE, CATEGORICAL, EFFECTIVE, VIRTUAL, BASIS, PRIMARY, PROMOTE, CONSTITUTE, EXHIBIT, EXPLOIT, UTILIZE, ELIMINATE, LIQUIDATE, are used to dress up simple statements and give an air of scientific impartiality to biased judgments.

Adjectives like EPOCH-MAKING, EPIC, HISTORIC, UNFORGETTABLE, TRIUMPHANT, AGE-OLD, INEVITABLE, INEXORABLE, VERITABLE, are used to dignify the sordid processes of international politics, while writing that aims at glorifying war usually takes on an archaic color, its characteristic words being: REALM, THRONE, CHARIOT, MAILED FIST, TRIDENT, SWORD, SHIELD, BUCKLER, BANNER, JACKBOOT, CLARION.

Foreign words and expressions such as CUL DE SAC, ANCIEN RÉGIME, DEUS EX MACHINA, MUTATIS MUTANDIS, STATUS QUO, GLEICHSCHALTUNG, WELTANSCHAUUNG, are used to give an air of culture and elegance.

Except for the useful abbreviations I.E., E.G., and ETC., there is no real need for any of the hundreds of foreign phrases now current in English. Bad writers, and especially scientific, political and sociological writers, are nearly always haunted by the notion that Latin or Greek words are grander than Saxon ones, and unnecessary words like EXPEDITE, AMELIORATE, PREDICT, EXTRANEOUS, DERACINATED, CLANDESTINE, SUB-AQUEOUS and hundreds of others constantly gain ground from their Anglo-Saxon opposite numbers. [Note 1, below]

The jargon peculiar to Marxist writing (HYENA, HANGMAN, CANNIBAL, PETTY BOURGEOIS, THESE GENTRY, LACKEY, FLUNKEY, MAD DOG, WHITE GUARD, etc.) consists largely of words and phrases translated from Russian, German or French; but the normal way of coining a new word is to use a Latin or Greek root with the appropriate affix and, where necessary, the '-ize' formation.
It is often easier to make up words of this kind (DE-REGIONALIZE, IMPERMISSIBLE, EXTRAMARITAL, NON-FRAGMENTARY and so forth) than to think up the English words that will cover one's meaning. The result, in general, is an increase in slovenliness and vagueness.

[Note: 1. An interesting illustration of this is the way in which the English flower names which were in use till very recently are being ousted by Greek ones, SNAPDRAGON becoming ANTIRRHINUM, FORGET-ME-NOT becoming MYOSOTIS, etc. It is hard to see any practical reason for this change of fashion: it is probably due to an instinctive turning-away from the more homely word and a vague feeling that the Greek word is scientific. (Author's footnote.)]

MEANINGLESS WORDS.

In certain kinds of writing, particularly in art criticism and literary criticism, it is normal to come across long passages which are almost completely lacking in meaning. [Note, below]

Words like ROMANTIC, PLASTIC, VALUES, HUMAN, DEAD, SENTIMENTAL, NATURAL, VITALITY, as used in art criticism, are strictly meaningless, in the sense that they not only do not point to any discoverable object, but are hardly even expected to do so by the reader. When one critic writes, "The outstanding feature of Mr. X's work is its living quality," while another writes, "The immediately striking thing about Mr. X's work is its peculiar deadness," the reader accepts this as a simple difference of opinion.

If words like BLACK and WHITE were involved, instead of the jargon words DEAD and LIVING, he would see at once that language was being used in an improper way. Many political words are similarly abused. The word FASCISM has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies "something not desirable."

The words DEMOCRACY, SOCIALISM, FREEDOM, PATRIOTIC, REALISTIC, JUSTICE, have each of them several different meanings which cannot be reconciled with one another. In the case of a word like DEMOCRACY, not only is there no agreed definition, but the attempt to make one is resisted from all sides.

It is almost universally felt that when we call a country democratic we are praising it: consequently the defenders of every kind of régime claim that it is a democracy, and fear that they might have to stop using the word if it were tied down to any one meaning.

Words of this kind are often used in a consciously dishonest way. That is, the person who uses them has his own private definition, but allows his hearer to think he means something quite different. Statements like MARSHAL PÉTAIN WAS A TRUE PATRIOT, THE SOVIET PRESS IS THE FREEST IN THE WORLD, THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS OPPOSED TO PERSECUTION, are almost always made with intent to deceive.

Other words used in variable meanings, in most cases more or less dishonestly, are: CLASS, TOTALITARIAN, SCIENCE, PROGRESSIVE, REACTIONARY BOURGEOIS, EQUALITY.

[Note: Example: "Comfort's catholicity of perception and image, strangely Whitmanesque in range, almost the exact opposite in aesthetic compulsion, continues to evoke that trembling atmospheric accumulative hinting at a cruel, an inexorably serene timelessness . . . Wrey Gardiner scores by aiming at simple bullseyes with precision. Only they are not so simple, and through this contented sadness runs more than the surface bittersweet of resignation." (POETRY QUARTERLY.) (Author's footnote.)]

Now that I have made this catalogue of swindles and perversions, let me give another example of the kind of writing that they lead to. This time it must of its nature be an imaginary one. I am going to translate a passage of good English into modern English of the worst sort. Here is a well-known verse from ECCLESIASTES:

I returned, and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favor to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth

Here it is in modern English:

Objective consideration of contemporary phenomena compels the conclusion that success or failure in competitive activities exhibits no tendency to be commensurate with innate capacity, but that a considerable element of the unpredictable must invariably be taken into account. This is a parody, but not a very gross one.
Exhibit (3), above, for instance, contains several patches of the same kind of English. It will be seen that I have not made a full translation. The beginning and ending of the sentence follow the original meaning fairly closely, but in the middle the concrete illustrations--race, battle, bread--dissolve into the vague phrase "success or failure in competitive activities." This had to be so, because no modern writer of the kind I am discussing--no one capable of using phrases like "objective consideration of contemporary phenomena"--would ever tabulate his thoughts in that precise and detailed way. The whole tendency of modern prose is away from concreteness.

Now analyze these two sentences a little more closely. The first contains 49 words but only 60 syllables, and all its words are those of everyday life. The second contains 38 words of 90 syllables: 18 of its words are from Latin roots, and one from Greek. The first sentence contains six vivid images, and only one phrase ("time and chance") that could be called vague. The second contains not a single fresh, arresting phrase, and in spite of its 90 syllables it gives only a shortened version of the meaning contained in the first. Yet without a doubt it is the second kind of sentence that is gaining ground in modern English.

I do not want to exaggerate. This kind of writing is not yet universal, and outcrops of simplicity will occur here and there in the worst-written page. Still, if you or I were told to write a few lines on the uncertainty of human fortunes, we should probably come much nearer to my imaginary sentence than to the one from ECCLESIASTES.

As I have tried to show, modern writing at its worst does not consist in picking out words for the sake of their meaning and inventing images in order to make the meaning clearer. It consists in gumming together long strips of words which have already been set in order by someone else, and making the results presentable by sheer humbug. The attraction of this way of writing, is that it is easy. It is easier--even quicker, once you have the habit--to say IN MY OPINION IT IS A NOT UNJUSTIFIABLE ASSUMPTION THAT than to say I THINK.

If you use ready-made phrases, you not only don't have to hunt about for words; you also don't have to bother with the rhythms of your sentences, since these phrases are generally so arranged as to be more or less euphonious.
When you are composing in a hurry--when you are dictating to a stenographer, for instance, or making a public speech--it is natural to fall into a pretentious, Latinized style. Tags like A CONSIDERATION WHICH WE SHOULD DO WELL TO BEAR IN MIND OR A CONCLUSION TO WHICH ALL OF US WOULD READILY ASSENT will save many a sentence from coming down with a bump.

By using stale metaphors, similes and idioms, you save much mental effort at the cost of leaving your meaning vague, not only for your reader but for yourself. This is the significance of mixed metaphors. The sole aim of a metaphor is to call up a visual image. When these images clash--as in THE FASCIST OCTOPUS HAS SUNG ITS SWAN SONG, THE JACKBOOT IS THROWN INTO THE MELTING POT--it can be taken as certain that the writer is not seeing a mental image of the objects he is naming; in other words he is not really thinking.

Look again at the examples I gave at the beginning of this essay. Professor Laski (1) uses five negatives in 53 words. One of these is superfluous, making nonsense of the whole passage, and in addition there is the slip ALIEN for akin, making further nonsense, and several avoidable pieces of clumsiness which increase the general vagueness.

Professor Hogben (2) plays ducks and drakes with a battery which is able to write prescriptions, and, while disapproving of the everyday phrase PUT UP WITH, is unwilling to look EGREGIOUS up in the dictionary and see what it means.

(3), if one takes an uncharitable attitude towards it, is simply meaningless: probably one could work out its intended meaning by reading the whole of the article in which it occurs.

In (4), the writer knows more or less what he wants to say, but an accumulation of stale phrases chokes him like tea leaves blocking a sink.

In (5), words and meaning have almost parted company. People who write in this manner usually have a general emotional meaning--they dislike one thing and want to express solidarity with another--but they are not interested in the detail of what they are saying.

A scrupulous writer, in every sentence that he writes, will ask himself at least four questions, thus:
What am I trying to say?
What words will express it?
What image or idiom will make it clearer?
Is this image fresh enough to have an effect?

And he will probably ask himself two more:
Could I put it more shortly?
Have I said anything that is avoidably ugly?

But you are not obliged to go to all this trouble. You can shirk it by simply throwing your mind open and letting the ready-made phrases come crowding in. They will construct your sentences for you--even think your thoughts for you, to a certain extent-and at need they will perform the important service of partially concealing your meaning even from yourself.

It is at this point that the special connection between politics and the debasement of language becomes clear. In our time it is broadly true that political writing is bad writing. Where it is not true, it will generally be found that the writer is some kind of rebel, expressing his private opinions and not a "party line."

Orthodoxy, of whatever color, seems to demand a lifeless, imitative style. The political dialects to be found in pamphlets, leading articles, manifestoes, White Papers and the speeches of under-secretaries do, of course, vary from party to party, but they are all alike in that one almost never finds in them a fresh, vivid, home-made turn of speech.

When one watches some tired hack on the platform mechanically repeating the familiar phrases--BESTIAL ATROCITIES, IRON HEEL, BLOODSTAINED TYRANNY, FREE PEOPLES OF THE WORLD, STAND SHOULDER TO SHOULDER--one often has a curious feeling that one is not watching a live human being but some kind of dummy: a feeling which suddenly becomes stronger at moments when the light catches the speaker's spectacles and turns them into blank discs which seem to have no eyes behind them.

And this is not altogether fanciful. A speaker who uses that kind of phraseology has gone some distance towards turning himself into a machine. The appropriate noises are coming out of his larynx, but his brain is not involved as it would be if he were choosing his words for himself. If the speech he is making is one that he is accustomed to make over and over again, he may be almost unconscious of what he is saying, as one is when one utters the responses in church.

And this reduced state of consciousness, if not indispensable, is at any rate favorable to political conformity.

In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible.

Things like the continuance of British rule in India, the Russian purges and deportations, the dropping of the atom bombs on Japan, can indeed be defended, but only by arguments which are too brutal for most people to face, and which do not square with the professed aims of political parties.

Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness. Defenseless villages are bombarded from the air, the inhabitants driven out into the countryside, the cattle machine-gunned, the huts set on fire with incendiary bullets: this is called PACIFICATION. Millions of peasants are robbed of their farms and sent trudging along the roads with no more than they can carry: this is called TRANSFER OF POPULATION or RECTIFICATION OF FRONTIERS. People are imprisoned for years without trial, or shot in the back of the neck or sent to die of scurvy in Arctic lumber camps: this is called ELIMINATION OF UNRELIABLE ELEMENTS.

Such phraseology is needed if one wants to name things without calling up mental pictures of them.

Consider for instance some comfortable English professor defending Russian totalitarianism. He cannot say outright, "I believe in killing off your opponents when you can get good results by doing so."

Probably, therefore, he will say something like this:

While freely conceding that the Soviet régime exhibits certain features which the humanitarian may be inclined to deplore, we must, I think, agree that a certain curtailment of the right to political opposition is an unavoidable concomitant of transitional periods, and that the rigors which the Russian people have been called upon to undergo have been amply justified in the sphere of concrete achievement.

The inflated style is itself a kind of euphemism. A mass of Latin words falls upon the facts like soft snow, blurring the outlines and covering up all the details.

The great enemy of clear language is insincerity.

When there is a gap between one's real and one's declared aims, one turns, as it were instinctively, to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish squirting out ink.

In our age there is no such thing as "keeping out of politics." All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred and schizophrenia.

When the general atmosphere is bad, language must suffer. I should expect to find--this is a guess which I have not sufficient knowledge to verify--that the German, Russian and Italian languages have all deteriorated in the last ten or fifteen years as a result of dictatorship. But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought. A bad usage can spread by tradition and imitation, even among people who should and do know better.

The debased language that I have been discussing is in some ways very convenient. Phrases like A NOT UNJUSTIFIABLE ASSUMPTION, LEAVES MUCH TO BE DESIRED, WOULD SERVE NO GOOD PURPOSE, A CONSIDERATION WHICH WE SHOULD DO WELL TO BEAR IN MIND, are a continuous temptation, a packet of aspirins always at one's elbow.

Look back through this essay, and for certain you will find that I have again and again committed the very faults I am protesting against. By this morning's post I have received a pamphlet dealing with conditions in Germany. The author tells me that he "felt impelled" to write it. I open it at random, and here is almost the first sentence that I see: "[The Allies] have an opportunity not only of achieving a radical transformation of Germany's social and political structure in such a way as to avoid a nationalistic reaction in Germany itself, but at the same time of laying the foundations of a cooperative and unified Europe."

You see, he "feels impelled" to write--feels, presumably, that he has something new to say--and yet his words, like cavalry horses answering the bugle, group themselves automatically into the familiar dreary pattern. This invasion of one's mind by ready-made phrases (LAY THE FOUNDATIONS, ACHIEVE A RADICAL TRANSFORMATION) can only be prevented if one is constantly on guard against them, and every such phrase anesthetizes a portion of one's brain.

I said earlier that the decadence of our language is probably curable. Those who deny this would argue, if they produced an argument at all, that language merely reflects existing social conditions, and that we cannot influence its development by any direct tinkering with words and constructions. So far as the general tone or spirit of a language goes, this may be true, but it is not true in detail. Silly words and expressions have often disappeared, not through any evolutionary process but owing to the conscious action of a minority. Two recent examples were EXPLORE EVERY AVENUE and LEAVE NO STONE UNTURNED, which were killed by the jeers of a few journalists.

There is a long list of fly-blown metaphors which could similarly be got rid of if enough people would interest themselves in the job; and it should also be possible to laugh the NOT 'UN-' formation out of existence, [Note, below] to reduce the amount of Latin and Greek in the average sentence, to drive out foreign phrases and strayed scientific words, and, in general, to make pretentiousness unfashionable. But all these are minor points.

The defense of the English language implies more than this, and perhaps it is best to start by saying what it does NOT imply. [Note: One can cure oneself of the NOT 'UN-' formation by memorizing this sentence: A NOT UNBLACK DOG WAS CHASING A NOT UNSMALL RABBIT ACROSS A NOT UNGREEN FIELD. (Author's footnote.)]

To begin with, it has nothing to do with archaism, with the salvaging of obsolete words and turns of speech, or with the setting-up of a "standard-English" which must never be departed from. On the contrary, it is especially concerned with the scrapping of every word or idiom which has outworn its usefulness. It has nothing to do with correct grammar and syntax, which are of no importance so long as one makes one's meaning clear, or with the avoidance of Americanisms, or with having what is called a "good prose style."

On the other hand it is not concerned with fake simplicity and the attempt to make written English colloquial. Nor does it even imply in every case preferring the Saxon word to the Latin one, though it does imply using the fewest and shortest words that will cover one's meaning. What is above all needed is to let the meaning choose the word, and not the other way about. In prose, the worst thing one can do with words is to surrender them.

When you think of a concrete object, you think wordlessly, and then, if you want to describe the thing you have been visualizing, you probably hunt about till you find the exact words that seem to fit it.

When you think of something abstract you are more inclined to use words from the start, and unless you make a conscious effort to prevent it, the existing dialect will come rushing in and do the job for you, at the expense of blurring or even changing your meaning. Probably it is better to put off using words as long as possible and get one's meaning as clear as one can through pictures or sensations. Afterwards one can choose--not simply ACCEPT--the phrases that will best cover the meaning, and then switch round and decide what impressions one's words are likely to make on another person.

This last effort of the mind cuts out all stale or mixed images, all prefabricated phrases, needless repetitions, and humbug and vagueness generally. But one can often be in doubt about the effect of a word or a phrase, and one needs rules that one can rely on when instinct fails.

I think the following rules will cover most cases:
(i) Never use a metaphor, simile or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print. (ii) Never use a long word where a short one will do.
(iii) If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
(iv) Never use the passive where you can use the active.
(v) Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
(vi) Break any of these rules sooner than say anything barbarous.

These rules sound elementary, and so they are, but they demand a deep change of attitude in anyone who has grown used to writing in the style now fashionable. One could keep all of them and still write bad English, but one could not write the kind of stuff that I quoted in these five specimens at the beginning of this article.

I have not here been considering the literary use of language, but merely language as an instrument for expressing and not for concealing or preventing thought. Stuart Chase and others have come near to claiming that all abstract words are meaningless, and have used this as a pretext for advocating a kind of political quietism.

Since you don't know what Fascism is, how can you struggle against Fascism?
One need not swallow such absurdities as this, but one ought to recognize that the present political chaos is connected with the decay of language, and that one can probably bring about some improvement by starting at the verbal end.

If you simplify your English, you are freed from the worst follies of orthodoxy. You cannot speak any of the necessary dialects, and when you make a stupid remark its stupidity will be obvious, even to yourself.

Political language-and with variations this is true of all political parties, from Conservatives to Anarchists-is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable. and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.

One cannot change this all in a moment, but one can at least change one's own habits, and from time to time one can even, if one jeers loudly enough, send some worn-out and useless phrase--some JACKBOOT, ACHILLES' HEEL, HOTBED, MELTING POT, ACID TEST, VERITABLE INFERNO or other lump of verbal refuse--into the dustbin where it belongs.

"YOU AND THE ATOM BOMB" BY GEORGE ORWELL

2007-08-11T15:44:00.000-07:00

The Complete Works of George Orwell

You and the Atomic Bomb

Essay - 1945

Considering how likely we all are to be blown to pieces by it within the next five years, the atomic bomb has not roused so much discussion as might have been expected.

The newspapers have published numerous diagrams, not very helpful to the average man, of protons and neutrons doing their stuff, and there has been much reiteration of the useless statement that the bomb 'ought to be put under international control.'

But curiously little has been said, at any rate in print, about the question that is of most urgent interest to all of us, namely: 'How difficult are these things to manufacture?'

Such information as we--that is, the big public--possess on this subject has come to us in a rather indirect way, apropos of President Truman's decision not to hand over certain secrets to the USSR. Some months ago, when the bomb was still only a rumour, there was a widespread belief that splitting the atom was merely a problem for the physicists, and that when they had solved it a new and devastating weapon would be within reach of almost everybody. (At any moment, so the rumour went, some lonely lunatic in a laboratory might blow civilisation to smithereens, as easily as touching off a firework.)

Had that been true, the whole trend of history would have been abruptly altered. The distinction between great states and small states would have been wiped out, and the power of the State over the individual would have been greatly weakened.

However, it appears from President Truman's remarks, and various comments that have been made on them, that the bomb is fantastically expensive and that its manufacture demands an enormous industrial effort, such as only three or four countries in the world are capable of making. This point is of cardinal importance, because it may mean that the discovery of the atomic bomb, so far from reversing history, will simply intensify the trends which have been apparent for a dozen years past.

It is a commonplace that the history of civilisation is largely the history of weapons. In particular, the connection between the discovery of gunpowder and the overthrow of feudalism by the bourgeoisie has been pointed out over and over again. And though I have no doubt exceptions can be brought forward, I think the following rule would be found generally true: that ages in which the dominant weapon is expensive or difficult to make will tend to be ages of despotism, whereas when the dominant weapon is cheap and simple, the common people have a chance.

Thus, for example, thanks, battleships and bombing planes are inherently tyrannical weapons, while rifles, muskets, long-bows and hand-grenades are inherently democratic weapons. A complex weapon makes the strong stronger, while a simple weapon--so long as there is no answer to it-- gives claws to the weak.

The great age of democracy and of national self-determination was the age of the musket and the rifle. After the invention of the flintlock, and before the invention of the percussion cap, the musket was a fairly efficient weapon, and at the same time so simple that it could be produced almost anywhere. Its combination of qualities made possible the success of the American and French revolutions, and made a popular insurrection a more serious business than it could be in our own day. After the musket came the breech-loading rifle. This was a comparatively complex thing, but it could still be produced in scores of countries, and it was cheap, easily smuggled and economical of ammunition. Even the most backward nation could always get hold of rifles from one source or another, so that Boers, Bulgars, Abyssinians, Moroccans--even Tibetans-- could put up a fight for their independence, sometimes with success.

But thereafter every development in military technique has favoured the State as against the individual, and the industrialised country as against the backward one. There are fewer and fewer foci of power. Already, in 1939, there were only five states capable of waging war on the grand scale, and now there are only three--ultimately, perhaps, only two. This trend has been obvious for years, and was pointed out by a few observers even before 1914.

The one thing that might reverse it is the discovery of a weapon--or, to put it more broadly, of a method of fighting--not dependent on huge concentrations of industrial plant. From various symptoms one can infer that the Russians do not yet possess the secret of making the atomic bomb; on the other hand, the consensus of opinion seems to be that they will possess it within a few years.

So we have before us the prospect of two or three monstrous super-states, each possessed of a weapon by which millions of people can be wiped out in a few seconds, dividing the world between them.

It has been rather hastily assumed that this means bigger and bloodier wars, and perhaps an actual end to the machine civilisation. But suppose--and really this the likeliest development--that the surviving great nations make a tacit agreement never to use the atomic bomb against one another? Suppose they only use it, or the threat of it, against people who are unable to retaliate? In that case we are back where we were before, the only difference being that power is concentrated in still fewer hands and that the outlook for subject peoples and oppressed classes is still more hopeless.

When James Burnham wrote THE MANAGERIAL REVOLUTION it seemed probable to many Americans that the Germans would win the European end of the war, and it was therefore natural to assume that Germany and not Russia would dominate the Eurasian land mass, while Japan would remain master of East Asia. This was a miscalculation, but it does not affect the main argument. For Burnham's geographical picture of the new world has turned out to be correct.

More and more obviously the surface of the earth is being parceled off into three great empires, each self-contained and cut off from contact with the outer world, and each ruled, under one disguise or another, by a self-elected oligarchy. The haggling as to where the frontiers are to be drawn is still going on, and will continue for some years, and the third of the three super-states--East Asia, dominated by China--is still potential rather than actual. But the general drift is unmistakable, and every scientific discovery of recent years has accelerated it.

We were once told that the aeroplane had 'abolished frontiers'; actually it is only since the aeroplane became a serious weapon that frontiers have become definitely impassable. The radio was once expected to promote international understanding and co-operation; it has turned out to be a means of insulating one nation from another.

The atomic bomb may complete the process by robbing the exploited classes and peoples of all power to revolt, and at the same time putting the possessors of the bomb on a basis of military equality. Unable to conquer one another, they are likely to continue ruling the world between them, and it is difficult to see how the balance can be upset except by slow and unpredictable demographic changes.

For forty or fifty years past, Mr. H. G. Wells and others have been warning us that man is in danger of destroying himself with his own weapons, leaving the ants or some other gregarious species to take over. Anyone who has seen the ruined cities of Germany will find this notion at least thinkable.

Nevertheless, looking at the world as a whole, the drift for many decades has been not towards anarchy but towards the reimposition of slavery. We may be heading not for general breakdown but for an epoch as horribly stable as the slave empires of antiquity.

James Burnham's theory has been much discussed, but few people have yet considered its ideological implications--that is, the kind of world-view, the kind of beliefs, and the social structure that would probably prevail in a state which was at once UNCONQUERABLE and in a permanent state of 'cold war' with its neighbors.

Had the atomic bomb turned out to be something as cheap and easily manufactured as a bicycle or an alarm clock, it might well have plunged us back into barbarism, but it might, on the other hand, have meant the end of national sovereignty and of the highly-centralised police state.

If, as seems to be the case, it is a rare and costly object as difficult to produce as a battleship, it is likelier to put an end to large-scale wars at the cost of prolonging indefinitely a 'peace that is no peace'.

THE UNHOLY TRINITY OF ATHEISTS - PART 2 - RICHARD DAWKINS

2007-08-11T09:30:00.000-07:00

This is a follow-up to "The Unholy Trinity of Atheists - Part 1 - Dawkins/Hitchens/Harris" on August 5 2007 :
http://crawleyindependent.blogspot.com/2007/08/unholy-trinity-of-atheists.html

Part 2 will be a personal critique of Richard Dawkins' twin ideas of Atheism & Evolution - as described in "The God Delusion" (2006) and "The Selfish Gene" (1976) - in relation to my primary criticism, as cited in Part 1 :

"This little 'trinity' of atheists...especially Dawkins...do little to heal a broken world...their little crusade will prove to be divisive to humanity".

HYPOTHESIS 1 - NON-RELIGIOUS, EVOLUTIONARY, ATHEISTIC IDEAS - SUCH AS THOSE OF RICHARD DAWKINS - ARE USED (AND WILL BE USED) TO JUSTIFY MAN'S INHUMANITY TO MAN, JUST AS MUCH AS RELIGIOUS, "IN-THE-BEGINNING-GOD", THEISTIC IDEAS...POSSIBLY MORE SO ...FOR EXAMPLE :

1. SOCIAL DARWINISM VIA DARWINISM

To quote Dawkins himself ("The God Delusion" - Chapter 6 "The roots of morality : why are we good" - Page 246) :

"Isn't goodness incompatible with the theory of the 'selfish gene'. No. This is a common misunderstanding of the theory - a distressing (and, with hindsight, foreseeable) misunderstanding.*

* I (Dawkins - Ed) was mortified to read in The Guardian ('Animal Instincts', 27 May 2006) that "The Selfish Gene" is the favourite book of Jeff Skilling, CEO of the infamous Enron Corporation, and that he derived inspiration of a Social Darwinist character from it...
...I have tried to forestall similar misunderstandings in my new preface to the thirteenth anniversary edition of 'The Selfish Gene', just brought out by Oxford University Press."

2. NEO-CONSERVATISM VIA NEO-DARWINISM

3. MORAL RELATIVISM VIA LOGICAL POSITIVISM

HYPOTHESIS 2 - IF THERE IS SOME TRUTH TO THE ABOVE, THEN A COUNTER-ARGUMENT CAN BE MADE AGAINST DAWKINS, WHO MAKES IT CLEAR THAT PEOPLE WITH A RELIGIOUS FAITH SHOULD DISCARD THEIR CHERISHED BELIEFS BECAUSE OF THE MASSIVELY DAMAGING AFFECTS OF THOSE BELIEFS...
IF HIS SECULAR 'FAITH' ALSO IS MASSIVELY DAMAGING, THEN PEOPLE SHOULD DISCARD SUCH NON-RELIGIOUS BELIEFS.

PR ADVERTISING & PROPAGANDA AS WEAPONS OF SOCIAL CONTROL - INSTEAD OF BRAIN-WASHING & TORTURE

2007-08-11T06:41:00.000-07:00

Jo Swift
Saturday, 11 August 2007

Noam Chomsky: How Propaganda Works in the West

The American approach to social control is so much more sophisticated and pervasive that it deserves a new name. It not propaganda any more, it's “prop-agenda”. It's not so much the control of what we think, but the control of what we think about.

Remember, children. Propaganda works because we don't know we're being propagandarized.

How could anyone suggest that in this beacon of 'freedom and democracy', the magnificent United States of Amnesia, that we are programmed to follow an ideology ?

Propaganda for Dummies

In the West, the calculated manipulation of public opinion to serve political and ideological interests is much more covert and therefore much more effective than a propaganda system imposed in a totalitarian regime.

Its greatest triumph is that we generally don't notice the influence of propaganda — or laugh at the notion it even exists.

We watch the democratic process taking place - heated debates in which we feel we could have a voice — and think that, because we have “free” media, it would be hard for the Government to get away with anything very devious without someone calling them on it.

The American approach to social control is so much more sophisticated and pervasive that it really deserves a new name. It isn't just propaganda any more, it's “prop-agenda.”

It's not so much the control of what we think, but the control of what we think about.

When our governments want to sell us a course of action, they do it by making sure it's the only thing on the agenda, the only thing everyone's talking about.

And they pre-load the ensuing discussion with highly selected images, devious and prejudicial language, dubious linkages, weak or false “intelligence” and selected “leaks”.

With the ground thus prepared, governments are happy if you then “use the democratic process” to agree or disagree — for, after all, their intention is to mobilise enough headlines and conversation to make the whole thing seem real and urgent.
The more emotional the debate, the better.
Emotion creates reality, reality demands action.

Keeping the People Passive & Obedient

The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - even encourage the more critical and dissident views.

That gives people the sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate.

Since the voice of the people is allowed to speak out in democratic societies, those in power better control what that voice says — in other words, control what people think.

One of the ways to do this is to create political debate that appears to embrace many opinions, but actually stays within very narrow margins.

You have to make sure that both sides in the debate accept certain assumptions — and that those assumptions are the basis of the propaganda system. As long as everyone accepts the propaganda system, the debate is permissible.

One reason that propaganda often works better on the educated than on the uneducated is that educated people read more, so they receive more propaganda.
Another is that they have jobs in management, media, and academia and therefore work in some capacity as agents of the propaganda system — and they believe what the system expects them to believe.
By and large, they're part of the privileged elite, and share the interests and perceptions of those in power.

It is much more difficult to see a propaganda system at work where the media are private and formal censorship is absent.
This is especially true where the media actively compete, periodically attack and expose corporate and government malfeasance, and aggressively portray themselves as spokesmen for free speech and the general community interest.

What is not evident (and remains undiscussed in the media) is the limited nature of such critiques, as well as the huge inequality of the command of resources, and its effect both on access to a private media system and on its behavior and performance.

Propaganda & the Ruling Ideology

When a leading journalist or TV news presenter is asked whether they are subject to pressure or censorship, they say they are completely free to express their own opinions.

So how does thought control work in a democratic society?
We know how it works in dictatorships.

Journalists are an integral part of the ruling ideology.
They are so well 'integrated' that they can't see outside the ideological box they inhabit.
Their journalism is balanced, fair and tolerant of other points of view.

But that is part of the 'value system' they are promulgating.
'Truth' is their version of the world.

To return to the original question. If one suggests there is censorship in the Western media, journalists immediately reply: “No one has been exerting any pressure on me. I write what I want.” And it’s true.
But if they defended positions contrary to the dominant norm, someone else would soon be writing editorials in their place.
Obviously it is not a hard-and-fast rule: the US press sometimes publishes even my work, and the US is not a totalitarian country.
But anyone who fails to fulfil certain minimum requirements does not stand a chance of becoming an established commentator.

It is one of the big differences between the propaganda system of a totalitarian state and the way democratic societies go about things.
Exaggerating slightly, in totalitarian countries the state decides the official line and everyone must then comply.
Democratic societies operate differently.
The line is never presented as such, merely implied.

This involves brainwashing people who are still at liberty. Even the passionate debates in the main media stay within the bounds of commonly accepted, implicit rules, which sideline a large number of contrary views.

The system of control in democratic societies is extremely effective. We do not notice the line any more than we notice the air we breathe. We sometimes even imagine we are seeing a lively debate.

The system of control is much more powerful than in totalitarian systems.
Look at Germany in the early 1930s. We tend to forget that it was the most advanced country in Europe, taking the lead in art, science, technology, literature and philosophy. Then, in no time at all, it suffered a complete reversal of fortune and became the most barbaric, murderous state in human history.
All that was achieved by using fear: Fear of the Bolsheviks, the Jews, the Americans, the Gypsies – everyone who, according to the Nazis, was threatening the core values of European culture and the direct descendants of Greek civilisation (as the philosopher Martin Heidegger wrote in 1935).

However, most of the German media who inundated the population with these messages were using marketing techniques developed by US advertising agents.The same method is always used to impose an ideology.

Violence is not enough to dominate people: some other justification is required.When one person wields power over another – whether they are a dictator, a colonist, a bureaucrat, a spouse or a boss – they need an ideology justifying their action.

And it is always the same: their domination is exerted for the good of the underdog.
Those in power always present themselves as being altruistic, disinterested and generous.
In the 1930s the rules for Nazi propaganda involved using simple words and repeating them in association with emotions and phobia.

When Hitler invaded the Sudetenland in 1938 he cited the noblest, most charitable motives: the need for a humanitarian intervention to prevent the ethnic cleansing of German speakers.
Henceforward everyone would be living under Germany’s protective wing, with the support of the world’s most artistically and culturally advanced country.

When it comes to propaganda (though in a sense nothing has changed since the days of Athens) there have been some minor improvements. The instruments available now are much more refined, in particular – surprising as it may seem – in the countries with the greatest civil liberties, Britain and the US.

The contemporary public relations industry was born there in the 1920s, an activity we may also refer to as opinion forming or propaganda.
Both countries had made such progress in democratic rights (women’s suffrage, freedom of speech) that state violence was no longer sufficient to contain the desire for liberty.

So those in power sought other ways of manufacturing consent. The PR industry produces, in the true sense of the term, concept, acceptance and submission.
It controls people’s minds and ideas.

It is a major advance on totalitarian rule, as it is much more agreeable to be subjected to advertising than to torture.

Posted by Left Turn at 14:33

BANKERS AND WANKERS

2007-08-10T23:43:00.000-07:00

Yes, I'll admit it - I'm not very good with money...and so, unsurprisingly, I don't have much of it...in fact I'm a bit of a "wanker" - especially when it comes to pounds, dollars and euros.

Even so, it doesn't take a Greenspan to work out that people like me - "wankers" - and others, are being well shafted at the moment by the "bankers" - such as The Federal Reserve System ($), The World Bank, The Bank of England (£) and the European Central Bank (Euros).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_bank

But I can't quite 'put my finger on' it' how these "bankers" are screwing the "wankers" (and others)...because I'm not very good with money...and I have even less of it now...especially thankx to...

Can anyone explain to a simple "wanker" exactly what is going on at the moment ?

"HOW TO WRITE, THINK AND SPEAK CORRECTLY"

2007-08-10T06:47:00.000-07:00

"HOW TO WRITE, SPEAK AND THINK CORRECTLY"

This is the title of a book, published by Odhams Press in 1939 and edited by - and it's really good...especially on "logic". For example :

SECTION 2 - THE ART OF THINKING

Chapter 10 - Some Obstacles To Clear Thinking
Chapter 11 - How Self-Interest Influences Our Beliefs
Chapter 12 - Speaking The Same Language
Chapter 13 - Cherished Beliefs
Chapter 14 - The Power of Suggestion
Chapter 15 - Some Logical Errors
Chapter 16 - How We Form Our Judgements
Chapter 17 - Some Unfair Tricks Of Argument

As I read it, nothing much has changedin 68 years - and what is said is as relevant now as it was then - perhaps more so.

THE IFIELD SOCIETY 'BALLS & FAIRWAYS' RAMBLETTE

2007-08-09T12:55:00.001-07:00

Dear All,

Following last Wednesday's "Fate of Ifield Golf Club" Lecturette, there will be an Ifield Society
Summer Evening Ramblette - "Balls and Fairways" - next Thursday 16th August.

This short walk will start at 6.30pm from The Plough, Ifield Street, Ifield Village - and will end at St Margaret's Parish Church, Ifield Village, at 8pm (approx).

All two-legged and four-legged animals warmly invited - except ostriches and elephants.

Yours sincerely,

Richard W. Symonds
THE IFIELD SOCIETY

IFIELD GOLF CLUB - R.I.P.

2007-08-07T06:41:00.000-07:00

We tried to stop the developers and 'partners', but money and power has won -Ifield Golf Club will be no more.

Last Friday, there was a meeting at Ifield Golf club "to pass a resolution to ratify the directors' action in signing an option agreement with a developer (possibly Taylor-Wimpey)...

"The resolution was passed.

"This now means that the Board of Directors have carte-blanche to sell the land to whoever they want - at whatever price they want - to build what shit cardboard noddy-boxes they want - without further consultation with the shareholders, or anyone else."

The Ifield Society will therefore be pulling out of any further formal discussions and/or Public Consultations, believing the whole democratic process to be a sham and a scam - and a total waste of taxpayers' money.

It would appear that Ifield Golf Club Ltd's Board of Directors (and 'partners') have 'sold its members down the River Mole' - and those within this ancient Parish.

As George Orwell said - his last-known published words - "Don't let it happen. It depends on you"

Are we already too late ?

GOD, MAN AND CARL GUSTAV JUNG

2007-08-07T03:20:00.000-07:00

I have a lot of time for Carl Gustav Jung, ever since he said in 1959 : "The greatest danger is Man himself. He is the great danger - and we are pitifully unaware of it"

Here is something more on Jung :

"Was Jung a mystic?

My short answer is, yes of course Jung was a mystic. His work makes no sense otherwise.

But what kind of mysticism was it?

In a 1959 interview on the BBC program "Face to Face," John Freeman asked Jung whether he believed in God. Jung's answer was, “I do not need to believe in God; I know.” Here is the excerpt from the interview:

Freeman: And did he make you attend church regularly?
Jung: Always, that was quite natural. Everybody went to the church on Sunday.Freeman: And did you believe in God?Jung: Oh, yes.
Freeman: Do you now believe in God.Jung: Yes. Now? …[long pause] Difficult to answer. I know. I needn't… I don't need to believe. I know.

You may be interested in hearing this interview. An audio clip of this excerpt is available on the website of the Jung Society of Atlanta.

After giving the BBC interview, Jung received letters from many people who had heard the radio broadcast. Jung then clarified his views in a letter to The Listener, January 21, 1960 [1A]. In some ways his clarification raises even more issues. Jung wrote:

Sir - So many letters I have received have emphasized my statement about 'knowing' (of God) [in Face to Face, The Listener, October 29].

My opinion about knowledge of God is an unconventional way of thinking, and I quite understand if it should be suggested that I am no Christian.

Yet I think of myself as a Christian since I am entirely based upon Christian concepts.
I only try to escape their internal contradictions by introducing a more modest attitude, which takes into consideration the immense darkness of the human mind.

The Christian idea proves its vitality by a continuous evolution, just like Buddhism. Our time certainly demands some new thought in this respect, as we cannot continue to think in an antique or medieval way, when we enter the sphere of religious experience.

I did not say in the broadcast, "There is a God." I said "I do not need to believe in God; I know."

Which does not mean: I do know a certain God (Zeus, Jahwe, Allah, the Trinitarian God, etc.) but rather: I do know that I am obviously confronted with a factor unknown in itself, which I call 'God' in consensu omnium [consent of everyone] "'quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus creditur"). ["What has been believed always, everywhere, and by all"] I remember Him, I evoke Him, whenever I use His name overcome by anger or by fear, whenever I involuntarily say: "Oh God!"That happens when I meet somebody or something stronger than myself.

It is an apt name given to all overpowering emotions in my own psychical system subduing my conscious will and usurping control over myself. This is the name by which I designate all things which cross my willful path violently and recklessly, all things which upset my subjective views, plans, and intentions and change the course of my life for better or worse.

In accordance with tradition I call the power of fate in this positive as well as negative aspect, and inasmuch as its origin is beyond my control, 'god', a 'personal god', since my fate means very much myself, particularly when it approaches me in the form of conscience as a vox Dei, with which I can even converse and argue. (We do and, at the same time, we know that we do. One is subject as well as object.)Yet I should consider it an intellectual immorality to indulge in the belief that my view of a god is the universal, metaphysical Being of the confessions or 'philosophies'.

I do neither commit the impertinence of a hypostasis, nor of an arrogant qualification such as: 'God can only be good.' Only my experience can be good or evil, but I know that the superior will is based upon a foundation which transcends human imagination.

Since I know of my collision with a superior will in my own psychical system, I know of God, and if I should venture the illegitimate hypostasis of my image, I would say, of a God beyond good and evil, just as much dwelling in myself as everywhere else: Deus est circulus cuius centrum est ubique, cuis circumferentia vero nusquam. [God is a circle whose center is everywhere, but whose circumference is nowhere]

Yours, etc.,

Carl Gustav Jung

GLOBAL FAT CONTROLLERS (1) THE FEDERAL RESERVE

2007-08-06T14:46:00.000-07:00

When UK's Bank of England raises interest rates, it receives orders to do so by the US Federal Reserve 'Bank'...and here is a little more about that 'Global Fat Controller' :

http://blog.globaltoad.com/?p=253

And to whom do we pay our National Debt ? Yes, you've guessed it :

THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK Is A Private Company.
Who actually owns the Federal Reserve central Banks ? The ownership of the 12 Central Banks, a very well kept secret, has been revealed :
ROTHSCHILD BANK OF LONDON
WARBURG BANK OF HAMBURG
ROTHSCHILD BANK OF BERLIN
LEHMAN BROTHERS OF NEW YORK
LAZARD BROTHERS OF PARIS
KUHN LOEB BANK OF NEW YORK
ISRAEL MOSES SEIF BANKS OF ITALY (Zionist Jew)
GOLDMAN-SACHS OF NEW YORK
WARBURG BANK OF AMSTERDAM
CHASE MANHATTAN BANK OF NEW YORK
http://www.save-a-patriot.org/files/view/whofed.html

Congressman Louis T. McFadden’s SpeechOn the Federal Reserve Corporation
The Federal Reserve-A Corrupt Institution

Mr. Chairman, we have in this Country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks, hereinafter called the Fed. The Fed has cheated the Government of these United States and the people of the United States out of enough money to pay the Nation’s debt. The depredations and iniquities of the Fed has cost enough money to pay the National debt several times over.

This evil institution has impoverished and ruined the people of these United States, has bankrupted itself, and has practically bankrupted our Government. It has done this through the defects of the law under which it operates, through the mal-administration of that law by the Fed and through the corrupt practices of the moneyed vultures who control it.

Some people who think that the Federal Reserve Banks United States Government institutions. They are private monopolies which prey upon the people of these United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers; foreign and domestic speculators and swindlers; and rich and predatory money lender. In that dark crew of financial pirates there are those who would cut a man’s throat to get a dollar out of his pocket; there are those who send money into states to buy votes to control our legislatures; there are those who maintain International propaganda for the purpose of deceiving us into granting of new concessions which will permit them to cover up their past misdeeds and set again in motion their gigantic train of crime.

These twelve private credit monopolies were deceitfully and disloyally foisted upon this Country by the bankers who came here from Europe and repaid us our hospitality by undermining our American institutions. Those bankers took money out of this Country to finance Japan in a war against Russia. They created a reign of terror in Russia with our money in order to help that war along. They instigated the separate peace between Germany and Russia, and thus drove a wedge between the allies in World War. They financed Trotsky’s passage from New York to Russia so that he might assist in the destruction of the Russian Empire. They fomented and instigated the Russian Revolution, and placed a large fund of American dollars at Trotsky’s disposal in one of their branch banks in Sweden so that through him Russian homes might be thoroughly broken up and Russian children flung far and wide from their natural protectors.

They have since begun breaking up of American homes and the dispersal of American children.

“Mr. Chairman, there should be no partisanship in matters concerning banking and currency affairs in this Country, and I do not speak with any.
In 1912 the National Monetary Association, under the chairmanship of the late Senator Nelson W. Aldrich, made a report and presented a vicious bill called the National Reserve Association bill. This bill is usually spoken of as the Aldrich bill. Senator Aldrich did not write the Aldrich bill. He was the tool, if not the accomplice, of the European bankers who for nearly twenty years had been scheming to set up a central bank in this Country and who in 1912 has spent and were continuing to spend vast sums of money to accomplish their purpose.

We were opposed to the Aldrich plan for a central bank. The men who rule the Democratic Party then promised the people that if they were returned to power there would be no central bank established here while they held the reigns of government. Thirteen months later that promise was broken, and the Wilson administration, under the tutelage of those sinister Wall Street figures who stood behind Colonel House, established here in our free Country the worm-eaten monarchical institution of the “King’s Bank” to control us from the top downward, and from the cradle to the grave.

The Federal Reserve Bank destroyed our old and characteristic way of doing business. It discriminated against our 1-name commercial paper, the finest in the world, and it set up the antiquated 2-name paper, which is the present curse of this Country and which wrecked every country which has ever given it scope; it fastened down upon the Country the very tyranny from which the framers of the Constitution sough to save us.

A SURVIVAL ACTIVIST (NOT A PEACE ACTIVIST) DECLARES WAR ON STATE TERRORISTS

2007-08-06T08:51:00.000-07:00

More to follow...

NOAM CHOMSKY AT HIS VERY BEST

2007-08-05T14:50:00.000-07:00

http://www.counterpunch.org/schivone08032007.html

I make no apology for thinking the thoughts and insights of Noam Chomsky are inspired.

When I compare Chomsky's thoughts with those of, say, Richard Dawkins - especially when it comes to their shared non-religious views - I can't help feeling the latter to be an intellectual pygmie by comparison.

I am not a Chomsky 'groupie', but if it is truths and inspiration we are seeking - especially unpalatable and unexpected ones - we can't go far wrong with Chomsky's thoughts and insights.

THE UNHOLY TRINITY OF ATHEISTS - PART 1 - DAWKINS/HITCHENS/HARRIS

2007-08-05T13:04:00.000-07:00

http://mwcnews.net/content/view/15895/26/

As I see it, this little 'trinity' of atheists do little to heal a broken world - and they appear more concerned with their own selfish agendas, and less concerned for the betterment of humanity.

In my view, their little crusade of joint self-aggrandisement will prove to be divisive to humanity, which must learn to co-operate with each other - whatever the cherished beliefs -if it is to survive and thrive.

THE ONE-WOMAN CAMPAIGN AGAINST A NEW COLD WAR

2007-08-05T05:54:00.000-07:00

Lone warrior fighting new cold war
Aug 5 2007
by Phil Doherty, Sunday Sun

CAMPAIGNER Helen John has set up a one-woman peace camp outside a North RAF base after it was revealed it will be part of the controversial US National Defence Missile Programme.
Helen John, 70, began her lonely vigil outside RAF Fylingdales, North Yorkshire, which, along with nearby RAF Menwith Hill, will be part of the scheme dubbed “Son of Star Wars”.

The US said it is to protect America and its European allies from missile attack by rogue states such as Iran and North Korea.

However, some fear the real target is Russia as relations between it and the West have deteriorated to the extent that the spectre of a new Cold War has emerged.
This would once again make both Fylingdales and Menwith Hill a strategic target as they were in the first Cold War.

Helen, from Harrogate, North Yorkshire, claimed: “The National Missile Defence shield is the United States’ ultimate first-strike weapon. They want this shield so that no one will be able to attack, while they’ll be able to strike at anyone else.

“As part of this shield they will have to weaponise space, which goes against existing treaties.

“The Russians will be targeted and, in truth, this is directed towards them because it’s about the US having full-spectrum military dominance over the planet. Fylingdales and Menwith Hill are the eyes and ears of the US fighting machine and, although the UK Government insists it has control of the bases, this is a blatant lie.

“This is already starting a new arms race. China has been blowing satellites out of space and the Russians are once again targeting Europe with nuclear weapons.”

The system is linked across the world to other listening bases in Australia, New Zealand, Canada and United States.

Fylingdales and Menwith Hill are being used to provide early warning of any potential missile launch from hostile soil.

Helen said: “So far, it has just been me at the base. But it’s the power of one and the last thing they want to see outside the base is my banners and me. They prefer for me just to go away . . . but I won’t.”

Top Back

E-mail to a friend Printable version

THE BOOK WITHIN A BOOK

2007-08-05T05:15:00.000-07:00

http://www.newspeakdictionary.com/go-goldstein.html

A PICTURE PAINTS A THOUSAND WORDS

2007-08-04T12:30:00.000-07:00

return to World facts
click on map to enlarge

When a picture of a world map is looked at, it really doesn't require Einstein to work out what the U.S. regime is up to - under their imperialistic global foreign policy of Full Spectrum Dominance (FSD) :

'Satellite' client/puppet states within Europe (Eurasia) - under U.S. control - includes UK, Turkey, Poland and Czechoslovakia....but not now Russia.

'Satellite' client/puppet states within Middle East - under U.S. control - include Israel and Iraq...but not yet Iran and Syria.

'Satellite' client/puppet states within Far East - under U.S. control - include Japan and Australia.

Every picture tell a story - and this world map asks a question too :

These 'satellite' US client/puppet states surround which country ?

Could Hilda's Intelligence Nullify Anthony's ?

As I see it - and please don't accuse me of being a 'conspiracy theorist' - 'The Master Puppeteers' invested much in the U.S. regime to deliver total global power and control - under the FSD 'umbrella'.

But 'All The President's Men - and One Woman' are completely fucking up 'The Masterplan' - which has threatened to expose these very real, and very human 'Master Puppeteers'...who are disappearing into the 'global woodwork' - outside the US.

The lethal danger is that the US regime will now 'go for broke' with a Final Solution which might put Hitler's attempt in the shade.

We are witnessing the rise and fall of the American Empire, but just this world started - supposedly - with a Big Bang - they might also end it with the same.

HUMANITY MUST THINK THE UNTHINKABLE TO SURVIVE

2007-08-03T13:51:00.000-07:00

Decent people find it hard - almost impossible - to accept there are pathological liars, killers, terrorists and terrorist-sympathisers within their Government (The State)...and so those within the Government (The State), literally, can often 'get away with murder' with immunity and impunity.

Humanity - We The People - must wake up, wise up and grow up - very fast indeed - if we want to survive the 21st century.

We must think the unthinkable - there are those within our Government (The State) who are liars, killers, terrorists, terrorist-sympathisers, and tyrants. They lie or tell the truth - let die or let live - kill or save life - make war or make peace - instil fear or contentment - scare or soothe - induce pain or pleasure - demonize or deify - protect or expose - incite hatred or love - torture or nurture...

...whatever it takes to gain more power and control - and maintain that power and control.

Humanity must think the unthinkable - because our Government (The State) has already done so - but somehow we must also remain decent people.

No easy task - especially when Corporations are found to do the same.

WHAT THE FCUK IS THIS ?!! AS IF SAUDI ARABIA NEEDS $13 BILLION OF U.S. AID - HELL WHY ???!!!

2007-08-02T11:26:00.000-07:00

This is grotesquely insane - and no-one seems to even raise an eyebrow. We get what we deserve. Insane, absolutely insane - and yet we allow it to happen. We will get what we deserve for doing nothing - or not enough :

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18106.htm

THE IFIELD SOCIETY PULLS OUT OF CONSULTATIONS

2007-08-01T16:25:00.000-07:00

NEWS RELEASE

THE IFIELD SOCIETY

AUGUST 1 2007

As from Friday, August 10 2007, Richard W. Symonds - representing The Ifield Society - will take no further part in any formal discussions/consultations relating to 'Land W and NW of Crawley' - especially 'Land' which includes Ifield Golf Club and Ifield Brook Meadows, within the ancient Parish of Ifield).

There are 3 Primary Reasons for this decision :

1. The property deal relating to Ifield Golf Club clearly appears a 'done deal', thus rendering any further discussion/consultation a complete waste of time, money and energy.

2. The 'democratic process' is no longer being adhered to by particular 'stakeholders', thus undermining the 'democratic process', and rendering it a complete sham.

3. Ifield Society's representative is provided with 'communication support' - at West Sussex council taxpayers' expense - he is very deaf.
As he now considers the discussion/consultation process to be a waste of time, money and energy, he does not wish to also waste the money of the West Sussex council taxpayer.

For any further details concerning this News Release, please contact :

Richard W. Symonds M.C.I.P.D.
THE IFIELD SOCIETY
14 Lavington Close, Ifield, Crawley, West Sussex RH11 OHX.
Tel : 18002 01293 535778 (Textphone for the Deaf)
Email : rwsymonds@hotmail.co.uk (preferred communication)

_____________________________

WHO GAINS MOST OUT OF MAKING WAR - ANY WAR ?

2007-07-31T00:34:00.000-07:00

George Bernard Shaw tackled this question in "Major Barbara" - regarding WW1 - and this also might be a clue :

http://wordsasweapons.blogspot.com/2007/07/september-9-baron-nathan-rothschild.html

Your contributions if possible - but please exercise caution.

If someone was to find out exactly who gained most out of making war - and could prove it beyond any reasonable doubt - that someone is unlikely to be making contributions here.

THE LOGIC OF "FULL SPECTRUM" INSANITY

2007-07-30T12:58:00.000-07:00

If this report proves to be true http://mathaba.net/rss/?x=558993 World War 3 holocaust here we come !

And I'm not trying to be funny.

THE REAL WAR : DEMOCRACY V PLUTOCRACY

2007-07-30T01:09:00.000-07:00

The real 'war' is between Democracy (of, by, and for the people) and Plutocracy (of, by, and for powerful people.

It is a war between the Majority and Minority...Humanity versus Tyranny.

We The People (aka Democracy, Majority, Humanity etc) are losing this war...

As Orwell said (his last-known published words) : "DON'T LET IT HAPPEN. IT DEPENDS ON YOU"