.. how to ...
.. get rid of ...
.. 'install flash' nag
How to get rid of 'This website wants to install the following add-on: Adobe Flash Player'
Easy to do, but took some time to find:
W7/ie9: <l-clk> Tools, <l-clk> ActiveX Filtering [so it gets a tick].
Method found here, following tip in dslreports.
[keywords added: windows 7 starter, chiliGREEN netbook N570]
.. how to ...
.. evil is as evil is seen to do ...
.. follow the 'leaders' ...
.. the US and Zs
Thesis/Subtitle: We suffer under 'leadership failure' in two ways; a) we are shown bad examples by our so-called 'leaders' and far worse b) leadership itself is absent in a tyranny - which is where we are.
Preamble: As if the tragedy in Oslo/Utøya wasn't bad enough, it is already being used - by villains - to further their own crooked agendas. This article is my reaction-response to these vultures (Newton's 3rd; seeking truth & justice). The very first thing to note is the outpouring of outrage/grief, some of it real and some of it confected. That's one big problem right there; Q: How can we know what's real and what's not? One A: As ever, consider cui bono?
(For some 'background,' see Musing.)
[updates, 110727; article continued, 110729; article concluded.]
Trigger article #1:
Huge explosion rocks central Oslo
Europe correspondent Rachael Brown
Updated July 23, 2011 02:25:40
«A large explosion has hit the Norwegian government's headquarters in Oslo, killing at least two people and injuring fifteen.
Witnesses say the city is in panic, with people fearing further explosions. As yet, nobody has claimed responsibility for the suspected terrorist attack.
A gas leak was initially suspected to be the source of the explosion, but local police have since confirmed it was caused by a bomb.»
Comment: At that time, writing "suspected terrorist attack" may have been justified.
Trigger article #2:
Twin attacks leave Norway reeling
Updated July 23, 2011 05:47:02
«Militants have staged twin bomb and shooting attacks in Norway, ... with police saying they have no clue who or what is behind the attack, but media reports the gunman behind the shooting has been arrested.»
Comment: Note "Militants" and contrast with "police saying they have no clue."
Trigger article #3:
25 July 2011
This is not a crazed loner, this is a terrorist
«When Jared Lee Loughner walked into a town hall meeting and unceremoniously gunned down a Chief District Court Judge and a Congress Democrat in January this year, the most conspicuously absent word in public response was "terrorism".
Hilary Clinton went close, calling Loughner an "extremist" and drawing a parallel with extremism in the Middle East. But overwhelmingly, Loughner was deemed dismissed as crazy - much like Norway's Anders Behring Breivik who has now admitted to killing 90 people on the weekend.»
Comment: There is now a 'terrorism industry;' the AusBC and Waleed Aly are 'players' = participants, as are most politicians, the MSM & police - and the burgeoning 'security' industry.
Note some keywords: Militants, extremist, Arab/Islam/Muslim, Middle East [About 381,000 results (0.28 secs)]
Intermezzo: It takes some time to draft a post such as this, but I'm forced to publish this 'momentarily' (i.e. now, to be completed later) and as is, by the arrival of another article;
Trigger article #4:
Media rushed to judgment in Norway attacks
Updated July 25, 2011 21:05:33
«In the aftermath of the twin attacks in Norway, there has been some strident criticism of the speed at which sections of the media linked the attacks to Islamic terrorism.
Mr McClellan, a former television current affairs reporter, says it is not only the tabloid media - the BBC and other organisations do it as well.»
Comment: As for the BBC, so the AusBC - see 'Militants' above.
[more to come ... hint: Manson ... Bryant & Breivik are psychopaths, perhaps the biggest problem we the people face. No, not these (thankfully) few and rare bomber/killers, but other psychopaths - who are many, and in far more powerful positions.]
Update 110727, 15:39; blog item continues ... as a good friend says: "It is not simple." Here, think 'tangled web.'
Norway killer praised Australian conservatives
Updated July 26, 2011 20:35:27
«Accused Norwegian mass murderer Anders Behring Breivik praised four Australian conservative leaders - including former prime minister John Howard - in his 1,500-page manifesto.»
Comment: Also praised were Costello, often (erroneously) referred to by 'our' AusBC as 'Australia's greatest treasurer,' Windschuttle (of Howard's culture wars) and Pell (a so-called 'Christian leader.')
Exploiting a Tragedy
By Stephen M. Walt
July 25, 2011
«Norway certainly did not buy itself much grace from the jihadis for staying out of the Iraq war, or for Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg's demand that Israel open its borders with Gaza, or for his calls for a Palestinian unity government between Fatah and its terrorist cousin Hamas.
Norway can do all this and more, but in jihadist eyes it will forever remain guilty of being what it is: a liberal nation committed to freedom of speech and conscience, equality between the sexes, representative democracy and every other freedom that still defines the West. For being true to these ideals Norwegians have now been made to pay a terrible price.»
Comment: The 'snip' quoted by Walt was published by *Murdoch's* Wall Street Journal as part of an opinion piece, original article now modified - itself an act of vandalism; once published such rubbish should stay wherever it was put, as a record. As such a record, here is a photocopy thanks to Ali Gharib via ICH/Walt [ibid.].
The Greater Threat: Christian Extremism From Timothy McVeigh to Anders Breivik
By Pierre Tristam
July 25, 2011
«Timothy McVeigh, meet Anders Behring Breivik. Those two jihadists—two right-wing reactionaries, two terrorists, two anti-government white supremacists, two Christians—have a lot in common, down to the way the massacres they carried out were first mistaken for the work of Islamists by an American press rich in zealotry of its own. And they have a lot more in common with the fundamentalist politicians and ideologues among us who pretend to have nothing to do with the demons they inspire.»
Comment: We can see how 'not simple' = tangled - and fraught - our situation is.
One more article, #8:
Self-taught hacker charged over NBN attack
Simon Santow, staff
Updated July 27, 2011 13:01:30
«An unemployed truck driver who allegedly gave himself the online nickname 'Evil' has been refused bail over what police say could have been Australia's biggest hacking attack.»
Comment: Note the "could." The article is full of conditional language; it seems that the 'alleged' hacker had not (yet) done any harm - although having boasted he 'could.' Clearly, prevention is better than cure ('see tiger = run'), but until actual harm is attempted, all we really have is a potential threat. The 'alleged' hacker was under observation, both by the 'target' and the police - but how far will the police venture with their 'observations?' Then, recall Murdoch's NotW telephone (and what other?) spying. In a different but associated direction, how far off are we from "thought-crime?"
"No one will bomb us to silence. No one will shoot us to silence. No one will ever scare us away from being Norway" ...
IMHO, it's an odd thing to say, but reminiscent of "We don't negotiate with terrorists!"
terrorist n. (often attrib.) person using esp. organized violence against a government etc. terrorism n. [French: related to *terror] [POD]
This article started with Manson ... Bryant, Breivik, now add McVeigh.
Manson (~1969) was no terrorist (... violence against a government), but he certainly was mad = crazy = psychopathic, as are all who set out to kill humans - with the single exception in the case of self-defence in the face of immediate & mortal danger (didn't apply to the aggressive 2003 invasion of Iraq, say, nor Libya 2011 ...). Interestingly enough, Manson was "convicted of the murders through the joint-responsibility rule, which makes each member of a conspiracy guilty of crimes his fellow conspirators commit in furtherance of the conspiracy's object."
Comment: Pay attention, all criminal accessories!
McVeigh (~1995) "later decided to bomb a federal building ... [which] was the most destructive act of terrorism on American soil until ..." [wiki]; he "sought revenge against ... hoped to inspire a revolt against what he considered to be a tyrannical federal government" [ibid].
Comment: Fits the terrorism definition, but not the usual MSM 'militant / extremist / Muslim / Arab' profile (AusBC -> WSJ).
Bryant (~1996) "was convicted of murdering 35 people and injuring 21 others in the Port Arthur massacre, a shooting spree..." quite (reversely) reminiscent of Breivik's (who has "admitted responsibility" - lawyer).
I assume any competent psychiatrist (assuming the existence thereof) would certify all of the above perpetrators as insane. Recalling 'prevention is better than cure,' Q: What, if anything, is being done to *prevent* insanity = psychopathy? A: AFAIK, *nothing*; to the contrary, by 'portraying all possible perversions,' TV presents incipient psychopaths with a convenient menu of 'means and motives,' that plus the politicians' 'hate speech' (Tampa, Haneef, etc.) means the crazies are left looking only for an opportunity. Backing up a bit, the use of TV as baby-sitter almost guarantees the failure or total lack of socialisation; a recipe for disaster (ever had to deal with a litter of unsocialised kittens?)
Refer my original statement: This article is my reaction-response to the vultures attempting to twist a catastrophe to their own advantage. I advocate for a *better* world, with cooperation instead of confrontation, less crime rather than ever more lying, cheating, theft & murder. The trends established by "the Enlightenment" have, sadly, been reversed; Q: How & why? A: By greedy psychopaths seizing power, to enrich themselves and/or their 'mates.'
Update 110729, 10:51; blog item concludes ...
Seeing 'Islamic Terror' in Norway
by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR)
July 25, 2011
«Right-wing terror suspect Anders Behring Breivik reportedly killed 76 people in Norway on Friday, by all accounts driven by far-right anti-immigrant politics and fervent Islamophobia. But many early media accounts assumed that the perpetrator of the attacks was Muslim.»
Comment: As usual, one should read the article, in this case it's an extension to my list of articles vis-à-vis utterly biased MSM coverage, concentrating on the US. Competent people paying attention will be aware of the media's treachery; it's the unaware ones who are the worry. No democracy ("of, by, for the people etc.") can ever function properly if voters are deceived - as so many are, deliberately and with malice aforethought.
Homebuyers shut out until 2020
By Sue Lannin
Updated July 28, 2011 14:24:52
«Mr Phillips says housing in Australia has become severely unaffordable and will remain so for at least the next 10 years.
He says house prices in Sydney only increased 83 per cent, citing that a lot of their price increases happened in the 1990s.»
Comment #1: On it's face, this article has nothing to do with Oslo/Utøya/Breivik, just as the 'Self-taught hacker' article has little to do with media or terrorism. But. My headline includes 'portraying all possible perversions;' trying to hack into some ISP violates the elementary injunction "Don't touch things not yours." Moreover, the perpetrator may not have intended harm but that's unlikely to save him; he will be made to feel "the full force of the law," as he's "the country's first solo hacker to be arrested." A 'message' must be sent, an example demonstrated.
Comment #2: What house-prices do have to do with, is the governments (of both Lib and Lab in Aus, nominally left/right or progressive/conservative elsewhere) - actions *against* the people's interests. Time was, when an average house cost appr. ~2.5 times an average annual income; what the cited article shows is a range from over 5 to over 8 with 'outliers' of 4.3 & 10.2. The greatest 'kickers' to house prices were Howard & Costello's halving of the capital gains tax, plus (mainly imported) low interest rates, with Hawke/Keating's negative gearing fiddles only a side-show. Recall it was Breivik praising Howard & Costello, probably for their barbaric stance against 'boat people' = Tampa etc.. Not only is our situation 'not simple,' the forces arrayed against us are 'united' (bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic) as the M/I/C/4-plex, in a word: Fraught.
Comment #3: It's enough. Failing effective, countervailing action, we the people and our once jewel-like planet are headed down the tubes = into the tor-let.
Musing 1: It's always someone else's fault. We can see that the M/I/C/4-plex forms a closed circle, each with hands in others' pockets. There are two other subsidiary components, namely religion & academia; both 'cooperate' with the 'main actors' with religion smoothing the way (by rights, they should condemn aggressive war unconditionally, and forbid any believers to participate), and academia 'developing' *and* teaching the crooked theories = erring ideology. Here I refer mainly to neoliberalism; we can see the effects almost everywhere and 'prime proof' of its purpose is seen with the obscene enrichment of the mainly already filthy-rich, with 'intended' side-effect of govts going broke - even, or especially, the US; and the forced introduction of austerity = killing of 'welfare entitlements.'
Bah! So much for 'civilisation;' Hi ho, hi ho, it's off to serfdom we go (are pushed).
Musing 2: One attempts to understand how the world works; one observes, one ponders. The process begins at a young age, here's a great example:
"What's that Daddy?"
"It's a ship."
One notices that the answer is not particularly illuminating. Some may recognise that it's taken from a comedy sketch, broadcast over TV. It illustrates two problems; a) that the parent may supply insufficient information, and b) that far too many people use TV as their 'primary input source.' Q: What's wrong with TV? A: It's the easiest way to misinform people. Humans evolved under what one may term "The law of the jungle," one interpretation being "Eat or be eaten." Consider possible 'original' versions of the sketch, 'back then:'
"What's that Daddy?"
(Case #1, Redback spider.)
"What's that Daddy?"
(Case #2, Sabre-tooth tiger.)
In each 'original' version, the answer is even less factually illuminating - but it may be life-preserving. But there's more to this, namely that the human 'input system,' mainly visual with accompanying audio, evolved to be unquestioning; i.e. see tiger = run - or be eaten. Could explain the expression 'seeing is believing' (to which I add: Believing is what some people may do - in the absence of evidence).
The survival impulse takes precedence (without getting too philosophical); it is the task of the infant to see/hear and obey, and the task of the carer to provide information otherwise unobtainable. TV defeats this process in two ways, a) by exploiting the 'vulnerability' of the human input system, and b) by presenting 'inappropriate' info = bad examples and worse, outright lies.
In addition to so-called 'factual' programs, there are the 'entertainment' ones; it is mostly through these that the aberrant ideas are acquired - the thousands of violent acts, from cartoon-shows through family violence to bloody massacres - the human 'input system' was never 'designed' to distinguish fact from fiction and no, it's not 'just a movie.' In the context of this article, we wonder how/where the Mansons, Bryants & Breiviks of this world get their ideas from; TV must be a 'prime suspect.' Of course, ideas may be acquired from books, newspapers or merely idle conversations, but TV is ubiquitous. This is not an appeal for censorship but a condemnation of a lacking context; what really is missing is the moral framework. Murdoch et al. - and 'primary carers' - kindly take note.
It stands to reason that abandoning infants to TV as baby-sitter is an abandonment of responsibility - and an extreme (mental) form of child abuse, only exceeded by subjecting a child to religious indoctrination.
Then, consider lies. On the 'criminal spectrum,' lies are the 'entry point;' lies are designed to deceive, who needs them/it = lies/deception?
End of musing.
drafting - under review
.. democracy ...
.. cannot live whilst ...
.. being smothered by a lie-cloud
The Murdoch phone-bugging scandal is just the tip of a *very* dirty iceberg.
Examine this headline:
For Years, the Tabloids' Sting Kept British Politicians in Line
«Fear of media harassment and political necessity have long underpinned the uneasy collusion between British politicians and the nation's tabloids.»
Comment: NYT is itself corrupt, yet even they can't lie all the time.
That's not all. As well as running a 'political agenda,' Murdoch and the corrupt&venal MSM - including, to their ever-lasting shame & *damnation*, the AusBC - all together tell us outrageous lies.
The case should not need any further proof - only the totally brain-dead may still be unaware, but just in case:
1. That Murdoch's papers lie, proof = continuous malfeasance, from the current scandal all the way 'back' at least to the continuous, despicable and scurrilous '72-'75 campaign against the twice democratically elected PM Whitlam & his Labor party government.
2. That the corrupt&venal MSM lie, proof = Iraq's *non-existent* WMDs.
3. That the AusBC lies, proof = Israeli hasbara, conduited *and actively assisted* by the taxpayer-funded AusBC, including the un- & anti-democratic 'unleashed' moderators.
Now, always worth a repeat, "of, by, for the people etc." democracy *requires*, among a few other vital components, a fully and fairly informed electorate.
Smothering the people with a lie-cloud clearly falls more than just a bit short...
That's still not all. As we see with UK PM Cameron, there is a 'working relationship' between the corrupt&venal MSM and the government, as proved by Cameron hiring a Murdoch cast-off.
The 'full scoop' is that both 'opposing' parties in our predominately two-party system cooperate more or less fully with the MSM, the only exception being when some part or all of the MSM decides to attack one side or the other; in the case of Murdoch usually the 'nominally left' party = Labor in Aus, say.
One could say that being attacked is the fault of the party, since occasionally they are in power and could 'deal with' any rogue elements - yet they don't so deal; why not? See the nyt article, perhaps.
But that's still not all.
Our so-called 'leaders' are not leaders at all, they're *pushers*. They push 'the program' onto us, we the *supposedly* sovereign people, this pushing otherwise being known as 'engineering consent.' Here's another article (headline only):
Democratization Can't Save Europe
«Despite the myriad problems currently facing the European Union, democratization is not the answer. Rather, the EU's elites need to improve -- and power has to be taken away from the periphery.»
Comment: Clear; disenfranchise the people even further. A dis-informed, mal-informed, outright deceived electorate cannot make rational voting decisions (except possibly to rebel); no consent may be 'engineered' = procured, from a deliberately dumbed-down populace.
Here's another article (headline only):
Brown takes aim at papers' 'criminal links'
«Former British prime minister Gordon Brown has accused Rupert Murdoch's media empire of using criminals to obtain his private documents.»
Comment: Brown can now afford to snipe; he's a 'yesterday' person. Cameron has already ordered a public inquiry, but we all know that enquiries are *also* corrupt, and will only return 'pre-specified' results. Nevertheless, it's going to be 'touch and go' before some accommodation is found.
In a nutshell: The 'democratic covenant' is totally kaput; we the people are powerless passengers, and the so-called 'leaders' are leading us over several cliffs; economic (neoliberalism), war (murder for spoil) & environmental = excess-CO2 caused climate-catastrophe.
Fazit: Stop referring to our 'modus vivendi' as democracy; it ain't.
Where's my effective vote?
[more later - perhaps]