A 'fog' of news?

Richard North, EU Referendum, posts on one example wherein is shown that our 'news services' are totally incompetent and thereby worthless. But this is but the latest example of the lack of real journalism from which we in this country, suffer.

Gawain Towler, England Expects, posts on some 'research' carried out by the BBC in which it is intimated that Hannan (and, by intimation, Farage) may not be a household name in British politics.

Neil O'Brien, writing in the Daily Telegraph, asks the question why has the proportion of households where no-one has ever worked, doubled; yet nowhere does he bother to go further and ask for the root causes of this fact. Perhaps it is beyond the intellectual capability of this man to look at the emasculation of the education system that has taken place; the 'social-engineering' that has taken place? This man is head of a 'think-tank'? Methinks the first word is totally misplaced!

How often have we been bombarded about Cameron's 'phantom veto on a phantom treaty'? "There was no draft treaty before the European Council, just a set of conclusions..." So who, exactly, is the "Straw Man" here.........?

That Orwell's 'Big Brother' has arrived is beyond doubt - it has arrived through a combination of political 'verbal dexterity' and a compliant MSM (in the politician's pocket, or in the case of the BBC - the EU) who are not in the 'news/comment' business - rather the 'parrot' business.

Just saying...................

'Meeja' studies

"The media's selection and description of particular events - far more than their editorials - help to create or promote national issues, to shape the minds of the Congress and public, and to influence the President's agenda and timing."
Theodore C. Sorensen, John F. Kennedy Speechwriter

Really? That the media do shape the minds of the public is true, but that they shape the minds of, in our case, the legislature and Prime Minister is pure hogwash. An example of how this statement is true can best be illustrated in the words of John Rendon, founder of the Rendon Group, a Washington PR firm, who in 1996 told the Us Air Force Academy:

"....when victorious troops rolled into Kuwait City at the end of the first war in the Persian Gulf, they were greeted by hundreds of Kuwaitis waving small American flags. The scene, flashed around the world on television screens, sent the message that U.S. Marines were being welcomed in Kuwait as liberating heroes. “Did you ever stop to wonder,” Rendon asked, “how the people of Kuwait City, after being held hostage for seven long and painful months, were able to get hand-held American, and for that matter, the flags of other coalition countries?” He paused for effect. “Well, you now know the answer. That was one of my jobs then."

And politicians do not manipulate the news? Yeah, right. What is presented to us today as 'news' is not 'fair and balanced'; it is most definitely 'one-sided', almost what could be termed 'advocacy- journalism'. The media have become part of - and the tool for - what may be termed 'perception management', the latest 'art form' currently being practised by our politicians. As an example I offer the 'Localism' aspect of the Coalition's process for the devolution of power to the people. From the Department of Communities and Local Government website it is possible to access the 'Plain English Guide' to this Localism thingy. Whilst the media did report the right to local referendums, I do not recall them providing as much space to the fact that local authorities can disrgard the result of a referendum if they so wish. As I wrote yesterday, if the public do not receive all the information required for them to make an informed decision, then there must be some form of censorship being practised.

If censorship 'per se' is not being practised, then mind-control most certainly is - and two examples. First Autonomous Mind posts on the misrepresentation of facts and lies being presented as truth. I would query AM's statement that the Express should ensure it's journalists understanding of the EU and the control it has accumulated over this country by pointing out that the content of journalistic efforts generally reflect the 'line' media proprietors wish 'pushed' - but I digress. Second, Richard North, EU Referendum, posts on the fact that Cameron has spent £2million of taxpayer's money on the formulation of his 'Happiness Index' questionnaire. The purported questions are 'mind conditioning' in that they are designed to focus the public's minds on matters of no real consequence, rather than on matters the public do have views - and in some cases, very strong views.

Besides being subjected, physically, to the will of our 'elected dictators', it must now be apparent so are we mentally. The control of our freedom and thought, coupled with the way history taught in our schools is being 'rewritten', means that in our journey down the Orwellian Big Brother path, it can't be long before we are provided with the all-seeing, all-hearing tv sets - or have we already?

Political discipline? Where?

A characteristic of the political elite most noticeable by its absence.

In the last few days we have witnessed:

• Oliver Letwin disposing of government papers in a public waste receptacle;
• Chris Huhne admitting 'briefing' against a cabinet colleague, Theresa May, whilst simultaneously being the object of a police investigation;
• Liam Fox admitting that his conduct as a Secretary of State had not been of the exemplary standard which is required of that high office;
• Jonathan Djanogly, Justice Minister, failing to declare a conflict of interest;

What the above four examples demonstrate is both a contempt for and arrogance of their political position. Coupled with that we have a Prime Minister who continues the pretence that he has a mandate to rule pretty much as he damn well pleases, even though he lost the 2010 general election. The fact he appears unwilling to punish displays of misbehaviour by members of his government is probably due to that same contempt for and arrogance of his own position. His government promise that they will work towards arresting natural climate change - a statement that makes his government sound like God, yet seems to overlook the fact that they are but a collection of very, very inferior men and women.

Not that those named members of the present government are the only ones guilty of contempt and arrogance, becuse that charge can be laid at the door of virtually every politician in the House of Commons. To paraphrase George Orwell, they are guilty of the most flagrant violations of reality because they never fully grasped the enormity of what was demanded of them, neither did they possess the expertise to deal with that enormity; and most arrogant of all they were not sufficiently interested in what occured outside their own little 'bubble' world.

And there is no 'them' and 'us'? And there is no reason why we should not rise up and put them out of their misery - and our lives?

More political 'cock-wuffle'....

"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 cuttlefish spurting out ink."
George Orwell (Politics and the English Language)

"During its first 15 months, the Coalition Government has been grappling with a series of touch challenges; restoring sustainability to the public finances, rebuilding our economy and delivering our climate change commitments.
Conventional wisdom dictates that supporting economic growth is incompatible with cutting carbon. Like most conventional wisdom, this is way off the mark. But, although reducing carbon on its own is relatively easy, doing so while generating growth and spreading prosperity is a far tougher challenge: one requiring co-operation and commitment from both government and industry.
This is a challenge that this Government is tackling head-on. We are investing in the transport infrastructure and technologies that will help us build a dynamic, balanced economy, while achieving our goals for carbon reduction.
We have announced a major electrification programme to reduce the carbon footprint of our railways. Our plans for a national high-speed rail network would encourage passengers to switch from short-haul aviation to rail, while bridging the north-south divide and spreading prosperity right across the country.
And because, unlike our predecessors, we believe that the enemy is the carbon, not the car, we have also placed Britain firmly in the global vanguard of the green motoring revolution.
Thanks to the ground-breaking Plug-in car grant, which gives motorists a 25pc subsidy of up to £5,000, new ultra-low carbon cars are much more affordable.
We have set out a comprehensive electric vehicle infrastructure strategy that identifies how a national recharging network can develop in a way that is targeted, convenient and safe. And, through our £30m Plugged-in Places programme, a network of vehicle recharging points is being established in eight areas across the UK - from homes and workplaces to streets, car parks, retail and leisure facilities - to allow us.to learn how real consumers use public charging infrastructure
Initiatives like this are paying real dividends in terms of growth and jobs. Major companies are no launching innovative low-carbon vehicles in Britain and being a launch market makes the UK attractive as a manufacturing location. So Nissan is building a plant to manufacture its electric vehicles and batteries in the North-East - and others will follow. Meanwhile Chargemaster and Ecotricity have recently both announced plans to build privately funded networks of thousands of recharging points at motorway service stations and other locations across the UK by the end of the year.
The Government understands the importance of aviation in giving businesses the connectivity they need to thrive in a competitive global economy, but we also recognise that the sector can only grow if it does so sustainably. So we are looking at new ways to incentivise airlines and aircraft manufacturers to address the climate change impact of air travel and encourage investment in low-carbon technologies and fuels.
Technological improvements are vital to improving fuel efficiency and reducing CO2 emissions. There have already been significant changes over the last decades in the efficiency of aircraft, which are today 70pc more efficient than the first commercial jets. New technologies, such as open-rotor engine designs and lightweight composite materials, have the potential to reduce carbon emissions significantly.
All this will feed into the work we are doing on our Sustainable Aviation Framework, which we will publish in draft next year. This framework will ensure that have a positive and enduring policy strategy that enables aviation to support economic growth while addressing its local and global environmental impacts.
In every mode of transport, new technology has a pivotal decarbonising role. But technology alone cannot deliver genuine sustainability. We need a productive blend of dynamic private enterprise and supportive public policy, combined with a much greater devolution of decision-making to local communities, to drive through real and lasting change.
By working in partnership to get that balance right, transport can play its full part in building the stronger economy and the greener, cleaner environment, that this country so badly needs."

So writes Philip Hammond, Transport Secretary, in the print edition of today's Daily Telegraph, outlining the Government's vision for the future of UK transport. This is part of a series being run by the Telegraph, one which has an introduction by Geoffrey Lean, thus:

"It will take a technological revolution to build the green economy, but this is already under way. Much of technology necessary to create low-carbon prosperity is available or being developed - and costs are falling fast. The question is whether Britain will be in the vanguard of developing and using it, reaping the rewards in exports and jobs, or whether, as often in the past, it will stumble along behind more far-seeing economies. In this - the second of seven pages sponsored by Shell under the editorial control of the Telegraph - leading figures describe how green technologies are taking root in such key areas as energy, transport, infrastructure and urban living. You can take part in the debate by contributing reactions and views on line."

Having trawled the Telegraph website, viewed Geoffrey Lean's article page, input "Plugged in to the green agenda (the title of Hammond's piece) into the Telegraph search facility - nothing. Likewise am I unable to find any webpage to contribute reactions and views (even if I wished to) - but I digress.....

Hammond, in common with all politicians, is practising the art of disingeniousness when he writes about investing in the transport infrastructure and technologies that will help build a dynamic, balanced economy while achieving goals for carbon reduction because, in effect, he has no option but to pursue this policy as it is a requirement of the European Union, transport being an area in which the EU has 'shared-competence'. Under the Trans European Network - Transport (TEN-T) the EU can demand certain measures, such as decarbonisation of any form of transport. A trawl round the European Commission Mobility & Transport website or the TEN-T Executive Agency website will confirm this. A further document setting out the requirements of member states can be found in Decision No 661/2010/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council dated 7 July 2010 on Union guidelines for the development of the Trans-European Transport Network.

For Hammond to write: "We need a productive blend of dynamic private enterprise and supportive public policy, combined with a much greater devolution of decision-making to local communities, to drive through real and lasting change." is pure political drivel as any 'supposed' devolution of decision-making to local communities will have no bearing on any aspect of any transport decision that is taken. Likewise where Hammond 'trumpets' major electrification programmes to reduce the carbon foot-print of our railways; encouraging passengers to switch from air to rail travel; 'bridging' divides; these are the aims of EU policy. The promotion of electric cars is no more than the aim of TEN-T and Europe 2020, which is one designed to ban all cars with combustion propulsion from city centres. Seems there might be a problem, if this report from the Guardian was correct - although logically there shouldn't be as we all know that "The EU Rules - OK?"

Poor Philip Hammond, he deserves every ounce of sympathy that we can give him - like his Leader, he suffers from the delusion that he is one of those that governs our nation!