The pornography of distraction ?

Isn't it funny that Home Secretary Jaqui Smith's husband apparently a Mr Richard Timney, was paying for porno films and at the expense of the tax payer to boot. A funny and small comeuppance for this ridiculous cloth-headed gorgon at the Home Office, and fittingly ironic for these anti-privacy ghouls in the tinpot regime; just a tiny hint of what the kinds of retained records they want everyone else to be chained to as a 'privilege of living in a modern society' can dig up. Smith is one of several New Labour gorgons, which all blend one into another as far as I'm concerned, I can barely even tell them apart.

Certainly there's a lot of media interest in MP's spending at the moment, and there is something seemingly of insanity about some of the things MPs can claim in their expenses, and for sure there are some grotesque examples of this that the press and other politicians will dig up.

Other than it underlines the particularly dismal and inevitable Animal Farm scenario for Labour, I don't believe it's a particular 'problem' though, and typically all this general talk of sleaze and abusing expenses and so on has a very corrosive and distraction-inducing effect.

Instead of talking about the horrendous, vile and very real policies of this government, including the burgeoning police state apparatus and policies being feverishly assembled, with the Home Office at the forefront of, we end up talking about their expenses and making that the 'bad' thing that they are doing. And this just totally trivializes the real issues of the day.

Unless we are to treat this case as some kind of serious warning shot at those Labour politicians hysterically trying to dismantle privacy and liberty in the UK, which include but are no means limited to mass internet data storage, driving surveillance, the National ID Register, the uploading of medical records and so on.

Great if that's the case, I certainly hope it is, and frankly it should be seen like that anyway despite the general focus on politicians' expenses at the moment.

But it would also be appropriate if this media, rather than solely trying to catch a politician out over some minor rule, or find some embarrassing expense just tell the truth about what's going on and what the government is trying to do to the population.

Debt is the new terrorism

It's been reported elsewhere, but I am just going to pick up on what I read in the Daily Express on this, as The Daily Express is like a number of newspapers now, anti-police state but remains thoroughly pro, clash of civilizations.

In the media today (and yes of course there are exceptions and we're not necessarily talking about individual journalists), it is permissible to be anti-police state or more specifically anti-'draconian'/anti-statist but you're not allowed to be anti-war, but of course you can't be pro-war of aggression and anti-police state as the two things are totally hopelessly intertwinned as history well shows.

You're not really going to get properly get to the bottom of the police state or general draconian legislation or exploitative degrading dehumanizing policies in general, until you can also say that the wars of aggression and this reshaping of the world are wrong, so in all practical terms various 'conservative' newspapers who are now taking an anti-police state position, are in practice, pro-police state because they remain (at least in their ownership which is what counts) pro war of aggression.

Now anyway what you see in the Daily Express on this topic of a second reading of a bill in Parliament that would give more powers to bailiffs to kick down doors and seize assets on behalf of creditors, is the usual 'but there isn't proper oversight of these laws and they could be abused' quote from some so called 'advocacy group' instead of 'Fuck! What the hell is happening here ? What the hell is going on in this country ?' .

So if you're seeing this then is difficult to imagine anything else, other than that organization or that reporter is either blissfully misinformed, so uneducated, so propagandized to and so stupefied as to make their contribution worthless, or on the payroll. Either way they are part of the problem, as naturally this is dampened opposition, bogus opposition, deliberately impotent, false and worthless opposition and which sadly, we tend to see across the board.

"I know let's create a law to make everyone who hasn't paid their debts have their legs cut off"

Response: "But will there be proper oversight ? will it be regulated properly ? ooohhh.'

You see how stupid it is.

Bailiffs trying to break your door down should be treated exactly as anyone else doing that. Is this 'law' ? Or part of an overall political/technological condition that is replacing it? This seems more about getting people used to the idea of breaking down safeguards, breaking down their dignity and self-respect, and part of an overall spectrum of ways to humiliate and degrade them that is fully in-step with all other ridiculous sick laws the regime has created for itself.

The real crime is of course putting vulnerable people into crushing debt in the first place, the trend of the endless creation of money, the creation of debt, so others can come along and seize their assets when they default. This needs to stop and people are becoming much more aware of this.

And if you look at the Daily Mail, with its campaign about outrageous and gross bank charges, quite right you might think, but is the Daily Mail really trying to help here or just offering a conduit for banks to make an even cushier and more expoitative deal for themselves ? It's difficult to tell.

And anyway, as usual we see this deep-rooted obsession of the regime with taking possession of every aspect of peoples' lives coming to the fore, through council tax inspectors, rubbish fines, more powers to some of the worst trash in society ie bailiffs and of course this is all garbage, and it is a sign of 2 things; this deep-rooted institutional burning hatred of humanity; this idea that the world is perpetually broken and needs fixing by an intellectual radical elite, and 2) a looming financial crisis as this whole debt bubble collapses which actually isn't just the opinion of alternative news websites but of the Financial Times and the Independent for the last year. So there is a real problem here.

And you have to ask the question, why should people put into crippling debt by these lending institutions be 'taught a lesson' like this and why are the institutions doing this not being taught a lesson ?

Now let's go back to the Daily Express, furious about Inheritence Tax and really used some very strong language recently about 'stopping the police state', so why this impotent drivel about bailiffs being given more powers by the regime ? Again the only truth is, you can't stop the police state, or related draconian trends if you're pro illegal war of aggression, it is as simple as that.

And for sure, we can leave out certain other newspapers like the Daily Mirror with 'the War on Terror being lost' on their frontpage recently, as that is now completely pro-war, completely pro-police state and completely pro destruction of all society, this is a dispicable vile piece of drivel now masquerading as a kind of popular tabloid for plebs.

We can leave out the Daily Telegraph ostensibly because although it complains about the police state from time to time (sometimes in very strong terms) it remains the main neocon purveyor of war and is the voice of neoconservatism in the UK and very interestingly even talked about Gordon Brown's strong admiration of neoconservatism last year. Actually Murdoch as well, openly critical of the nanny state/police state but fiercly pro war of aggression.

So lets go over things yet again, today in 2007, you have a cloistered sickly. rotting government in office headed by sickly rotting war criminals being propped up by deeply corrupt or flawed individuals. They are looking around at everything in a panic and fear and feverishly trying to reshape society and create as many laws as possible, this is pretty serious situation.

But I suspect the reason a lot of people don't understand why Blair went to war and they try and say he was a 'poodle of Bush' is they don't understand or rather don't want to accept what they are dealing with and what they have put in office and they still don't despite the fact that it is manifested on every layer of policy and couldn't be more obvious.

debt bailiffs