marahfreedom

Archive for the ‘use of tax monies’ Category

16 USA/England Oriented Articles : Alpha Male Language Styles, Demogoguery Against Alpha Males, Spirit and Brain Not Always The Same Page, Too Excited Even With Cold Showers?, Too Much Attention Paid to Assange, Religion And Disenfrachisement, Educaion-Financiar Complex Debunked, Education Fee Paradigms, China Football Underworld And Failed CCTV Sting-Op?, Monopoly And Fair Use Issues – For One’s Own Image No Less!, Clegg’s Wealth Tax, What Do Strippers Expect – Retiring 401K Middle Class Is Fine Enough (Don’t Be Gold Diggers), Danica’s Skillz, Stripping A Debt Free Career, Tired Old People Need Defending Not Bullying – reposted by @AgreeToDisagree – 31st August 2012

In 1% tricks and traps, Christianity, Church, critical discourse, demogoguery, Education, football, Muslims, sex positivism, Sexuality, social freedoms, terrorists, use of tax monies, vested interest on August 30, 2012 at 7:26 pm

ARTICLE 1

Donald Trump: The Dumbest Things He’s Said About Women – by Piper Weiss, Shine Staff | Work + Money – 30th August 2012

Donald Trump (undated pic)

The following women are not attractive to Donald Trump: Angelina Jolie (“She’s been with so many guys”), Cher (“bad plastic surgery”), Rosie O’Donnell (“big, fat pig”), and now, Arianna Huffington.

On Wednesday, Trump used his Twitter account to call the internet powerhouse “unattractive both inside and out.” He went on to attack her marriage, which ended in an amicable divorce.

“I fully understand why her former husband left her for a man-he made a good decision,” Trump added in less than 140 characters.

It’s not the first time he’s publicly judged a successful female media figure by her looks and intimate life, and it probably won’t be the last.

Trump’s world seems to be divided into three categories. Women he finds attractive. Women he doesn’t find attractive. And Men. It’s not so different from a Miss USA pageant, only “contestants” like Huffington don’t ask to be entered.

Trump slams Cher for anti-Romney tweets

It’s unclear what exactly prompted Trump’s alarmingly inappropriate personal attack. His rep told the Washington Post it stems from her largely op-ed driven publication’s “massive and consistently inaccurate reporting on Mr. Trump.”

Huffington smartly refused to take the bait and refrained from responding, possibly avoiding another drawn out Trump vs. Barbara Walters feud.

In the past, both male and female columnists at major media outlets have labeled Trump “a sexist dinosaur,” with “a legacy of unapologetically gleeful misogyny.” These days nobody’s wasting words trying to prove that point, when Trump seems to do the job all on his own. Here are some of the

gems from the mouth of a modern day caveman:

“All of the women on The Apprentice flirted with me – consciously or unconsciously. That’s to be expected.”
-From his book How to Get Rich.

“So when he had plenty of money, she liked him…But then after that, not as good, right?”
-In response to an Access Hollywood interview question on Anne Hathaway’s split from her jailed ex-boyfriend.

“I’ll send one of my friends to pick up her girlfriend and I think it would be very easy.”
-On Rosie O’Donnell and his own mysteriously beguiling friends, as reported by The New York Daily News.

“She does have a very nice figure . . . if [she] weren’t my daughter, perhaps I’d be dating her.”
-On his daughter, Ivanka, during a interview on the The View.

“You look very good, Aubrey, I have to say, Do you mind if I say? Is that sexist?”
-On Aubrey O’Day’s boardroom appearance during an episode of The Apprentice.

“Maybe [women] don’t know him. Maybe they don’t get what is going on.”
-On Obama’s popularity with women voters, in a recent Fox News interview.

“The early victories by women on The Apprentice were to a very large extent dependent on their sex appeal.”
-On women’s success on The Apprentice, from How to Get Rich.

“I believe we’re all equal except women still have to try harder and they know it. They will do what they have to do to get the job done and will not necessarily be demure about it.”
-More on women’s success, from How to Get Rich.

“Oftentimes when I was sleeping with one of the top women in the world I would say to myself, thinking about me as a boy from Queens, ‘can you believe what I am getting?'”
-On former romantic partners, from Think Big: Make it Happen in Business and Life.

“Beauty and elegance, whether in a woman, a building, or a work of art is not just superficial or something pretty to see.”
-On inanimate objects and women, from Trump 101: The Way to Success

“You know, it doesn’t really matter what [the media] write as long as you’ve got a young and beautiful piece of [expletive].”
-On media zen and women’s body parts, from a 1991 Esquire interview.

http://shine.yahoo.com/work-money/donald-trump-dumbest-things-hes-said-women-192600474.html

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Any ‘unapologetically gleeful misogyny’ is only for and usable by alpha males. Even wealthy betas like Bill Gates do not, or dare not use ‘unapologetically gleeful misogyny’. And due to socialised pressure, the alpha male is an increasingly rare species these days.

Good role model for those able to fathom this guy or where this guy is coming from but physicality wise, doubtful could take on Putin (more Trump is more Alpha Slick than Alpha Hardman, even as some of us are only mindset based Alpha Minor . . . ), though mindset wise probably on same standing. Both of these guys though lack beards (Alpha Major) . . . in any case, the real alpha males should set up the last international Gentlemen’s Club before the whole Alpha-male type/meme disappears . . . Club Alpha or Alpha Club, for “Playboy/Hustler/Penthouse/Miss World loving”, full bearded, hairy (thanks JB or was that DM . . . ), lantern jawed, bald from too much testosterone (not anything else though), Hells Angel type club joining, Car Modding, gladiatorial game playing, bull riding/fighting, male f—ing (females too delicate, would break . . . try this for hyper masculinity lol!), 2nd amendment loving, alcohol swilling, organic drug taking males only.

The rest of the slack jawed f@99ot, PC, metrosexual types are for alpha females unable to find alpha males (betas females are best for beta males if a Matriarchy is not intended . . .  ), OR alpha females socially twisted into ‘Lordosis’ ‘male bashing’ or accidental same-sex (socialised m2m or f2f are incidental not genetic, so differentiate to avoid much grief and regret later on) type behaviour. So would alpha females serious enough get that lab to grow a penis and a pair (set of testicles) with. But don’t go around subverting already estrogenized metro-males who are no challenge even as no females could ever be larger than the largest male or more ethical than the most ‘testosteronized’ males . . .

She’s been with so many guys (of Angelina Jolie)” . . . never really looked at this from that angle. Thanks Trump! It’s informed now! Now how about running for Governor or even President to change some laws for the 99%? Back to the Future 2 (Robert Zemeckis 1989) cannot occur without Trump on the scene! ‘Biff” (Thomas F. Wilson)’s an Alpha!

http://crankymanslawn.com/2011/04/14/who-will-trump-the-donald-2/

ARTICLE 2

Todd Akin and the Second Sex – Posted by Judith Thurman – August 27, 2012

Naw, just demogoguery, Todd wouldn’t rape a fly . . . or was that the other way around . . . ugh . . . anyway too many GOPs should be dropped for term limitlessness if not crony capitalism . . .

Simone de Beauvoir’s foundational treatise on gender inequality, “The Second Sex,” was published in France in 1949, a year after the author—a thirty-eight-year-old public intellectual—was allowed to vote for the first time. French women, so belatedly enfranchised, would not have access to legal birth control until 1967, or to legal first-trimester abortions until 1975.

In 1971, Beauvoir took the lead in her countrywomen’s struggle for reproductive rights. She wrote a declaration, “The Manifesto of 343,” that exposed her and her fellow-signers—some of France’s leading female artists, actors, writers, jurists, and filmmakers—to criminal prosecution. (It also exposed them to degrading ridicule of a now-familiar sort. Forty years before Rush Limbaugh aired his repulsive fantasies about Sandra Fluke, the declaration was nicknamed “The Manifesto of the 343 Sluts.”)

“One million women in France have an abortion every year,” Beauvoir’s declaration began. “Condemned to secrecy, they have them in dangerous conditions…. These women are veiled in silence. I declare that I am one of them. I have had an abortion.”

Not all of the women who signed Beauvoir’s manifesto had actually had an abortion. Some of them, like Violette Leduc, the lesbian writer, may never have had sex with a man. The point was to stand together on behalf of the “veiled.” And in 1971, I was one of the veiled. I was a single woman just out of college, far from home, living marginally, without a partner, who found herself pregnant.

It is sometimes hard to remember that abortion has not been a crime in the United States since Roe v. Wade was decided, in 1973. If politicians like Todd Akin and Paul Ryan prevail, it will be a crime again, under all circumstances, along with some forms of contraception that can spare women from a hard choice that they have to live with, one way or another, for the rest of their lives.

Akin disgraced himself as a benighted zealot by blathering about “legitimate rape,” but it’s a mistake, I think, to focus one’s outrage on the trauma of rape and incest victims, on teen-age girls of severely limited mental capacity who are conned by predators, or on patients who have been told by their physicians that a full-term pregnancy may kill them. Forcing such women to bear a child violates their integrity in a barbaric fashion—it rapes them twice.

But most women who seek abortions do not fall into those categories. They are our neighbors, daughters, sisters, granddaughters, and colleagues. They come in every size and color. They are rich and poor. They are Republicans and Democrats. They are churchgoers and atheists. They are married, single, and divorced. Some ardently want a family—when the time is right. Some of them have children already. But they have this in common: at some point between the onset of puberty and the end of menopause—and one neither wants nor needs to know the circumstances, it is none of our business—they had a sexual encounter that resulted in an accidental conception, and they couldn’t go through with it.

Here is where the Akin uproar leads us to perilous ground. “Legitimate rape” (or “forcible rape,” as the Congressman put it in his apology for having “misspoke”) is a coded expression that everyone in its target audience understands. It conjures the image of a Victorian maiden ravished by a villain in a cloak and a top hat, twirling his mustache as she flails on the railroad tracks (hey writer you forgot the Mr.Peanut brand type Monocle . . . ) . It implies that there are “legitimate” victims—and only certifiably “pure” women fall into that category. Everyone else had it coming.

“The Second Sex” is an exhaustive study of the ways that misogyny has, from time immemorial, been disguised as righteousness. Todd Akin and Paul Ryan want to write a new chapter to the story. If you are saved, you need not fear their policies. If you are fallen, you will pay the price. They would lower the veil of shame and silence on a new generation. But if we let this become a debate about female virtue, rather than about female self-determination, we have lost it.

One generation ahead of ya Todd . . .

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Todd does not speak the language of ‘occultism’ and nor do those attacking Todd. The *body* and the *spirit* are different ‘people’. A rapist rapes ONLY when the spirit in the woman allows or calls to the spirit in the man (this is how Burkha clad women who cannot even be seen are even raped to begin with), OR the spirit of the rapist is not in control. Todd Akin is not to be blamed for the clumsy language use, ‘Legitimate’ means Spirit to Spirit, nothing else . . . this is not a commonly broached subject in society where spirit and brain are seperate leading to all kinds of abuses in the name of ‘mental health’ to enable the culling from society people aware of the differences between spirit and brain (the feminazis, demogogues and psychiatric establishment, also henpecked male politicians, collude on this one to take out as many right minded people as possible . . . this comes from experience . . . ). But needs to take  up some language and ‘spirit of language’ courses. The viciousness directed against Todd though is inequitable. Todd dropping semi-wonky language from lack of training means nothing about character and ONLY the same could be done back to Todd. Not threats of AIDS infected rape or drowning.

Todd Akin most probably does not have interest in raping anyone (even if Todd does, he’d have too much to lose by doing so, makes no sense), we also do know that to even become a Congressman, the discipline needs to be there, especially for 2 terms limited types not drunk with power for decades. As for mysogyny factor, so long as there is no intent to hurt anyone, and if all persons subject to mysogyny are consensual, no issue.  Please don’t threaten Congressmen with AIDS rapes or drownings- might be actionable. Todd Akin may have described the above clumsily and look like Kurtwood Smith who played Clarence J. Boddicker in Robocop 1 (1987 Paul Verhoeven), but that does not mean Todd should be subject to this sort of abuse.

Perhaps those threatening Todd need to get their heads checked instead . . . I do however suggest that since Todd has been in ‘power’ for more than 2 terms, that Todd relinquish that seat anyway for someone that Todd could endorse that is similarly minded. Oligarchic term limitlessness destroys democracy, and Todd looks like part of the problem of technicalities in ethics for bettering democracy rather than the solution or being an exemplar. Careerist politicians are a sad relic of the past. Todd voted well on several bills but has not forwarded any useful bills or at even bills to redistribute land to the poor or come up with anything useful for all those stints in taxpayer paid for posts.

Todd voted for carrying concealed weapons GOOD (2nd Amendment is always good, the bigger the weapon the better . . . )
Todd voted against the parks and soils sales tax GOOD (The Iraq war is not over, the last thing USA needs is Crony Capitalism gardening companies bleeding tax payers)
Todd voted against the 1993 tax increase and education spending increase GOOD (Prevented Crony Capitalism)
Todd sponsored legislation to prohibit casino companies from contributing to Missouri state lawmakers. GOOD (Ethical)

Todd is anti-abortion rights, BAD (Authoritarian, the state does not control women’s bodies . . . but spiritual issue of partially formed life is very serious – perhaps could be dealt with via formulation between various faiths the best way to safely ensure partly formed ‘Foetids’ are able to ‘re-enter’ the circle of life properly)

How about redistribution of un-used state land to the homeless or poor due for foreclosures? A semi-thoughtful man who did not delve deep enough into the above before speaking . . .

ARTICLE 3

Man on trial for paedophilia to use ‘my brain made me do it’ defence – August 29, 2012

Norwegian mass killer Anders Behring Breivik was sane when he killed 77 people last year. — Reuters pic
LONDON, Aug 29 — He was once a respected paediatrician, loved by patients and their parents for over 30 years. Now Domenico Mattiello faces trial for paedophilia, accused of making sexual advances towards little girls in his care.

Scientific experts will argue in court that his damaged brain made him do it, and his lawyers will ask for leniency.

It’s the latest example of how neuroscience — the science of the brain and how it works — is taking the stand and beginning to challenge society’s notions of crime and punishment.

The issue has been thrown into the spotlight by new technologies, like structural and functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), positron emission tomography (PET) scans and DNA analysis that can help pinpoint the biological basis of mental disorders.

A series of recent studies has established that psychopathic rapists and murderers have distinct brain structures that show up when their heads are scanned using MRI.

And in the United States, two companies, one called No Lie MRI and another called Cephos Corp, are advertising lie-detection services using fMRI to lawyers and prosecutors.

Crime and punishment

While structural MRI scans show the structure of a brain and can highlight differences between one brain and another, PET and fMRI scans can also show the brain in action, lighting up at particular points when the brain engages in certain tasks.

But the dazzling new technologies and detailed genetic data leave unanswered the issue of whether criminal courts are the right place to use this new information.

“The worry is that the law, or at least some judges, might be so overawed by the technology that they start essentially delegating the decision about guilt to a particular form of test,” says Colin Blakemore, a professor of neuroscience at Oxford University.

The lawyers for American serial killer Brian Dugan, who was facing execution in Illinois after pleading guilty to raping and killing a 10-year-old girl, used scans of his brain activity to argue he had mental malfunctions and should be spared the death penalty. In the event, Illinois abolished capital

punishment while he was on death row.

In a court in the Indian city of Mumbai, a woman was convicted of murder based only on circumstantial evidence and a so-called brain electrical oscillations signature profiling (BEOS) test, the results of which prosecutors said suggested she was guilty.

The days when mental capacity for crime is argued over by psychiatrists unaided by sophisticated machinery — such as Friday’s verdict that Norwegian mass killer Anders Behring Breivik was sane when he killed 77 people — look numbered.

“All sorts of types of neuroscience evidence are being used for all sorts of types of claims,” says Teneille Brown, a professor of law at the University of Utah. “The question is, is this technology really ready for prime time, or is it being abused?”

“Acquired paedophilia”

In Mattiello’s case, the neuroscientific evidence will come in the form of a full psychiatric and biological analysis including an MRI brain scan that shows a roughly 4-centimetre tumour growing at the base of his brain.

This created pressure inside his skull and “altered his behaviour”, says Pietro Pietrini, a molecular geneticist and psychiatrist at Italy’s University of Pisa who is compiling an expert report on the 65-year-old.

“His previous behaviour was completely normal,” Pietrini told Reuters. “He was a paediatrician for 30 something years and he saw tens of thousands of children and never had any problem. The question is why, at some point, did someone who has always behaved properly suddenly change so drastically?”

The doctor was arrested in Vicenza, northern Italy, more than a year ago and is undergoing cancer treatment after having the tumour removed. Pietrini is due to see him again next month to continue his assessment and see the effects of the treatment.

The case, which has yet go to court, is strikingly similar to another of “acquired paedophilia” dating back to 2002, in which a 40-year-old married American schoolteacher suddenly became obsessed with sex and began secretly to collect child pornography.

He was eventually removed from the family home for making sexual advances towards his stepdaughter and convicted of paedophilia. But later medical examinations found he had an egg-sized tumour in a part of the brain involved in decision-making.

When the tumour was removed, the man recovered from his paedophilic tendencies and was able to return to his family.

Experts are generally agreed that conditions like psychopathy and paedophilia can’t be “cured”, but in this groundbreaking case it appeared that removing the tumour, and hence the pressure in the brain, may have re-established his ability to control impulses.

As in that case, Pietrini said he and colleague Giuseppe Sartori of Padua University believed Mattiello’s tumour “may well have played a role in altering his behaviour”.

“This is what we will be arguing,” Pietrini said. “But of course it will be for the judge to determine to what extent he believes this medical condition played a role.”

Oxford’s Blakemore, one of the world’s leading thinkers in this field, says such cases are “startling”.

“It makes one wonder about the notion of responsibility,” he said in an interview.

Is “my brain made me do it” a defence?

And when it comes to prison, should paedophiles, psychopaths and other violent criminals be punished less severely if their behaviour can be blamed on biology? Is “my brain made me do it” a defence that warrants recognition with lighter sentences, or even no jail time at all?

“(It) raises the whole issue of what you think sentencing is for,” says Blakemore. “Is it about punishment? Is it about retribution? Is it about remediation and rehabilitation? Is it about protecting society? Well, to some extent it’s about all of those things.”

Recent evidence — from both real and hypothetical cases — suggests judges are sympathetic to neurobiological evidence as mitigation.

A study published in the journal Science this month showed that criminal psychopaths in the United States whose lawyers provide biological evidence for their brain condition are more likely to be sentenced to shorter jail terms than those who are simply said to be psychopaths.

For the study, researchers at the University of Utah tweaked the real-life case of Stephen Mobley, a 39-year-old American who was sentenced to death in 1994 after robbing a Domino’s pizza place in Georgia and shooting dead the restaurant’s manager.

At his trial, Mobley’s lawyer presented evidence in mitigation showing the accused had a variant of a gene called MAO-A that has been dubbed the “warrior” gene after scientists found it was linked to violent behaviour.

Aggressive genes

In the Science study, judges were given a hypothetical case loosely based on Mobley’s, where the crime was a savage beating with a gun, rather than a fatal shooting.

All the judges were told the defendant was a psychopath, but only half were given expert testimony on the genetic and neurobiological causes of his psychopathy. Those who got the neuroscientific evidence were more likely to give a shorter sentence – generally about a year less, the study found.

Pietrini worked on a similar real-life case in Italy in 2009 — thought to be one of the first criminal cases in Europe to use this type of neuroscientific evidence.

It involved Abdelmalek Bayout, an Algerian living in Italy, who was tried and convicted for fatally stabbing a man who teased him in the street.

After conducting a series of tests on the Algerian, Pietrini and colleagues said they had found abnormalities in imaging scans of his brain, and in five genes that have been linked to violent behaviour — including MAO-A.

A 2002 study led by researchers at the Institute of Psychiatry at King’s College London linked low levels of MAO-A with aggressiveness and criminal behaviour in boys who were raised in abusive environments.

Bayout’s lawyers got his sentence reduced by arguing that this and other bad genes had affected his brain and were partly to blame for the attack.

Where will it end?

Experts say it’s almost inevitable that neuroscience and law will become yet more intertwined. After all, while neuroscience seeks to find out how the brain functions and affects behaviour, the law’s main concern is with regulating behaviour.

Yet many are uneasy about the use in courts of law — and in matters of life and death — of basic science that is only just creeping out of the lab.

Observers such as Hank Greely, a professor of law at Stanford University, point out that no scientific peer-reviewed studies have been published demonstrating that BEOS — the brain test used in the Mumbai case — actually works.

Others stress that while genes like MAO-A have been associated with violence, there are also plenty of people with similar genotypes who don’t go out and kill, rape or abuse.

“Neuroscience is being used by serious scientists in real labs, but the people trying to apply it in courts are not those same people,” says Utah’s Brown. “So they’re taking something that looks very objective, that looks like gold standard science, but then morphing it into a forensic use it wasn’t developed for.

“This isn’t snake-oil science. It’s real science. But it’s being misapplied.”

Seena Fazel, a clinical senior lecturer in forensic psychiatry at Oxford University, says he’s uncomfortable with the long-term implications and wonders where it will end.

There are already known biological bases for many brain disorders criminals suffer from, including drug addiction, alcoholism and antisocial personality disorder, which is thought to affect up to half of all those in prison.

“If psychopathy reduces your sentence because it has a biological basis, why shouldn’t these other more common conditions also result in reduced sentences? The problem here is where do we draw the line?” — Reuters

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

One’s spirit can only do so much healing before, calling quits. The physical brain may not have been aware and continuing such work created the tumour from the spirit’s dissatisfaction. In response, the paediatrician began TAKING back for the spirit by predating the children instead. One can only want to do so much healing. The capacity of the spirit may be boundless to the point of earthquakes and tornadoes, but a spirit who healed perhaps the 1000th or even 100th child decided to retire, and the physical man with the physical brain continued at the spirit’s expense which led to a tumor that specifically caused paedophelia or other harmful behaviour. Perhaps many bankers and politicians, even priests of large orders need to retire once a number of years have passed or a number of years of work have been offered, monetary renumeration is not what the spirit wants, the brain does not understand, but the spirit will make it’s will known in any number of ways like ailments.

ARTICLE 4

We’re more comfortable with sex on TV…but should we plug the filth flood before it’s too late? – by Andy Dawson – Wednesday, 29 August 2012 at 2:26 pm

We’re more comfortable with sex on TV…but should we plug the filth flood before it’s too late?As a 1980s teenager, finally deemed old enough to be allowed to stay up late and watch TV with my parents, it was the moment I feared the most – THE SEX BIT. On the screen that is, not in the living room. For both myself and my parents, short-term mortification was guaranteed every single time.

Of course, as this was almost thirty years ago, so when I say THE SEX BIT I’m referring to nothing more sizzlicious than the sight of a woman in her underwear, an extended bout of what Britain’s swimming pool law-enforcers call ‘heavy petting’, or if I was lucky/unlucky enough, actual female toplessness.

See even today, I’m still struggling to grasp for the correct terminology while maintaining my composure. But I have to confess that it isn’t working – my hands are becoming clammy and my brow fevered as I poke the words ‘female toplessness’ out on my sweat-drenched keyboard.

Back then, during one of those infrequent but time-stopping sexy TV flashpoints, if someone were to run in to the living room and conduct a straw poll as to whether there was too much sex on TV, the outcome would be a resounding 100% affirmative vote.

Mind you, if someone were to run in to the living room and steal our eyeballs from right out of the front of our heads, there would be very little dissent. We were all too busy trying to pretend that what we were witnessing wasn’t happening, while straining to stem the crimson tide of embarrassment that was flooding our faces.

But it’s 2012 now and attitudes are changing – Britain is loose and groovy now. A recent Ofcom poll found that just 25% of adults are unhappy with the amount of sex on the small-screen, a figure that is down from 36% in 2005. Perhaps some of them are unhappy because they’re not seeing enough sex, who knows. The fact that only 19% were offended by something they’d seen over the past 12 months suggests that might well be the case.

So what’s happening to us all? Are we in the midst of a new 21st century permissive society? Is the sight of televised rutting now as normal to us as that of Jeremy Kyle haranguing an absent, glue-addled dad?

If many of us are indeed more comfortable with the sight of what the French commonly call ‘the flesh fandango’, perhaps broadcasters will bend to our will and tailor more of their post-watershed programmes to our increased thirst for boot-knocking.

For years now, knuckle-dragging observers have yearned for the first televised full-blown sexual encounter in the Big Brother house. Perhaps it already happened – I genuinely couldn’t care less. But surely it’s time for the BBC to steal the march and give us the first ever full-blown sex scene in Eastenders, preferably in the Queen Vic, during a lock in. As for what form it takes, I don’t care as long as Jean Slater is involved (I have niche tastes, shush, mind your own business).

Surely it’s time for David Attenborough to stop traversing the globe and obsessing over the mating habits of boring old animals and secrete himself away in a wardrobe in a Surrey semi instead, fastidiously commentating on the passionate wranglings of a middle-aged middle manager and his partner of choice. As for the potential that is inherent in a new-look, post-sexy-revolution Strictly Come Dancing – well, the mind boggles. Oh, my hands are getting clammy again.

But telly sex isn’t for everyone and there would need to be a two-tier system with a quick and easy opt out available. Fair warning should be given ahead of any graphic sex scene and a simple push of the red button would switch to an alternative broadcast, with all of the rude bits covered by an animation of Cardinal Keith O’Brien monotonously braying the words ‘this is not actually happening’.

Is it what we really want though? Before long we’ll be living in a new era of wall-to-wall filth and we won’t even know how it happened. We’re almost certainly just a few years away from a time where the major source of living room awkwardness is when dad realises that the TV remote is wedged firmly beneath the writhing bodies of his 19-year-old daughter and her boyfriend.

Be careful what you wish for.

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Dawson is looking at this in a wrong manner. There could be ‘stiff’ channels for the upper classes, ‘semi-stiff’ for the middle classes, and ‘groovy’ channels for the lower classes. The viewership records merely show where society is headed. In a poorer lower class majority society, people will be ‘playing’ at home or at the cheaper part of the RLD mainly to relax, in a middle majority society people will be playing outside in non-RLD venues to sorta exercise, in a wealthy society people will be playing at the upper class venues to challenge themselves. No need to worry, rather look at the macro economic issues. I think Dawson isn’t really familiar with all groups? All facets of society should not be put under a microscope like this. Hands clammy? Well sound like Dawson is under stress and depending on Dawson’s wealth level, time to head to the RLD or the middle level venues if not too stressed . . .

We’re more comfortable with sex on TV…but should we plug the filth flood before it’s too late? – There is no filth flood, Dawson has been looking at the wrong channel too long IMHO.

ARTICLE 5

Women sexually ‘assaulted’ during water festival – By Cao Yin  and Huang Yiming (China Daily) – 08:52, August 24, 2012

Several women were sexually assaulted on Thursday during festivities to mark a local water festival in the island province of Hainan, according to eyewitnesses.

Around 8:30 am, several men tried to touch some women’s breasts, tearing their clothes during celebrations in Qixian Square, Baoting Li and Miao autonomous county, a website run by Xinhua News Agency reported.

Li Min, a tourist from Wanning in Hainan who has participated in the festival for the past five years, told China Daily that four or five women were assaulted after an opening ceremony, and the attackers were taken away by police.

“There were more than 1,000 people on the square playing with water at that time, and most of them were very young,” he said, adding that he was standing on the second floor of a building overlooking the square.

“I saw a man take off a young woman’s clothes, while similar situations also happened to four or five other women who were playing with water in different areas of the square at the same time.

“Later, police came to restore order, taking the men out of the square,” Li said, adding that he couldn’t tell how many men were taken into custody.

Huang Dingyi, from Haikou, capital of Hainan, who also witnessed the incident, said he saw a woman being molested by a man wearing a hat and a red scarf.

“The woman slipped when she was attacked by the man and she hit the attacker with a water pot,” he said. “The police rushed to stop the disorder from a house on the square and seized the man, who was in his 20s.”

On Thursday afternoon, media and netizens published photos of the festival celebrations on micro blogs.

A publicity officer for the county, who did not want to be identified, confirmed the incidents but said only one teenage girl had been sexually assaulted.

Some witnesses might have been mistaken about what they saw, according to the officer.

“It might be the carelessness of the girl wearing a vest playing with the water,” he said, adding the real situation was not as serious as netizens described.

In addition, Wang Xiumei, head of the county’s publicity department, said the public security bureau has been investigating the case and trying to determine how many women were attacked.

“We are paying attention to the case and will disclose the number and newest information as soon as possible,” she added.

On the seventh day of the seventh month of the lunar calendar, China’s traditional day for lovers, Li and Miao ethnic groups offer water sacrifices, which has led to locals organizing a festival to attract tourists and residents to play with water.

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

No need to get police involved, rather have official ‘car wash’ type girls specifically to draw attention for these cheap thrill types. Do put notices stating clearly that no stripping of regular citizens is allowed and that only the ‘Water Show Girls’ are to be stripped and that charges can be pressed if regular citizens are stripped or manhandled or attacked.

ARTICLE 6

Iran’s Supreme Leader Orders Fresh Terror Attacks On The West – Con Coughlin, The Daily Telegraph | Aug. 22, 2012, 6:35 AM | 4,195 | 45

Gunmen Have Attacked And Entered A Pakistani Air Force Base Thought To House Nuclear Weapons

Report: US Officials Are Investigating Deutsche Bank And Others Over Business Links To Iran, Sudan

Jim O’Neill Isn’t Too Worried About A Middle East Conflict Causing Oil Prices To Spike

Iran’s Supreme Leader has ordered the country’s Revolutionary Guards to intensify its campaign of terror attacks against the West and its allies in retaliation for supporting the overthrow of President Bashar al-Assad in Syria.

According to Western intelligence officials, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei gave the order to the elite Quds Force unit following a recent emergency meeting of Iran’s National Security Council in Tehran held to discuss a specially-commissioned report into the implications for Iran of the Assad regime’s overthrow.

Damascus is Iran’s most important regional ally, and the survival of the Assad regime is regarded as vital to sustaining the Iranian-backed Hizbollah militia which controls southern Lebanon.

The report, which was personally commissioned by Mr Khamenei, concluded that Iran’s national interests were being threatened by a combination of the U.N. sanctions imposed over Iran’s nuclear programme and the West’s continuing support for Syrian opposition groups attempting to overthrow the Syrian government.

Intelligence officials say the report concludes that Iran “cannot be passive” to the new threats posed to its national security, and warns that Western support for Syrian opposition groups was placing Iran’s “resistance alliance” in jeopardy, and could seriously disrupt Iran’s access to Hizbollah in Lebanon.

It advised that the Iranian regime should demonstrate to the West that there were “red lines” over what it would accept in Syria, and that a warning should be sent to “America, the Zionists, Britain, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and others that they cannot act with impunity in Syria and elsewhere in the region.”

Mr Khamenei responded by issuing a directive to Qassem Suleimani, the Quds Force commander, to intensify attacks against the West and its allies around the world.

The Quds Force has recently been implicated in a series of terror attacks against Western targets. Last year U.S. officials implicated the organisation in a failed assassination attempt against the Saudi Arabian ambassador to Washington. It was also implicated in three bomb attacks against Israeli diplomats in February, planning to attack the Eurovision song contest in Azerbaijan while two Iranians were arrested in Kenya last month for possessing explosives.

Intelligence officials believe the recent spate of Iranian attacks has been carried out by the Quds Force’s Unit 400, which runs special overseas operations.

“Unit 400 seems to have been involved in all the recent Iranian terrorist operations,” said a senior Western intelligence official. “The Iranian regime now seems determined to retaliate for what they regard as the West’s attempts to influence the outcome of the Syrian unrest.”

Iran has been actively supporting the Assad regime’s attempts to suppress the wave of anti-government protests that erupted in March last year. Iranian opposition groups claim teams of experienced Revolutionary Guard officers have been flying to Damascus on specially-chartered Iranian aircraft on a weekly basis to advise the Assad regime.

The extent of Iran’s support for the Assad regime was exposed earlier this month when 48 Iranians were captured and taken hostage by Syrian opposition fighters. The Iranians, who are said to include senior Revolutionary Guard officers, claimed they were conducting “reconnaissance missions”,

and their capture by Syrian opposition fighters was deeply embarrassing for Tehran, which is demanding their immediate safe return to Iran. Syrian rebels have threatened to kill the hostages unless Iran ends its support for the Assad regime.

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Do not target civilians as only cowards will do that. Jailbreaks though would be nice and almost supported by locals . . .

ARTICLE 7

Ecuador says Britain withdraws threat to raid embassy in Assange standoff

A police officer reacts to the heat of the day before a speech by Wikileaks founder Julian Assange at the Ecuador’s embassy, where he is taking refuge in London August 19, 2012. REUTERS/Chris Helgren

By Girish Gupta and Eduardo Garcia – QUITO | Sat Aug 25, 2012 7:49pm EDT

(Reuters) – Britain has withdrawn a threat to enter Ecuador’s embassy in London to arrest WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange who has taken refuge there, President Rafael Correa said on Saturday, taking the heat out of the diplomatic standoff.

“We consider this unfortunate incident over, after a grave diplomatic error by the British in which they said they would enter our embassy,” Correa said in a weekly media address.

In a statement, Ecuador’s government said it had received “a communication from the British Foreign Office which said that there was no threat to enter the embassy.”

Ecuador was furious after the British government warned it might try to seize Assange, who has been holed up in the building for more than two months trying to avoid extradition to Sweden, where he is wanted for questioning over rape and sexual assault allegations.

Ecuador, which has granted the former computer hacker asylum, demanded that Britain’s threat be retracted. The latest move should improve relations between Quito and London and allow more talks on Assange’s fate to take place.

For now, however, Assange remains trapped in the embassy with British police waiting outside. Britain has said it is determined to fulfill a legal obligation to send him to Sweden.

The Washington-based Organization of American States had condemned Britain’s threat, and South American foreign ministers strongly backed Correa’s position that Britain’s warning was unacceptable and could set a dangerous precedent.

Correa says he shares Assange’s fears that if handed over to Sweden, he could then be extradited to the United States to face charges over WikiLeaks’ 2010 publication of secret U.S. cables.

U.S. and European government sources say the United States has issued no criminal charges against the WikiLeaks founder and has launched no attempt to extradite him.

Ecuador’s government says it never intended to prevent Assange from facing justice in Sweden. It has said that if he received written guarantees from Britain and Sweden that he would not be extradited to any third country then Assange would hand himself over to the Swedish authorities.

Assange, whose platinum hair and friendships with the rich and famous have helped make him a global celebrity, spoke from the embassy’s balcony last weekend, denouncing what he called a “witch hunt” by the United States against him and WikiLeaks.

(Editing by Brian Ellsworth and Mohammad Zargham)

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

How important is Assange? If Assange is VERY important in a manner that could finish off the England or what not, then the MI6 could have a group of unknown baklava wearing ‘Right Wingers’ (invent an IRA type outfit loyal to England i.e. ‘Swedish Meatball Brigade’ – of course these are tight lipped Commandos or such that never set foot among civvies), barge into the embassy in a peaceful holdup would be nice, abit of bruising or slapping for drama and PC believability, but depending on how unpleasant Ecuador has been with England  . . . fully expect the same to occur in English Embassy in Ecuador though if ever the situation was reversed – in tit for tat) and drag Assange out, to deliver Assange to the nearest police station then use the ‘deniability’ issue.

This will however have everyone on their toes ‘Cold War’ style. If Assange is not important enough, then forget about Assange and stop media covering the obvious narcissist and even let the guy out on the streets. If Assange goes to Equador on his own, ‘Swedish Meatball Brigade’ can suddenly have a Right Wing Branch in Ecuador (made of incidental expats or tourists) as well who can still haul Assange to the Swedish Embassy in Ecuador for ‘rape’ charges (in what could be the most farcical trial ever in the history of humanity . . . ).

ARTICLE 8

Crosses chopped down: ‘Anti-church hysteria’ spreads across Russia – Published: 26 August, 2012, 00:21

No comment ! CJ needs a chainsaw mission? . . .

Four Orthodox Christian crosses have been chopped down in different parts of Russia. The incidents come after the Femen movement attacked a cross in Kiev to protest the sentence of the punk band Pussy Riot, who received two years in prison.

Three crosses have been taken down in the Urals’ Chelyabinsk Region, and one in the Archangelsk Region, northern Russia.

By the time police arrived at the scenes the vandals had already left. Authorities have launched an investigation into both cases.

The Arkhangelsk cross was erected in the memory of the victims of political repressions, said a local priest, Hegumen Feodosy.

He also said that in recent years the monastery, situated across the street from the cross, has seen two arson attacks and a number of other acts of vandalism.

“This comes in the context of all these incidents in recent months across the country, all this anti-church hysteria waged against our diocese, against the church authority, against everything sacred,” Hegumen Feodosy said.

Russian Human Rights Ombudsman has also strongly condemned the acts of vandalism.

“Just like all normal people, I’m outraged by the ludicrous acts of these individuals. I would hope to see these low-lifes voluntarily come in and explain the motives behind their outrageous actions,” Vladimir Lukin has told Interfax news agency. “Deliberate destruction of Christian or any other religious shrines is a bacchanalia of hatred and brutality.”

The two incidents follow a similar case when the leader of the Ukrainian activist group Femen took down a cross in Kiev using a chainsaw. The act, which was filmed and photographed, later received wide circulation on the Web.

In a statement Femen declared that the cross was taken down in solidarity with the members of punk band Pussy Riot, who were sentenced to two years in jail for hooliganism motivated by religious hatred.

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Much like loudspeakers and Muslim prayers 5 times daily can offend, there is a neutral spaces issue that can anger. Are the crosses placed in a way that disenfranchise other faiths?

ARTICLE 9

Student Debt as a Moral Issue – Posted on August 26, 2012 – By Noam Shpancer

A few months ago I took several of my students to a conference in Chicago. Many of my students come from small towns in Ohio. Many have never been to a big city. Many have never left Ohio, never been on a plane before. It was thus particularly rewarding to chaperone them and witness their excitement and joy as they experienced the Second City.

One evening, strolling down Michigan Ave, the conversation turned to money. I casually asked my students about their loan burden. One of them, a perky senior psychology major planning to get her Masters and become a social worker, said she had $80,000 in student loan debt. I was shocked.

Now, I am not entirely naïve about the problem of student loan debt. Until this year, I had one myself. A university degree is still—and perhaps more than before—the passport to the American middle class life.

Demand for education is high, classroom seats in good schools are in limited supply, and so prices tend to go up. Tuition rate hikes routinely outpace inflation. Thus, students are pushed into larger debts. According to the NY Times, the average student loan debt in the US topped $23,000 last year. Much has been written recently about the attendant economic and social hazards. A debt of $23,000 is a troubling burden, for students and parents.

But a debt of $80,000 is something else entirely.

You can perhaps make a case that debt of this magnitude is justified in some unique cases—such as in the process of obtaining a highly valuable degree from a top notch institution. Some professions pay very well. And Ivy League degrees practically guarantee higher starting salaries. But in this particular context—in my reality and that of my students—such a debt is simply not justifiable.

The difference between 23k and 80k debt is a bit like the difference between drinking and driving drunk. If I see a student of mine drinking beer, I may feel uneasy, or worried. I may even say something about responsibility. But if I see a drunken student get behind the wheel, I’m obligated to intervene. An $80,000 debt, for my students, is akin to getting behind the wheel while plastered. it is a recipe for disaster.

Like most private liberal arts institutions, my university prides itself on nurturing students. Many formal systems and procedures are in place to identify and address potential problems and pitfalls students may encounter as they pursue their degrees. We track student attendance, we track their grades, we advise them on which courses to take so as to stay on track toward graduation; we make sure they take the right load—that they don’t over-burden themselves.

There is a medical clinic on campus, as well as career counselors at the ready and free psychotherapy sessions. There are writing labs and tutors and study groups and remedial classes for those who are academically behind, or unprepared. There are assorted advocacy and support group and myriad religious activities.

There are social clubs and Greek organizations and many opportunities set up to help students find company, identity, a sense of belonging; we’re trying to take care of them while they learn the tools that will facilitate their ascent in the world.

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Education is a trick by ‘elites’ to get middle class people indebted (also job fair hype), so that the middle class can be turned into the poor. Most large businesses or multi-corps are already owned by elites, so all middles who do not think like, or think for the benefit of elites, or who are too independent and rebellious, or likely to take civilisation beyond the plutocrat-masses-capitalist paradigm of the 20th/21st century, will be prevented from getting jobs, negatively socialised, demogogued against, and turned into ‘the poor’. The poor will be too poor to run for election or have enough energy to think critically, and the threat to the elites from the middles end in this way. Democracy ends when people fail to recognize that plutocrats or term limitless politicians or nepotists try to control the political arena. So will the 99% please vote only for the non-plutocrat or non-nepotists or non-GLC contractors or plutocrats, and eventually vote Joe Publics into power to ensure unused land distribution as discussed throughout this blog, as well as wealth distribution with Socialist limits eventually.

ARTICLE 10

Middle classes forced out of private education as costs rise at twice rate of inflation over 10 years – By Laura Clark – PUBLISHED: 00:53 GMT, 27 August 2012 | UPDATED: 01:50 GMT, 27 August 2012

Rise in fees is excluding children of average-earners
Dr Martin Stephen say private schools are putting themselves in danger

Private schools have put themselves in danger warns Dr Martin Stephen

Thousands of middle-income families have been priced out of private schools by inflation-busting fee rises.

Average fees have risen at nearly twice the rate of inflation over the past ten years.

The increases mean that private schooling is now beyond average earners in well-paid occupations, including pharmacists, architects, IT experts, engineers and scientists.

A decade ago, these professionals would have been able to afford to pay fees out of earned income.

Now, however, they would struggle without funding from other sources, according to the study.

The average annual fee for a day pupil at a private school is £11,457, up from £6,820 in 2002, researchers found. Charges have risen 68 per cent in that period, 1.8 times faster than retail price inflation over the same period, which was up 37 per cent.

Private school fees are considered affordable if they account for 25 per cent or less of the average annual full-time salary before tax.

But £11,457 represents 35 per cent of this average, which stands at £33,011, according to the study by Lloyds TSB Private Banking. In 2002, fees would have taken 27 per cent.

Tuition fee rise HAS turned thousands of middle class students off going to university
It’s catastrophic for students, abused by profiteering exam, boards and blindly discriminates against boys. We bust me bold… and put the GCSE out of its misery
Exam regulator to look into GCSE gradings after headteachers threaten legal action

Suren Thiru, economist at the bank, said the rises make it ‘increasingly difficult for the average worker in many occupations to afford a private education for their offspring’.

Those who can most easily afford the fees include accountants, senior police officers, airline pilots and  production managers as fees  represent 19 per cent of their annual earnings.

Excluded: The rise in fees for private education means that average earners can no longer afford independent schooling for their children

The findings follow a warning this year from the former head of a top private school that the sector is  losing public confidence by becoming the preserve of the super-rich.

Dr Martin Stephen, formerly of St Paul’s School, West London wrote: ‘Independent schools have put themselves in a very dangerous position; even more dangerous because they don’t realise the danger.

‘They are pricing themselves out of the reach of most normal people in the UK. The independent sector is becoming socially exclusive in a way not seen since Victorian times.’

Dr Stephen is now director of education at GEMS, an international schools group aiming to make private education ‘affordable’.

He added: ‘The sector has become too dependent on overseas parents and is profiting from a state sector in some turmoil as a result of radical change. Independents need to realign themselves with their clients.’

The biggest rises in fees have been in London and the South West, both up 79 per cent from 2002-12. Next were East Anglia (74 per cent) and the East Midlands and South East, both at just under 70 per cent.

The number of pupils enrolled at private schools has also fallen over the decade, according to the study.

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Fee price as well as goods price increases need to be monitored by government and prevented from being more than inflation rate. To ensure exclusivity, use the CLASS paradigm or requirement (i.e. the job the parent was working at determines if a private school wants to take them in), also CRIMINAL RECORD or at extreme levels ETHICAL requirements, instead of the wealth only paradigm. Not all wealthy are classy folks (even the titled have been stealing tax funds from so many cases in England), and not all poor are unsuitable or lack the high mindedness for exclusive education. For lack of a better method of retaining exclusivity, the private college has lost all ethics to become money spinners and mere businesses rather than educational or social bastions. Education now, is a farce.

Public school fees could be on a flat 10% of earnings basis regardless of whatever the parent is earning. Private school fees could be on a flat 20% of earnings basis regardless of whatever the parent is earning.

This way all social classes are able to participate after criminal record or background checks so long as they sacrifice 20% of the monthly salaries. This would make entrances on quality possible for everyone, not equate wealth with quality and create a low quality plutocracy and a worship of wealth as the basis of a society and nation and unending increases in education fees which should be free, being a basic necessity.

ARTICLE 11

Police claim Tao Wei’s death not suspicious – Updated: 2012-08-28 15:15 ( chinadaily.com.cn)

Police said the death of Tao Wei, China Central Television’s famous soccer commentator, was not suspicious, people.com reports.

The body of the 34-year-old was discovered in a room at the Nishihaitai Hotel in Jinan, Shandong province at 9 am on Monday after he failed to meet friends for breakfast that morning.

He was staying at the hotel for one night with three friends before continuing their journey to Qingdao.

Local police say Tao’s body showed no signs of injury. There was no sign of any disturbance in the room, and the hotel room window and door was in good condition.

Tao’s coworkers at CCTV say he was a hardworking and modest person who has a good reputation among colleagues and maintained a healthy lifestyle, according to Beijing News.

Tao was a soccer player for more than a decade before becoming a soccer commentator for CCTV. He also owned a soccer club in Beijing.

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

. . . also owned a soccer club in Beijing . . . – This is the main cause for certain. ALL soccer clubs have links to gambling and the underworld. Not so surprising. Actaully all sports related people and industry players are nominally affected by gambling as well. Sports is driven to a great degree by gambling and hence the underworld, especially for those out of University level age or even career sportsmen. Look at the milder eating/fatness oriented Sumo for example which was riddled with underworld allegations. Football is far deeper enmired. The best is to legalize gambling at football stadiums much like gambling at horse races. No point keeping up pretenses. Bad debts can occur and Taowei being an owner doubtless was involved.

Who knows Taowei was conducting a sting for CCTV, if not involved in a criminal manner that might lead to certain individuals being targeted for questioning and would ‘squeal’. Had to be killed then. But worse still, the police could well have had their own informers and killed Taowei in a counter-sting operation – i.e. ‘death not suspicious’. Just legalize football gambling to prevent this sort of case from occurring. People love to gamble though limits on losses should be clearly marked like 30% of salary level at most (or 30% of lifetime asset at most) before being barred from gambling. Even the underworld would prefer to be legal so why make all these pretenses? Much like prohibition in the USA for alcohol, this is gambling prohibition in China.

ARTICLE 12

Kim Kardashian settles lawsuit with Old Navy after label used a lookalike in ad – by Daily Mail Reporter UPDATED: 19:59 GMT, 29 August 2012

Kim Kardashian has settled a lawsuit against Old Navy claiming the clothing retailer violated her publicity rights by using a lookalike in an ad.

The reality TV star, 31, sued over the spot in July 2011, claiming the company’s use of a model who looked like her might confuse consumers about her actual endorsements, which include a clothing store and shoe line.

No details about the settlement were filed with the court.

Spot the difference: Kim Kardashian, left, settled a lawsuit against Old Navy claiming the clothing retailer violated her publicity rights by using lookalike Melissa Molinaro in an ad  who is rumoured to be dating Reggie Bush.

‘The lawsuit was resolved to the mutual satisfaction of the parties,’ said the reality TV starlet’s lawyer Gary Hecker, who declined to elaborate.

A spokesperson for Old Navy parent company The Gap Inc. was not immediately available.

The lawsuit was over the commercial titled ‘Super C-U-T-E.’

The ad began airing in February 2011 and was still being used in some of the company’s promotions months later, Kardashian’s lawsuit stated.

It featured Canadian singer-model Melissa Molinaro, who an attorney for Old Navy said at a January hearing was famous in her own right.

Doppelgänger: In the advertisement, Molinaro hair and make-up is styled almost identically to Kim’s

Molinaro was said to be dating Kardashian’s ex boyfriend Reggie Bush at the time.

But the retailer maintained her appearance in the ad wasn’t intended to draw similarities to Kardashian.

Hecker contended that some news outlets and Twitter users noted similarities in the women’s appearances.

Kardashian was seeking unspecified damages – believed to be in the region of $15 – $20 million and an order barring Old Navy from using a lookalike model again.

Seem familiar? Molinaro even tries her hand at a signature Kim ‘look over the shoulder’ pose

Plenty in common: Model and actress Molinaro was also linked to Kim’s ex Reggie Bush

Last year Molinaro said she was thrilled to be compared to Kardashian, describing it as an ‘amazing compliment.’

She had previously been a competitor on the Pussycat Dolls Presents: The Search For The Next Doll and also P. Diddy’s hit show Making The Band, where she just missed out on becoming part of now defunct female group, Danity Kane.

Melissa also scored a major role in the dance/romance film ‘Honey 2’, the follow up to Jessica Alba’s original flick, Honey, but it went straight to DVD in the U.S.

She had also released her debut single and video Dance Floor, where she is seen prancing around and posing in an array of leotards and skimpy bathing suits that show off a rounded derrière, similar to Kim’s.

Who would actually think that would be Kim K singing/dancing? Remember…. she has no talent.

– Jessica, Dallas, Texas, 30/8/2012 04:19
Rating   106

Is she going to sue the model for looking like her too?? Stupid, self-obsessed woman. I don’t think I’m alone in wishing she would just disappear.

– lauren, lala land, 30/8/2012 03:14
Rating   98

I want my girl Nicole Scherzinger to sue Kim for infringing on her look and publicity rights as well! That girl does not look THAT much like Kim and anyone who thought it was Kim in the ads must be pretty silly. Besides if Kim so much as passes gas she let’s the world know, surely people would not question if she had an endorsement deal with Old Navy-they’d know it already. Sounds like she only did this because the girl was dating Reggie, the love of Kim’s life. Kim will do anything for money as well. She is the worst type of person you could ever imagine. What a shame that Old Navy would settle this with her. Disgusting.

– LOL SMH, LA, USA, 30/8/2012 02:46
Rating   41

What UTTER nonsense!!! She obviously sued because that girl is prettier! Is she going to sue everyone who wears their hair like that on TV? A style that’s before she ever ‘arrived’. What utter nonsense. I really hate that woman.

– Greg, Belfast Norn Iron, 30/8/2012 02:19
Rating   40

Ha Ha, So we have a nobody that thinks she is somebody and a nobody trying be the nobody that thinks she is somebody, Never knowingly undersold, you can’t make this stuff up.

– Rapidlaser, London UK, 30/8/2012 01:59
Rating   23

So that girl can’t model for anyone because she looks too like Kim? Sounds a bit unfair.

– alwayshocked, Ireland, 30/8/2012 01:47
Rating   89

Get a life Kim.

– Hasan, London, UK, 30/8/2012 01:34
Rating   60

I think she looks more like Eva Longoria. Did Eva sue as well? Actually I have a friend who also has long brown hair. I should tell her to sue old navy for having the audacity to hire an actress who resembles her.

– Cassie, Wyoming, 30/8/2012 01:29
Rating   53

“…a rounded derrière, similar to Kim’s.” Let’s get real – any similarity between them ends at the ass line.

– Kingfish, Atlanta, USA, 30/8/2012 01:26
Rating   33

this women is so full of it!! Does she seriously think every women with long dark hair and brown eyes is trying to imitate her pathetic!!

– Mrs B, buckinghamshire, 30/8/2012 01:06

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Molinaro even tries her hand at a signature Kim ‘look over the shoulder’ pose. NO. There is no such thing as a signature pose. The human body has limited poses. No combination can fairly be considered ‘signature’.

This is almost Old Navy admitting to wanting to use a Kim Kardashian lookalike. However that Molinaro model could well present herself to ANY company to want to market their goods and a company that accepts that offer would be absolved of this form of infringement. A company cannot specifically seek a Kim Kardashian lookalike, BUT a Kim Kardashian lookalike could seek ANY company for promotion of themselves, NOT specifically as Kim Kardashian BUT as themselves.

You see lookalikes have as much right to a certain look as the first person who looks that way who was promoted. If Old Navy managed to sustain ‘deniability’ sufficiently, they could countersue for anti-monopoly issues and modelling industry ‘Fair Opportunity’ laws. Sort of like Kim Kardashian demanding a monopoly on ALL people who look like her, which suppress the opportunity of all lookalikes from having a viable modelling career which is obviously illegal.

Either Old Navy had the intent and owned up, or just wasn’t steady on their feet in thinking through on the anti-monopoly issue. This is where foreign advertising companies who never heard of such and such ‘stars’ could be employed for ‘deniability’, so long as intent is not traced back. If coincidences occur there still is no case then. Melissa Molinaro incidentally could counter sue Kim Kardashian for preventing her from having a modelling career with Old Navy if they have the stomach and CORRECT sense of indignation to re-open up the case, not for money but an apology that will set precedents for case studies in law.

ARTICLE 13

Hit the rich with an emergency tax to help the poor, says Clegg: Inequality threatens ‘breakdown of society’  – By Jason Groves – PUBLISHED: 00:59 GMT, 29 August 2012 | UPDATED: 08:44 GMT, 29 August 2012

Deputy PM says Britain’s wealthiest should contribute to ‘economic war’
Nick Clegg demands a new tacx in addition to levy on ‘mansion tax’
Susan Kramer, Lib Dem treasury spokesman in the Lords, says ‘we can’t give a free ride to people’

Clegg clamp-down: The Deputy PM wants a new tax on Britain’s richest

Nick Clegg last night demanded a swingeing new tax on the rich to help ease the financial squeeze being suffered by the less well-off as austerity measures bite.

The Deputy Prime Minister said Britain’s wealthiest should be made to contribute more to the ‘economic war’, which has been made worse by the double-dip recession.

He said an extra ‘time-limited contribution’ from the rich would be seen as fair given the scale of Britain’s financial problems.

Without it, he suggested, Britain could suffer a breakdown in ‘social cohesion’ as seen during last summer’s riots.

Calls for a new tax to soak the rich are likely to antagonise the Tory Right, who argue that cutting taxes is the best way to boost growth and persuade the well-off to pay more.

The Liberal Democrat leader gave little indication of where he thought the new tax should be levied, although he suggested it would be in addition to the party’s existing proposal to levy an annual ‘mansion tax’ on homes worth more than £2million.

In an interview with the Guardian he said the prolonged nature of the battle to tackle the deficit left by Labour called for exceptional measures.

He said: ‘If we want to remain cohesive and prosperous as a society, people of very considerable personal wealth have got to make a bit of an extra contribution.

‘In addition to our standing policy on things like the mansion tax is there a time limited contribution you can ask in some way or another from people of considerable wealth so they feel they are making a contribution to the national effort?

Return of the Laws: Mr Clegg says he wants disgraced David Laws back in Government despite Mr Laws resignation over his expenses

‘What we are embarked on is in some senses a longer economic war rather than a short economic battle.’

Mr Clegg said it was vital for the Government to ‘really hard-wire fairness into what we do in the next phases of fiscal restraint’. He added: ‘If we don’t do that I don’t think the process will be either socially or politically sustainable or acceptable.’

This morning, Susan Kramer, the Lib Dem treasury spokesman in the House of Lords, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: ‘We can’t give a free ride to people. If we’re going to be a coherent society everyone has to carry a share of it.’

She added: ‘At the very upper end income tax probably doesn’t work effectively… a wealth tax is a very interesting way to go.’

In a gloomy assessment, Mr Clegg said it was now clear that what once appeared to be a ‘short, sharp economic battle’ was ‘clearly turning into a longer term process of economic recovery and fiscal restraint’.

He said this would involve ‘sacrifices over a longer period of time, a longer period of belt tightening as a country’ – making it essential that the rich are seen to be playing their part.

Mr Clegg said details of his new tax proposals would be unveiled at next month’s Lib Dem conference.
Nick Clegg’s Lib Dems have refused to support David Cameron’s proposed boundary changes following the collapse of the Government¿s plans for Lords reform

Forced vote: Nick Clegg’s Lib Dems have refused to support David Cameron’s proposed boundary changes following the collapse of the Lords reform

He suggested the tax was likely to target ‘very high asset wealth’. Changes to the top rate of income tax have been all but ruled out following the Coalition’s controversial decision to reduce it from 50p to 45p earlier this year.

Mr Clegg also gave the strongest hint yet that David Laws is set to return to Government in the forthcoming reshuffle.

Mr Laws was forced to quit his post as Treasury Chief Secretary after less than a month following revelations about his expenses.

But he has continued as an informal adviser to Mr Clegg, particularly on economic matters and is now tipped to return as a minister in the Cabinet Office.

Mr Clegg said: ‘I have never made any secret of the fact that I want to see David Laws back in Government.’

Mr Clegg also urged David Cameron to force a vote on proposed boundary changes, which the Lib Dems have refused to support following the collapse of the Government’s plans for Lords reform.

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Lets see which MPs are part of the problem that refuse to ratify this Wealth Tax bill. A person earning 1+ million annually should be subject to 80% taxes IMHO. That would mean 200K a year earnings which 99% of the population will not likely achieve given the sluggish jobs growth and England’s lack of positioning on any major trade routes. How many people earn 16,000+ a month (i.e. 200K a year) in England anyway? Wealth distribution otherwise cannot occur. A person earning 10+ million annually should be subject to 90% taxes. That would mean 1M a year earnings which is well beyond most of the WORLD. How many people earn 80,000+ a month in England anyway? So think wealth tax for redistribution of wealth. All that sequestered wealth is not going to make 99% lives better, so might as well tax, then redistribute for healthcare or education and perhaps more council housing for the poor or other cost absorbing initiatives like free power and water or even staples – courtesy of your fat cat plutocrat millions earning types . . . good one Clegg, so who’s going to set up a  another series of riots to make sure the 1% understand that the Wealth Tax is for the good of everyone if convincing the corrupted crony Capitalist colluders in Parliament won’t work?

ARTICLE 14

‘She’s flirtatious, she’s sexual with people… it’s disgraceful’: MC Harvey slams CBB’s Danica Thrall as she faces eviction again – by Louise Saunders – PUBLISHED: 22:34 GMT, 30 August 2012 | UPDATED: 23:34 GMT, 30 August 2012

After shooting to fame on Sex, Lies and Rinsing Guys, it’s fair to say Danica Thrall knows how to manipulate men to get her own way.

But now her flirtatious behaviour has landed her in hot water in the Celebrity Big Brother house yet again as she faces eviction for a second time.

The 24-year-old beauty was slammed by her housemates for causing a ‘love triangle’ between former pals Mike ‘The Situation’ Sorrentino and Prince Lorenzo Borghese.

Emotional: Danica Thrall burst into tears as she confronted Mike ‘The Situation’ Sorrentino about nominating her for a second time

And she was forced to listen to every word of their criticism as Big Brother ordered the group to make their nominations in front of each other yet again.

Before the contestants even took to the sofas to deliver their verdict, Martin Kemp admitted he had been shocked by the glamour girl’s behaviour in the ‘Gods and Mortals’ task, explaining she had been ‘teasing’ both The Situation and Prince Lorenzo.

Speaking in the Diary Room, he said: ‘The whole argument between Danica and The Situation has been caused by Danica’s bed-hopping. She teases those boys.
‘It’s disgraceful’: MC Harvey fumed about Danica’s behaviour to Prince Lorenzo following the nominations

‘It’s disgraceful’: MC Harvey fumed about Danica’s behaviour to Prince Lorenzo following the nominations

‘They think they can snog her. Danica led Lorenzo to the point where I thought he was going to propose. She knows what she’s doing and she’s very good at it.’

But worse was yet to come when Danica’s fellow housemates slammed her behaviour in front of her.

MC Harvey said: ‘I’m sick of this love triangle situation, and I think she was one of the main causes of The Situation and Lorenzo becoming distant when they used to be friends.’

And the beauty was shocked when The Situation turned against her for a second time, saying: ‘Danica uses my emotions against Prince. Although I do care about her, let’s see how the public feels.’

Upsetting: The housemates were forced to make their nominations in front of each other yet again

Meanwhile, Samantha Brick added: ‘We’ve got very different views on how you treat and respect men.’

Danica was left in tears at the end of the nominations and decided to confront The Situation on why he had put her up for eviction again.

‘I would never have done that to you. Never,’ she said. ‘I thought out of everyone I could rely on you, like I said I could.’

Upset: Danica looked on as she was nominated by Ashley, Harvey, Julie, Samantha and The Situation

But the Jersey Shore star claimed his decision was tactical, saying: ‘I practically love you, but I know you have a boyfriend.’

And Danica’s actions caused a further divide between the group when Prince Lorenzo attempted to stand up for her against MC Harvey.

However, the rapper immediately hit back in a scathing attack, suggesting the model’s behaviour has been ‘disgraceful’.
‘I’m sick of this love triangle’: The Celebrity Big Brother housemates fumed that they were fed up of the model’s incessant flirting

‘I’m sick of this love triangle’: The Celebrity Big Brother housemates fumed that they were fed up of the model’s incessant flirting

He fumed: ‘She’s got a boyfriend and how she’s acting is wrong. She’s flirtatious, she’s sexual with people. I’ve watched it.

‘Do you think going into your shower and flashing your boobs at someone is OK? She doesn’t carry herself like someone who has a boyfriend and I honestly think it’s disgraceful.’

But Danica wasn’t the only one left in tears after the night’s events.

Nominations time: In turn, Danica chose to put Samantha and Ashley up for eviction

Coleen Nolan sobbed in the Diary Room after claiming former Coronation Street actress Julie Goodyear was playing a ‘vile game’.

She told Big Brother: ‘Julie is so f***ing two-faced. I have felt a b***h coming in here s***ging that woman off, but she is playing the game in a vile way.

‘She says she loves me but p**s off, Julie. You haven’t loved me since day one. But you’re loving the young ones because you want to come across as a hip 70-year-old.

Sobbing: Coleen Nolan was also reduced to tears in the Diary Room after claiming Julie Goodyear was playing a ‘vile game’

‘I didn’t nominate her because I thought she’s a national treasure and thought everyone would hate me. But I don’t care anymore.

‘Julie’s been out to get me from day one. I just wish she’d stop telling me she loves me because it makes me f***ing sick.’

Danica Thrall, Coleen Nolan and Samantha Brick will face eviction from the Celebrity Big Brother house tomorrow night (Friday).

‘National treasure’: Coleen admitted to Big Brother that she had previously been afraid of nominating Julie

I nearly chocked on my horlicks when Coleen referred to Julie Goodyear as being a national treasure, that gum chewing trouble maker is everything but.

– Kal, Manchester, 31/8/2012 07:39
Rating   2

MC Harvey is a nasty piece of work and not nice to women – Danica is right; he is a bully and a ring leader. Ashley is a stupid but nasty little boy too with no respect for women. Julie Goodyear is a disgrace. I don’t respect Danica’s career but she is not insincere – she is a very honest woman – I like her!

– laura, oxford, 31/8/2012 07:36
Rating (0)

Harvey you numpty you can’t talk about Danica after what you did to Alisha. While all you eejits are looking and hating on Danica the one you should be watching is Julie ‘clacking gum’ Goodyear she’s the silent assassin. Mike the walking ego is playing a great game knowing he’s got the house’s sympathy over Danica he’s playing it for all it’s worth. Prince Lorenzo is a sweetie but hardly stupid. Relationships formed in these situations are doomed before they start. Danica is flirting BUT hardly crime of the century… Unless you’re Mike who doesn’t like not having her 24/7 to himself. I don’t want Danica to leave I think Sam should go she’s boring

– Oxfordshire Annie, UK, 31/8/2012 07:27
Rating (0)

Even though she has faults Danica is so pretty – islingtongrl, Renfrew Scotland, 31/8/2012 03:43 ———————————————————————————- What a sad little comment that is! She’s ugly on the inside, no one knows who the real Danica is. Being pretty will only get you so far and eventually it will lead to trouble, hope she’s prepared for it. As a man i acknowledge she’s pretty, but some men can see through the lipstick and flirty hair playing. She’s a little tramp and i hope in future a real strong powerful man destroys her emotionally and morally!

– Robert, Liverpool, 31/8/2012 07:26
Rating   1

Please, please please vote to keep the lovely Julian in. He’s a lovely and genuine person and deserves to win. Martin Kemp second. As for Julie, well, what a vile, foul mouthed back stabber she is!

– jane, south coast, 31/8/2012 07:22
Rating   3

Harvey – You are a vile Hypocrite, and that is 10 time worse than Danica!!!

– RJ, London, 31/8/2012 07:20
Rating   1

Danika is a vile woman.

– only me, Bedford, 31/8/2012 07:13
Rating   1

My my, aren’t we all judgemental. I’m sure nobody commenting here has ever done anything others wouldnt approve of. I’m not a big fan of her behaviour in the house (or at leastbwhat C5 have chosen to show us), but I think she had a point last night. The boys have formed a nasty gang against her. For my money, she’s just a silly girl. The real nasty piece of work is Julie. What a malevolent crow. She is playing every single one of the housemates for fools. She is the true villain of the piece, not sideshow Danica.

– Miffster’s Mum, Nowhere, 31/8/2012 07:10
Rating (0)

Can not stand Danica! Spoilt madam!

– nicole, London, 31/8/2012 07:06

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Is this Danica even a real person? Lets pretend if not because the issue is quite interesting . . . Danika could make a fortune TEACHING others to use that mojo as she does (uncontrolled mojo btw leads to rapes of even Burkha clad women, even though their eyes cannot even be seen, a man though can sense the ‘spirit’ of such women and get excited – so the chips fall in trhe Middle East . . . Danika however actually IS in control!).

Don’t condemn and put Danika in proper perspective and context. Danica could change the sex lives of the ‘untrained’ FOREVER perhaps via some seminars or what not! This is talent and must not be blunted by attacks like this. Maybe not suitable for some reality shows or some social situations, but must not be lost or weakened! Danika could in fact create a renaissancxe in sex positivism as well as overhaul the henpecked feminazi manipulated psychiatric establishment and nridge the alpha male group to mainstream society!

Danika sound like beyond mere sex, but can be the MIND OF SEX. Just immature and needs proper context (reality TV is no context for anything btw, just aggravation and lots of poseurs bullying those watching unawares, or if not ‘their own size/skill’.). Freud style genius in the making here, though not for the lower classes, this is a high society skill to be propagated! Incessant flirting is only so in the podunk village Danika comes from, that is probably peopled with retards, so when finally in the limelight Danika goes into overdrive and makes everyone feel threatened . . . Danika should find or create that niche for what she does so well! Don’t miss this comment!

ARTICLE 15

Hordes of randy Republicans were expected to be a boon for Tampa’s Sunshine State many strips clubs, but owners and dancers are still waiting for their RNC stimulus package – by Rich Schapiro / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS – Thursday, August 30, 2012, 6:05 AM

Scantily-clad beauties perform at Mons Venus strip club in Tampa on Tuesday. Strippers were promised a booming business with the Republican National Convention in town, but so far it’s been a bust.

TAMPA — The wildly anticipated Republican nudie-bar bonanza has turned out to be a double D-sized bust.

Strippers across this mammary mecca were anticipating an orgy of business this week from the crush of conventioneers.

Instead, three days into the RNC, Tampa’s dancing beauties were still waiting for their stimulus packages.

“My friend told me I’d make $3,000 a night this week,” said a slinky brunette named Jordan, as she gazed dejectedly around an empty Mons Venus bar on Monday, the Isaac washout day in Tampa. “I’ve made $100 tonight and it’s already 3 a.m.”

“I don’t even know what I’m still doing here,” she added. “This sucks.”

Don’t even know what ‘I’m’ still doing here? Don’t be ungrateful! Just look at the jobless GRADUATES who owe the ‘Education-Financiar-Complex’ while interest piles up. Lucky to be earning so much in such nice conditions!

OUR TEAM IN TAMPA REPORTS LIVE FROM THE RNC

The scene was no different at 2001 Odyssey, located just across the street, where some strippers were dealing with their own personal deficit crises.

“I don’t even know what I’m still doing here,” one Mons Venus stripper said. “This sucks.”

A dancer named Sicily said she was actually down more than $100 after working Friday, Sunday and Tuesday. Strippers at 2001 Odyssey pay a stage fee every night — and Sicily said the club raised it from $50 to $100 this week.

“I wish I was going home with one dollar in my pocket,” Sicily said. “That’s sad.”

Warren Colazzo, owner of Thee Dollhouse, had predicted that the convention haul would triple the cash brought in during previous Super Bowls hosted in Tampa.

But between 1 a.m. and 2 a.m. Wednesday, his sleek club drew only one extremely drunk conventioneer in an ill-fitting suit who was seen being reprimanded by a burly security guard.

A pair of cocktail waitresses, in skin-tight American flag corsets and barely-there blue thongs, looked bored.

Asked how her week has been, Karen Kennard, an ample-chested blonde, broke into a pained smile.

“Hashtag 2012 RNC money myth,” quipped Kennard. “I’ve worked four Super Bowls. I was hoping to be inundated financially in Super Bowl proportions, but it definitely hasn’t happened yet.”

Not all of the delegates have acted like choir boys, of course. A smattering of randy Republicans have mixed canoodling with conventioneering.

A portly delegate in a white button-down shirt and khaki pants showed up at 2001 Odyssey Monday night still wearing his convention credentials.

Every five minutes or so, he disappeared into a back room to get a lap dance.

“That guy can’t get enough,” one stripper remarked.

An hour or so later, a politico in a blue blazer emerged from the private VIP area tailed closely by a busty brunette. He made a beeline for the club’s ATM machine and pulled out $400 before walking back out, his hand on the small of her back.

Monica Fox, a stripper at Mons Venus, said a pair of GOP bigwigs stopped by Monday afternoon — and one of them treated her like royalty.

“He had money, and he had no problem spending it,” Fox said.

But she was one of the very lucky ones. At 4 a.m. Wednesday, a heavily tattooed stripper named Anna surveyed the scene at 2001 Odyssey — where a gaggle of girls were jostling for the attention of three guys in suits — and offered her take on why business was so bad.

“To be honest, I think a lot of them just hired escorts,” she said. “That’s more their style.”

See how Tampa strip clubs prepared for the RNC in this video report

rschapiro@nydailynews.com

Craig Warga/New York Daily News

Dancers at Mons Venus strip club in Tampa told The News that business has been terrible.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/hordes-randy-republicans-expected-a-boon-tampa-strips-clubs-owners-dancers-waiting-rnc-stimulus-package-article-1.1147630

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

At 100 per night, 2-3K a month is quite fair! This is relaxing half day shift of 4 hours at most, to just prance around a pole, get some exercise, or get groped and pawed abit! Look at all those degree holding debt ridden graduates who earn nothing for years! Remember to put some aside for your retirement girls! Education should be free, and even then there might be no takers for education!

ARTICLE 16

Benedict Groeschel, NY Priest, Apologizes For Suggesting Child Abuse Sex Victims Seduce The Clergy – by DEEPTI HAJELA 08/30/12 08:22 PM ET AP

Benedict Groeschel

The Rev. Benedict Groeschel, a New York priest, is apologizing following criticism he’s receiving for saying that priests accused of child sex abuse are often seduced by their accusers and that a first-time offender shouldn’t go to jail.

NEW YORK — A New York priest apologized Thursday after coming under criticism for saying that priests accused of child sex abuse are often seduced by their accusers and that a first-time offender should not go to jail.

The Rev. Benedict Groeschel of the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal made the comments in an interview with the National Catholic Register published this week. The website for the conservative independent Register then removed the story and posted an apology for publishing the comments. Groeschel and the friars did as well.

Asked about working with priests involved in abuse, Groeschel said, “Suppose you have a man having a nervous breakdown, and a youngster comes after him. A lot of the cases, the youngster – 14, 16, 18 – is the seducer.”

In expanding on his answer, Groeschel also referenced Jerry Sandusky, the former Penn State coach convicted of sexually abusing boys, referring to Sandusky as “this poor guy” and wondering why no one said anything for years.

He also added later that anyone involved “on their first offense, they should not go to jail because their intention was not committing a crime.”

Editor in Chief Jeanette De Melo posted a note apologizing for “publishing without clarification or challenge Father Benedict Groeschel’s comments that seem to suggest that the child is somehow responsible for abuse. Nothing could be further from the truth. Our publication of that comment was an editorial mistake, for which we sincerely apologize.”

Groeschel also posted an apology to the site. “I did not intend to blame the victim. A priest (or anyone else) who abuses a minor is always wrong and is always responsible. My mind and my way of expressing myself are not as clear as they used to be. I have spent my life trying to help others the best that I could. I deeply regret any harm I have caused to anyone,” he said.

The friars expressed regret for the remarks and highlighted Groeschel’s medical history. They said he had been in a car accident several years ago, and that “in recent months his health, memory and cognitive ability have been failing.” They described the comments as “out of character.”

The Archdiocese of New York repudiated the comments in a statement posted on its website, calling them “simply wrong.”

“Although he is not a priest of the Archdiocese of New York, what Father Groeschel said cannot be allowed to stand unchallenged. The sexual abuse of a minor is a crime, and whoever commits that crime deserves to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,” spokesman Joseph Zwilling said.

Groeschel is not a priest with the Archdiocese in any specific parish but has worked with it in the past. He helped start the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal in 1987. He hosts a weekly show, “Sunday Night Prime,” on EWTN, the Catholic television network.

Deacon Bernard Nojadera, executive director of the Secretariat of Child and Youth Protection of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, said, “There is never a time when you can blame a minor who is sexually assaulted for the crime perpetrated upon him or her. The responsibility is always with the adult. Sexual abuse of a minor is abhorrent and indefensible. It is especially heinous when the abuse is perpetrated by a cleric.”

David Clohessy, director of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, or SNAP, said there needs to be consequences for figures like Groeschel, “who say incredibly hurtful and mean-spirited things.”

“He’s rubbing salt into the wounds of already-suffering victims,” Clohessy said.

Comments like Groeschel’s “discourage victims, witnesses and whistleblowers from reporting horrific crimes both known and suspected,” he said.

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Another contrived NLP article? Well here’s an answer for answerings sake. This Groeschel guy is too old, mellow and tired, also too deeply socialised to think through the whys or argue. All of the above articles’ responses were not so easy to elucidate or apply immediately under the barrage of abuse the poor guy got hammered with (as per the NLP manufactured b.s. . . . of course . . . ). As mentioned, earlier, the reptillian brain and the day-to-day personality are entirely different things, and children being partially socialised can and do communicate at different levels. THAT is what Groeschel meant. Not that sexual abuse is normal, especially in consensual cases, but that everything takes 2 hands to clap. Yea for sure, the other Benedict (Arnold? Nope . . . ) needs to grow a thick shell, no amount of NLP fake articles will make child abuses go away . . . honesty is better than harbouring paedophile Catholic (or whatever denomination) Priests. Time for those overdue melons . . . no mellowing here!

4 Articles on Unconscionability of, and, Ending Forced Military Conscriptions (or at least adding Abstention Options to the rent seeking, contractor.supplier enriching bill) – reposted by @AgreeToDisagree – 10th February 2012

In Abuse of Power, bad laws, Conscription, critical discourse, criticism, Democracy, Forced Military Conscription, Malaysia, mental abuse, Mind Control, neurolinguistics, self policing, social freedoms, spirit of the law, taxpayer funds, use of tax monies on February 10, 2012 at 4:13 pm

ARTICLE 1

Najib’s Orwellian 1 Malaysia – Written by johnleemk (who most authoritarian-‘ly’ dubbed Malaysian online commentators and people interested in politics – ‘chatttering classes’ on 4:58:29 am Mar 11, 2010.

Datuk Seri Najib Razak was supposed to be a better Prime Minister than Tun Abdullah Badawi. But his charm offensive belies his failure to protect our democracy and our institutions. Najib replaced Pak Lah because of the Umno warlords protecting their own interests, rather than those of the country’s; he is a Prime Minister beholden to Umno politicos, not the Malaysian voters.

The biggest problem people had with Pak Lah was that he was weak. He said nice things, but he didn’t have the willpower to see them through. He was a career civil servant, not a politician. So we got Najib—a consummate politician.

But Pak Lah’s weakness was a double-edged sword. He let a lot of people get away with saying nasty things—our nation’s dirty laundry of corruption and racism was aired like never before during his time. But the Sarawak Tribune aside, the Abdullah administration also let people get away with a lot of productive debate. It was a breath of fresh air compared to the Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad regime.

The Najib regime is a return to the era of Mahathir. One of the most pervasive and repulsive examples of this is the insidious 1Malaysia campaign. It’s simply a tiruan ciplak of Bangsa Malaysia or Wawasan 2020—a pretence of vision for the country. Nowadays when I go to official events, the emcees greet us: “Assalamualaikum dan salam 1Malaysia.” This is nothing more than Orwellian propaganda.

Now, I could tolerate propaganda if this amorphous 1Malaysia idea were actually productive. It seems that Datuk Idris Jala has been working his butt off to make it so. But as The Malaysian Insider has reported, Idris’s attempts to redress racial injustices have been rejected by the Cabinet and replaced with vague, token promises of sweet nothings.

Other reform efforts, such as the amendment or abolition of the ISA and our other anti-democratic laws seem to have fallen by the wayside. Despite the fanciful KPIs flying around, the government still cannot convince the public that our law enforcement agencies truly work to uphold justice. In the public’s eyes, the MACC is as tainted and politically biased as ever. The constant foot-dragging in the prosecutions for the death of A. Kugan and the multi-billion ringgit Port Klang Free Zone disaster only suggest that Najib has no intention of meaningfully upholding the rule of law.

Under the Constitution, the same laws apply to all Malaysians: if one Malaysian has the right to peacefully protest, then all Malaysians must have that same right. Only a few days ago, the police stopped a major Pakatan rally in Kuala Lumpur because it was supposedly disturbing the peace.

When a bunch of rabble-rousers held rallies outside mosques across the country in January then—rallies where some people had the gall to call for further torching of churches—that wasn’t disturbing the peace? Apparently not: Najib’s regime protects your democratic rights only when it is convenient.

Now, Najib’s government is going further: it is confiscating books simply because it doesn’t like them. Cartoonist Zunar’s 1FunnyMalaysia is gone—I suppose because the title makes fun of 1Malaysia. Amir Muhammad’s Politicians Say the Darndest Things, which was perfectly acceptable for public consumption a year ago, is now gone from the shelves. Nat Tan and I edited a book on police brutality and custodial deaths, such as Teoh Beng Hock’s; this book, Where is Justice, is now gone too.

Again, forget the rule of law; these books are not officially banned. (Indeed, in some stores, the sales clerk will sell them to you from behind the counter.) What Najib has simply done is intimidate booksellers into taking these books off the shelves, so you do not even realise they exist. Again, the Orwellian parallels are frightening.

What I liked about Pak Lah is that as bumbling as he was, he was an accidental democrat. Under his still-authoritarian regime, we at least saw the beginnings of some productive and open debate. Heck, he even tried to reform the Anti-Corruption Agency and overhaul some of our draconian laws like the ISA before he stepped down. If Mahathir was Bapa Pemodenan, then I daresay Pak Lah could be Bapa Demokrasi.

Najib is set only on protecting himself and the cronies of his regime, democracy and the rule of law be damned. 1Malaysia does not do away with any of the serious injustices in our country; this is not a government for all Malaysians. This is a government for Umno. There is a chance, of course, for Najib to change course, and make 1Malaysia for all; he could, if he wanted to, be remembered as Bapa Reformasi. But unless he takes action, I fear we may well remember him as Bapa Kezaliman.

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

” What I liked about Pak Lah is that as bumbling as he was, he was an accidental democrat. Under his still-authoritarian regime, we at least saw the beginnings of some productive and open debate. ”

NO, John ‘Chattering Classes’ Lee, thats not true at all. Pak Lah was no accidental democrat. During Pak Lah’s time, FORCED MILITARY CONSCRIPTIONS without abstention options backed by fines and jail terms which still exist today were implemented. Those had caused near a score deaths and still cause deaths among trainees. There is nothing accidental or democratic about Pak Lah allowing that to occur under his watch. FORCED MILITARY CONSCRIPTIONS without abstention options backed by fines and jail terms  in fact draws influences from two of the world’s most oppressive regimes – Singapore’s dictatorship, Taiwan’s ‘Fear of Invasion Collusion for Contractor profiteering AGAINST the Chinese hinterland’  and Israel’s Zionism and directly contravenes the Human Rights Charter which Malaysia is a signatory of and perhaps even the Hadiths of Islam.

What’s so democratic about Pak Lah who allowed FORCED MILITARY CONSCRIPTIONS without abstention options to be inflicted on Malaysia (alongside with so many instances of less than subtle clique forming and nepotism)? Given PM Najib’s use of APCO Worldwide, an Israel based and possibly Zionist owned media company to promote 1Malaysia, we know where Malaysia is heading under the racist faction at UMNO, hopefully Pakatan Rakyat will abolish FORCED MILITARY CONSCRIPTIONS (sadly we have parachute CM YM Lim Guan Eng indirectly fetting the pernicious abstentionless militarisation system – doubtless influenced by DAP’s ppatron PAP Singapore to the point that DAP’s MPs and Assemblymen cannot declare their assets – by saying the Forced Abstention Clauseless Militarisation/Brainwash programme ‘helped’ Guan Eng’s daughter – well on the mind control note, NOTE CAREFULLY Guan Eng went down in a Malay staffed submarine for a few hours, this is enough to place any Neurotech implants or allow for any chemical induced brainwahing to occur – he’s just not made his move for his new ‘Masters’ yet so do know that DAP leadership is currently impacted by UMNO high tech infiltration/brainwash (unless PAP has some de-brainwash protocols?) in which case DAP is still subject to PAP fifth columnist influence, needs changing – note how shidty Guan Eng is on Hudud these days? Meanwhile ISA has not even been abolished, implement IPCMC as well as give Malaysia :

1) Freedom from Apartheid/Fascism
2) Freedom from Religious-Persecution/Religious-Supremacy.
3) Equality for all ethnicities and faiths in all aspects of policy, Law and Constitution.

;so that we will not mistake so pre-groomed Yes-Men (installed illegally as PM by the facts thus far) with so called ‘Bapa Reformasi’ and ‘Accidental Democrats’ who militarise the population by force (no abstention and under threat of fines and jailings) by the writings of possibly embedded writers such as the above. Slamming a single political (Najib) faction while promoting another (Pak Lah) has been faction does not make one a defender of Human Rights and Democracy John . . . while Malaysia becomes more and more oppressive with police state, militarised laws like FORCED MILITARY CONSCRIPTION and ISA which Pak Lah had power to remove but did not, we have people like John lying through his teeth whil calling politically interested citizens ‘chattering classes’. Just another spin-doctor counter-propagandist working for racists.

By God’s will (if you believe in God) Man is free, Man can choose, and unless Malaysians are not considered human and have rights as elucidated in the UNHCR, by which FORCED MILITARY CONSCRIPTIONS without abstention options rubber-stamps obviously are illegal, none (especially Federal Government) has a right to force anyone into military fatigues under threat of fine or incarceration. Pak Lah, why did you allow that to happen? Why did you not address the above ITEMS 1,2 and 3 and vacillate the people’s mandate away? Some of us believed in you and you let everyone down . . .

ARTICLE 2

Breaking the fever of militarism — Chris Floyd

MARCH 9 — All who draw the sword will die by the sword. (Yeshua Ha-Notsri, Palestinian dissident, c. 33 CE.)

As we all know — or rather, as everyone but those who climb and claw their way to the top of power’s greasy pole knows — the effects of war are vast, unforeseeable, long-lasting — and uncontrollable.

The far-reaching ripples of the turbulence will churn against distant shores and hidden corners, then roil back upon you in ways you could never imagine, for generations, even centuries.

Nor is “victory” in war proof against these deleterious effects. For the brutalization, moral coarsening, corruption and concentration of elite power that attend every war do not simply disappear from a society when the fighting stops.

They persist, like microbes, in myriad forms, working with slow, corrosive force to degrade and deform the victors.

Indeed, victory in battle often leads a society to enshrine war’s most pernicious attributes: violence is ennobled, and becomes entrenched as an ever-ready instrument of national policy.

Militarism is exalted, the way of peace dishonored: cries of “Appeasers! Cowards! Traitors!” greet every approach that fails to brandish the threat of extreme violence, that fails to “keep all options on the table.”

The apparent “lesson” of victory — that there can be no right without armed might to win and safeguard it — quickly degenerates into the belief  that armed might is right.

Military power becomes equated with moral worth, and the ability to wreak savage, unimaginable destruction through armed violence —via thoughtless obedience to the orders of “superiors” — becomes a cherished attribute of society.

War is no longer seen as a vast, horrific failure of the human spirit, a scandalous betrayal of our common humanity, a sickening tragedy of irrevocable loss and inconsolable suffering —although this is its inescapable reality, even in a “good” war, for a “just” cause. (And of course no nation or faction has ever gone to war without declaring that its cause is just.)

Instead of lamenting war, and girding for it, if at all, only in the most dire circumstances, with the most extreme reluctance, the infected society celebrates it at every turn. No national occasion — even a sporting event! — is complete without bristling displays of military firepower, and pious tributes to those wreaking violence around the world in blind obedience to their superiors.

Oddly enough, when a modern nation consciously adopts a “warrior ethos,” it casts aside —openly, even gleefully — whatever virtue that ethos has historically claimed for itself, such as courage in battle and honor toward adversaries.

In its place come the adulation of overwhelming technological firepower and the rabid demonization of the enemy (or the perceived enemy, or even the “suspected” enemy), who is stripped of all rights, all human dignity, and subject to “whatever it takes” to break him down or destroy him.

Thus our American militarists exult in the advanced hardware that allows “soldiers” to slaughter people from thousands of miles away, with missiles, bombs and bullets fired from lurking, unreachable drones high in the sky. (A recent study shows that even by the most conservative reckoning of who is or isn’t a “militant,” at least one third of the hundreds killed in the Bush-Obama drone campaigns on the “Af-Pak” front are clearly civilians.)

The drone “warriors” — often living in complete safety and comfort —see nothing but a bloodless image on a screen; they face no physical threat at all. This is assassination, not combat; it reeks of cowardice, and dehumanizes everyone it touches, the victims and the button-pushers alike.

Yet our militarists — most of whom, of course, have somehow never found the time to fight the wars they cheer for — wax orgasmic about this craven weaponry. In the transvaluation of values that militarism produces, cowardice becomes a martial virtue.

Barack Obama, the Nobel Peace Laureate, pushes forward with plans for the “Prompt Global Strike” system of “conventional” super-missiles that can rain down massive death — unstoppable, undeterrable, without warning — anywhere on the planet within an hour. All this, while expanding shorter-range missile “defense” systems that bristle with blatantly offensive potential, and intent, all over the world.

Plus spending billions to “modernize” the nuclear arsenal, ensuring that it stays effective enough to murder the entire earth, while weeding out some “redundant” warheads as a PR gesture.

Meanwhile, the drone programs — emblazoned with names that proudly proclaim their savage nature: “Predators” and “Reapers,” launching “Hellfire” missiles into sleeping villages — keep expanding relentlessly. As noted by Nick Turse — who is doing invaluable work detailing the deadly nuts and bolts of the militarist empire and its profiteers — the Pentagon is drooling over visions of vast robotic forces filling the heavens and roaming the earth, even down to the smallest crevice.

He rightly notes the main purpose of this massively funded R&D: to make war “easier,” less deadly to “our side,” and thus more palatable to the public:

“This means bigger, badder, faster drones — armed to the teeth — with sensor systems to monitor wide swathes of territory and the ability to loiter overhead for days on end waiting for human targets to appear and, in due course, be vaporized by high-powered munitions.

It’s a future built upon advanced technologies designed to make targeted killings — remote-controlled assassinations — ever more effortless.

“… For the Air Force, such a prospect is the stuff of dreams, a bright future for unmanned, hypersonic lethality; for the rest of the planet, it’s a potential nightmare from which there may be no waking.”

But while Turse outlines this potential nightmare in grim detail, we are of course beset by present nightmares in horrific plenty. And few are more chilling than the ruling establishment’s astonishingly swift acceptance of outright torture as an open tool of national policy.

This acceptance not only includes the increasingly frenzied praise and championing of torture by the circle of war criminals and accomplices led by Dick Cheney; in slightly more restrained tones, it goes right across the board among the political and media elite. Torture is now nothing more than a topic for “debate” — debates which center largely on the relative “effectiveness” of various torture techniques, or else on mindless (not to mention heartless) hairsplitting over the meaning of the word “torture.”

There is of course a myth that Barack Obama has “ended” the practice of torture. This is not even remotely true. For one thing, the Army Field Manual that Obama has adopted as his interrogation standard permits many practices that any rational person would consider torture.

For another, we have no way of verifying what techniques are actually being used by the government’s innumerable “security” and intelligence agencies, by the covert units of the military — and by other entities whose very existence is still unknown.

These agencies are almost entirely self-policed; they investigate themselves, they report on themselves to the toothless Congressional “oversight” committees; we simply have to take these organizations —whose entire raison d’etre is deceit, deception, lawlessness and subterfuge — at their word.

And of course, we have no way of knowing what is being done in the torture chambers of foreign lands where the United States often “outsources” its captives.

Finally, even if the comforting bedtime story of Obama’s ban of torture techniques in interrogation were true, there remains his ardent championing of the right to seize anyone on earth — without a warrant, without producing any evidence whatsoever of wrongdoing — and hold them indefinitely, often for years on end, in a legal limbo, with no inherent rights whatsoever, beyond whatever narrowly constricted, ever-changing, legally baseless and often farcical “hearings” and tribunals the captors deign to allow them.

Incarceration under these conditions is itself an horrendous act of torture, no matter what else might happen to the captive. Yet Obama has actively, avidly applied this torture, and has gone to court numerous times to defend this torture, and to expand the use of this torture.

Many thousands of innocent people have already been forced through the meat grinder of this torture — at one point early in the Iraq War, the Red Cross estimated that 70-90 percent of the more than 20,000 Iraqis being held by the Americans as “suspected terrorists” were not guilty of any crime whatsoever, much less ‘terrorism’.

And that is just a single snapshot, at a single point in time, of the vast gulag that America has wrapped around the earth — a gulag where many have been murdered outright, not just tortured or unjustly imprisoned. And it is still going on, with scarcely a demur across the bipartisan establishment.

The heinous and dishonorable practice of torture, physical and psychological, is now an intrinsic, openly established element of American society.

Murder, cowardice, torture, dishonor: these are fruits — and the distinguishing characteristics — of the militarized society. What Americans once would not do even to Nazis with the blood of millions on their hands, they now do routinely to weak and wretched captives seized on little or no evidence of wrongdoing at all.

We are deep in the darkness, and hurtling deeper, headlong, all the time.

Let’s not kid ourselves, however. The militarism that has now gained such a strangulating ascendancy over American life did not drop down suddenly from the sky (or arrive on the hijacked bus that Bush and Cheney drove to the White House).

Although this militarism has now reached unprecedented levels of institutional and political dominance, there has always been a strong warlike strain running through American history — indeed, through its pre-history as well, as Fred Anderson and Andrew Cayton demonstrate in their book, Dominion of War, detailing the decisive influence of war and imperialism on America’s development over the past 500 years.

Nor is it a peculiarly American problem. As Caroline Alexander notes in her excellent new work, The War That Killed Achilles:

“If we took any period of a hundred years in the last five thousand, it has been calculated, we could expect, on average, 94 of those years to be occupied with large-scale conflicts in one or more parts of the world. This enduring, seemingly ineradicable fact of war is … as intrinsic and tragic a component of the human condition as our very mortality.”

We human beings have been shaped by millions of years of genetic breakage and mutation, all of which is still on-going. We are compounds of chaos, ignorance and error. Our psyches are frail and variegated things, isolated, with each individual consciousness formed from a unique and ever-shifting coalescence of billions of brain cells firing (and misfiring) in infinite, unrepeatable combinations.

Beneath this electrical superstructure lie mechanical rhythms and erratic surges of instinct and impulse, dark, hormonal tides and drives that never reach the plane of awareness.

In the infancy of our species we began to cling — fiercely, in fear and desire — to patterns of behavior, emotion and thought that seemed to bring some sort of order, some containment of the whirlwind within us, and some protection from the dangers, known and unknown, that lurked outside.

We began to do “whatever it takes” to preserve these patterns from the ever-present threat of their dissolution in the whirlwind, to impose them, by violence if necessary, on the recalcitrant material of reality — including the always-unknowable, impenetrable reality of the Other, those mysterious combinations outside our isolated consciousness.

The patterns become ingrained, they sink into the substrate where they operate unquestioned and unseen, they become “natural,” the way that things must be. Domination and obedience are among the strongest, and most enduring, of these patterns, taking multitudinous forms — a “local habitation and a name” — in the ever-changing circumstances of existence.

War is their expression writ large. It is in us, it comes from us.

But to acknowledge war’s intrinsic, universal character does not absolve us of the need to resist it. To say, “Oh, that’s just human nature; it’s always been this way and always will be this way,” is not only a lazy, timorous acquiescence to base instinct, it also posits a settled, even eternal quality to human nature and human consciousness that simply does not and cannot exist.

To go against war, to step outside the ingrained behavioral patterns of domination and obedience is indeed an “unnatural” act — and it feels unnatural, it feels strange, and raw, and frightening. But the deeper fear — of psychic and physical dissolution — that lies at the foundation of these ever-more destructive patterns can only be faced down, changed, and wrenched into some more benevolent pattern by embracing the risk and discomfort of stepping forth, of stepping beyond — literally, “transgressing” — the boundaries of a wholly imaginary (or even hallucinatory) “human nature.”

The whirlwind that characterizes the imperfect, breaking, misfiring, evolving reality of human consciousness is not only a producer of (very understandable) deep-seated fears; it is also a force for liberation.

Because our nature is not ultimately fixed, we can, literally and figuratively, burn new connections in our brains, we can enlarge our consciousness and extend our empathetic understanding of those strange Others. And we have been doing this, in fits and starts, in lurches and staggers, with much backsliding and many wrong turns — indeed, in ignorance and error — for as long as we have been creatures cursed and gifted with self-awareness.

We do have the capacity, the space, to resist the patterns of domination and obedience, to seek out new ways of seeing the world, of being in the world, of communing with others.

This seems, to me, a worthwhile thing to be getting on with during our painfully brief time on the earth, during our infinitesimal window of opportunity to make some small contribution toward pushing the project of being human — or rather, becoming human — down the road, at least a few more steps, in the direction of a better understanding, a broader consciousness, a greater enlightenment. — http://www.counterpunch.org

* Chris Floyd is an American writer and frequent contributor to CounterPunch. His blog, Empire Burlesque, can be found at http://www.chris-floyd.com.

ARTICLE 3

Suppress ‘Anti-conscription System’

The National Police Agency (NPA) investigated internet sites of anti-military/avoiding military service. Two sites closed by themselves and discussion on it is getting passive.

What is difference between objecting military service and avoiding military service?

Where can we draw a line between discussing conscription system and agitating objection of military service? On Mar.20.2001 an investigation team on cyber crimes of the NPA announced that they are investigating on three inter-net sites, which informed people about how to avoid, military service, agitated people to object military service and recruited its members through the notice board on Internet. This announcement is controversial in Korea. The three sites, which are under investigation, are ‘Non Service Army site (NSA)’, ‘Organization of Objecting Military Service (OMS-Taum Cafe)’ and ‘Defense Ministry of Abusing Us (DMAU-Laicos)’.

The OMS is the most active discussion site among military service related sites and has been accessed more than 40,000 times. The police announced to exclude OMS from investigation because OMS had been a discussion site, which had pointed out problems of conscription system and suggested volunteer army instead of it, and it had also come under a sphere of ‘freedom of expression’. DMAU was also excluded because even though it had been considered the site which had informed people the way of avoiding military service in detail such as the amount of bribes, having an experience of treatment in mental hospital, and habitual dislocation, it had given information of recruit of special case of military service and played a role as a private bureau on military service. Moreover, ordinary people already know the methods of avoiding military service that had been shown on the notice board of DMAU.

The site that the police focused on is NSA because it declared the anti-military movement. The police announced to investigate the NSA because a member of the NSA had declared not going to the army in public, and their behaviors such as denying military duties and agitating objection of conscription are anti-social. Moreover, they had ‘offline’ meeting twice, and it was considered an action for spreading anti-military movement. Even though it is controversial, the police investigates and actively applies NMS’s behavior to Article 114 of the criminal code which stats a crime of being a member of group/organization of objecting military service. After an announcement of the policy of the police, more than 300 mails both of agreement and disagreement with it have been shown on the NMS site.

On the same day the police required Taum communication and Laicos Korea to submit managers’ personal record, and ‘the Council of Info-communication Ethics’ also required these sites to close. Although Taum communication submitted managers’ personal record and ID address, Laicos Korea rejected closing its site because it considered the close of conscription related site is too much restriction on the freedom brought by internet. The Council of Info-communication Ethics couldn’t decide an order of correction because the discussion in the council hasn’t been convened. However, on the notice board of OMS displayed its close, and all contents of the notice board of DMAU were removed the following day.

The managers of OMS and DMAU accepted the police investigation, but two managers of NSA didn’t. While the police insisted that they violated Article 114 of the criminal code (it read that people who organize groups for the purpose of objecting military duties or tax payment duties, or to be a member, will be punished 15 years of imprisonment or less than 15million won penalty), it seems the range of application to the law will be controversial. Furthermore, the fact that the police included not only managers of the sites but also members as its investigation objects is more controversial. The mangers of the NSA said, “We didn’t put the method of avoiding military service on the site. Moreover, we only required government to accept the rights of objection by political conscientious reason and the alternative service.”

During the police investigation, citizens’ organizations one after another announced their statements. On Mar.22.2001, 8 organization for peace and human rights such as the Solidarity of Peace and Human Rights, the Organization of Human Rights Movement and Mingahyop criticized and said “the police action is an expression of their will which they won’t sit and watch the rational discussion related to problems of conscription system and making it as public opinion. The following day the Progressive Network Center, the Democratic Labor Party and the Solidarity of All Nation participated in ‘Co-action against Info-communication censorship’ and announced its statement. The statement read that the idea, which the police justify, its censorship on the inter-net by considering only having discussion about conscription system being antisocial is out of date. And these organizations required withdrawing its investigation on discussion sites about conscription.

A person concerned the police said “I don’t think that the NSA established a big organization only after opening its site one month ago. But we want to prevent beforehand because we have to pay much social cost when this movement occurs in large scale. We also know that the discussion on conscription system in the society is already started, and we never think about stopping the discussion itself totally.

It is not sure that this incident is applied to ‘the crime of being members in organizations of objecting military service’. The police have to prove that the NSA organized an organization for the purpose of objecting military service, and the managers of the NSA have to prove that their purpose was not avoiding conscription. The policy for investigation of the police already brought passive (=not active) discussion just after the discussion on conscription started. It is proved by the two sites, which closed it by themselves.

Interview with Jo Yakgol (manager of the NSA) on a Meeting of ‘Offline’

“We oppose all kinds of violence and the military force.”

Is anti-military movement different from movement of conscientious objection?

Anti-military movement is a larger conception than movement of CO. We oppose militarism pervaded in every place of Korean society and CO. Avoiding military service is not a purpose of our movement. Our purpose is having doubts and reflection about the attitude that military system and conscription system are too justified by ordinary people.

Why anti-military movement?

For me, it is a struggle for surviving. I was terrified to see people (not only men but also women, disabled people, and homosexuals) living under oppression of nationalism and uniformity. If I endure this situation, it means that I aid violence. I think that the core of nationalism is conscription system. That is why I am doing the anti-military movement.

What is an aim of movement?

Getting rid of all kinds of violence and military force is our ultimate aim. However, CO by political, religious and humanitarian reasons should be accepted the first. If the alternative service is introduced, the next task is to change over to volunteer military system. I don’t think these are easy tasks.

Who do you cooperate with?

We welcome whoever stands for anti-military. An essence of military is monopoly of military force, and a few privileged people keep the present social order using it (military force). We want to work together with the weak and the minority against the present social order.

What are methods of movement?

We are planning to have a performance about anti-military on the Mayday. We are collecting songs about anti-military and already have some of them.

How is the situation of running the site?

I have received much response on the line, but people don’t turn up a meeting of ‘offline’. I guess that some people come here and look around, but they don’t show up. I can see deeply rooted fear of our mind through this behavior.

http://www2.gol.com/users/quakers/suppress_anticonscription_

 

 

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

We citizens in South Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand (this is a monastic conscription but still conscription nevertheless), Taiwan etc.. (Russia is ending Forced Military Conscriptions . . .  so not on this list) also need a UN Agency addressing FORCED MILITARY CONSCRIPTIONS to set up an office here in Malaysia as well. Normal citizens are having their human rights abused via the FORCED MILITARY CONSCRIPTIONS being forced on them via fines and jail terms. Via the UNHCR abusing NS Act, the government of the day has contravened the Articles of the Human Rights Charter :

Article 9.

* No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

Article 12.

* No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family . . .

Article 19.

* Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. Expression of Conscientious Objection is trampled upon by the NS Act.

Article 22.

* Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization . . . of social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality. A right to not being part of a Quasi-Military organisation under threat of fine and jail is given in Article 22. (i.e. Islam is a religion of peace, Indians have concept of Varna, Chinese do not regard the Military as a prestigious institution . . . )

Please set up a UN agency addressing the FORCED MILITARY CONSCRIPTIONS on Conscientious Objectors or people who do not subscribe to non-voluntary enforcement of military service.

 

 

ARTICLE 4

The rhetoric of oppression

MARCH 9 — Umberto Eco, in his article, The Wolf and the Lamb — The Rhetoric of Oppression (from which the title to this article is borrowed), posits that often enough, an oppressor — such as a dictator — would try to legitimise his oppression. He or she will even try “to obtain the consensus of those he is oppressing, or to find someone who will justify it” by using “rhetorical arguments to justify his abuse of power.”

(At this juncture, I would like to add to Eco’s example of an oppressor. In addition to a dictator, I would add a “totalitarian democrat” who is a so-called leader elected through a controlled democratic process. I would also add to the list what Rawls terms as the “benevolent absolutist.”)

The need for legitimisation of an act or acts of oppression, to my mind, stems from the desire to justify such acts,  which in turn is driven by  purely egoistical motivation, or perhaps is due to a deep feeling of guilt. Added to that must be the desire to gain acceptance of the people and to pander to the middle class intellectual probing.

Whatever the reason for the attempt to legitimise, at the end of the day, the rhetoric of the oppressor, to reasonable and probing minds, would often come out as completely lame and curious — sometimes even ridiculous, stupid and laughable — babbles.

That is because of the nature of the oppressor. He is so used to getting and doing what he wants without the necessity to justify any of his actions. He thus develops this inability to answer properly when questioned; to engage when called to question; to debate when argued against.

The oppressor rules with absolute subservience from his minions. He is the supreme leader. He is an idol of the people. His wishes are his people’s commands. All the years of absolutism contributes to his feeling of being infallible. That in turn numbs his mind and thought process.

Darwin’s evolution theory has proven that when any particular  biological or physical  mechanism is not used or needed for some time, it will soon disappear from the being. That is true with the oppressor. Soon, he ceases being a thinking creature.

All that matters to him is the untold power which he wields. And the idolatry which he enjoys.

Thus the  legitimisation of his acts is actually unnecessary. It is not a rational act. Or a rationalisation process. There is no need for such process. Because at the end of the day, all that matters to the oppressor is the achievement of a goal. And that is already assured and ensured. Not much care is then needed in the process of legitimisation.

Being so, when an oppressor tries to legitimise his oppression through rhetoric, it often sounds curious and ridiculous to reasonable people. Needless to say, they often fall flat.

Eco, in his work, gives us a classic “pseudorhetoric of oppression” in the form of Phaedrus’ fable of the wolf and the lamb.

In the tale, a thirsty wolf and a lamb came to a stream. The wolf was drinking upstream and the lamb was downstream. The wolf, ever the oppressor that he was, sought to start a quarrel.

“Why are you muddying the water I am drinking?” said the wolf.

If we stopped here, we could see the utter ridiculousness of the would-be oppressor’s starting line. How could the lamb, who was downstream, muddy the water which the wolf was drinking upstream? But the wolf, as with any oppressor, does not care about reasonableness of arguments. Reasonableness is only for the weak.

The lamb, however, represents a picture of reasonableness, when he sought to rationalise with the wolf. He answered, “I am sorry, but how could I do that? I am drinking the water that has passed you first.”

That is a polite answer. It is also an answer which any sensible member of a civilised society would offer to the oppressor’s rhetoric. Faced with such sensible — and probably irrefutable — rebuttal, the wolf changes the goal post and employs another line of attack.

“Six months ago, you talked about me behind my back,” charged the wolf.

To the reasonable mind, this is something which is totally unrelated to the first line of attack. It reflects the oppressor’s inability to engage in any meaningful debate about a stand taken by him. When faced with such a situation, the oppressor would create a new attack in a reckless manner.

The recklessness in the oppressor’s reply shows when the lamb said “but I wasn’t even born yet six month ago!”

Again, the oppressor’s inability is exposed. He is shamed but not ashamed. That is due to the power which he wields and the obvious physical prowess between the oppressor and the oppressed. The wolf would again change his charge.

The wolf, this time with impatience, said, “by Hercules, then it was your father who spoke badly of me.”

With that statement, the wolf pounced on the lamb, killing it before eating it up.

How frightening!

Regardless of the simplicity of the tale, the reflection of the oppressor’s mind and how it works in that tale is paralysingly frightening. The almost nonchalant attitude towards the exercise of extreme power by the strong and mighty over the weak and meek is symptomatic of any oppression.

Throughout Malay classical literature, we can see for example, the child Hang Nadim, who saved Temasek from the dreaded “ikan todak”, being executed for being too smart and therefore a possible threat to the Sultan. When Hang Tuah was perceived as being favoured by the Sultan, he was accused of partying with the Sultan’s “gundek” (concubine) and sentenced to death.

In not too far a time before, for some reason or other, the regime wanted Tun Salleh, the Lord President, sacked. That was the opening line as provided by the wolf. To which, Tun Salleh asked “Why?”

The answer was “because you have signed a resignation letter.”

The reply was “But I have changed my mind, because I was under pressure.”

The final rebuttal, before Tun Salleh was dismissed was, “You have to resign because you have abused your power by bringing your son to the authority to request a fishery license. You also have to be sacked because you promote Islam and Islamisation in your judgments and speeches.”

The utter ridiculousness and unreasonableness of the rhetoric did not matter. Because the oppressor had no ability to rationalise. Nor did he see the need to do so.

Later, Anwar Ibrahim had to go as the DPM.

“What did I do?” asked Anwar. That was the sensible and reasonable lamb asking the wolf who was starting a fight.

Just like the wolf accusing the lamb of bad mouthing him six months ago, Anwar was told that he had to go because he had committed sodomy.

The lamb, in the fable above said he wasn’t even born yet six months ago.

Anwar said “but the apartment in which I committed sodomy wasn’t even completed yet at the time you said I committed sodomy!”

Notice the uncanny similarities between the fable and the event which had actually happened?

Faced with that, the oppressor changed his story, just like the wolf. “Okay, but you did commit sodomy at that place on a different date. And I have the mattress too.”

With that, the lamb was pounced on, killed and eaten up.

Contemporary Malaysia is filled with stories of oppression and denied justice. The rhetoric of oppression has been perfected and repeated to utter death.

“You are too noisy and please shut up,” said the wolf.

“What have I done?” asked the people.

“You have insulted Islam and are a threat to national security,” came the answer.

Or, “You have to be detained for your own safety,” came the mind-numbingly curious answer.

I could go on and on. But I would just sound like a horribly scratched CD.

The question is, what is the lamb going to do about it?

Yes.

 

 

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

What is the lamb going to do about it? Why does the writer presume to make the reader into a lamb and show how helpless the reader is? That is my impression at any rate. We are HUMAN BEINGS and not lambs. Therefore we can do whatever any other HUMAN BEING can do. Just MANKIND here. No lambs sorry. By that let us live in a state of :

1) Freedom from Apartheid/Fascism
2) Freedom from Religious-Persecution/Religious-Supremacy.
3) Equality for all ethnicities and faiths in all aspects of policy, Law and Constitution.

That is what HUMAN BEINGS are going to do here in Malaysia. Wolves and lambs can go yiff and vore each other to death. We HUMAN BEINGS couldn’t care less. Neurolinguistic programming articles are the worst type of word litter on the web. Rhetoric of Oppression indeed !

Try the below site :

War Resisters International (this is nominally an end Forced Conscription Organisation as well) :

War Resisters’ International, 5 Caledonian Rd, London N1 9DX, Britain
tel +44-20-7278 4040 & +44-20-3355 2364, skype: warresisters, fax +44-20-7278 0444
email info@wri-irg.org

http://www.wri-irg.org/

Moving forwards or backwards? — Martin Jalleh – 7th March 2010

In Ethics, Israel, Malaysia, opaque system, Public Accounts Committee, taxpayer funds, use of tax monies, vested interest on February 10, 2012 at 10:16 am

MARCH 7 — The catchphrase and chant of 2009 was “change”. The political tsunami of March 2008 brought about unexpected, unthinkable and unforgettable change to the political landscape of Bolehland. The country and the political divide were left with no choice but to change — for better or worse!

No one has been so conversant and committed to change than Najib Razak. As the year began he masterminded the change of the legitimate government in Perak. He tried successfully to convince the citizens of Bolehland that all dubious change is possible and can be made “legal”.

As the historic day of him being PM neared, Najib hammered home his message of change: “If we don’t have the courage to change, the people will change us at the next general election”. Umno heeded his warning. The first thing that they did was change their president! Pak Lah was hounded out of office in March.

Pak Lah had failed to translate rhetoric into reality. The Umno warlords wrapped in a world of their own made him a scapegoat. They were also largely responsible for reducing Umno into a fragmented “formidable” force. It was their resistance to change that had contributed to the rot. Such refusal to reform continued throughout 2009.

As the days passed, Najib’s “change” appeared to be one of taking the country back to the bad old days. Lim Kit Siang would remark: “In Najib’s pre-100 days as Prime Minister, the country is already seeing increasing signs of the powers-that-be reverting to the “old ways” of restricting freedom and silencing criticism…”

At the 59th Umno General Assembly held in March, Najib rallied on the delegates towards change. He said Umno needs leaders who “dare to change and are accepting of change, who dare to criticise and are willing to accept criticism”. Sadly, he and his cohorts did not appear to be receptive to criticisms in the days that followed.

Najib also reminded the delegates that if Umno was to remain relevant then the indispensable role of the new media must be recognised. He declared: “Like it or not, we cannot regard the new media as our enemy…” Unbelievably, six new-media organisa-tions would later be denied accreditation to Umno’s general assembly!

In October 2009, Umno held an extraordinary general assembly to take what Najib called “a bold and brave step in amending the party’s constitution to make it more transparent, inclusive and democratic”. Proud of the changes that took place the Umno President declared that the amendments are “not cosmetic. They represent concrete and significant changes.”

But former de facto law minister Zaid Ibrahim was unconvinced: “Of course, Umno…has introduced some change in their internal party processes but what about the mind-set of the leaders? We see no change whatsoever. It’s all cosmetic. The more things seem to change, the more they remain the same. They will never change.”

In an article, Barry Wain, author of the book Malaysian Maverick: Mahathir Mohamad in Turbulent Times believes Najib’s political background and baggage “doesn’t recommend him for the role of reformer” and “almost everything about Mr. Najib proclaims the status quo”!

Fanciful slogans

On April Fool’s day, The Malaysian Insider reported that Najib, in his final public address before his swearing in as PM “gave a hopeful glimpse into his administration … when he said that the new thrust of his government will be One Malaysia”.

For the rest of the year the citizens of Bolehland were bombarded with the slogan without knowing what Najib had in mind. Najib did not giv a clear picture of 1Malaysia, neither did Apco Worldwide, a global PR firm, employed to re-engineer and redeem the PM’s flagging image at a rumoured price of RM20 million or more. As columnist David D. Matthew would write: “slogans by itself are often nothing more than convenient rhetoric… 1Malaysia… is an empty slogan disguised as a solution.”

Tunku Abdul Aziz, a former chairman of Transparency International and DAP vice-chairman, argued that the PM has to “venture beyond sloganeering and spell out in terms that are concise and clear what he has in mind when pontificating on what appears to thinking Malaysians to be nothing more than a party dogma being shoved down their throats as part of a ploy to regain the non-Bumi electoral support.”

“How does Najib propose to give practical effect to his excellent concept given the reality of Malaysia’s race-biased policies of racial discrimination? Does he not see a contradiction? Is he clear in his own mind what he is talking about?

“For now, it remains a slogan and, without a clear vision of what

1Malaysia is intended to be, it could well turn out to be nothing more than a grand illusion. Does he really believe that he has what it takes to reconcile Umno’s pathological obsession with bumiputra rights on the one hand with the principles of inalienable equality for ALL Malaysians on the other?

1Malaysia without complete equality of opportunity is nothing if not a cruel and dishonest practical joke.”

Undoubtedly, Umno’s coalition allies were of no help in bolstering Najib’s 1Malaysia message of unity. They were busily engaged in bitter internal battles and endless bickering throughout the year, refusing or pretending to bury the hatchet in spite of the possibility that they could be burying themselves for good!

In his concluding line for the year, Lim Kit Siang highlighted the charade and chicanery the new PM had put the nation through: “After nine months (of Najib’s premiership), ‘1Malaysia. People First. Performance Now’ has proved to be mere publicity and propaganda puff of Najib’s premiership with no meaningful change or consequence to the lives of Malaysians.”

Fires of fanaticism

In September 2009, the United Nations General Assembly heard from Foreign Minister Anifah Aman the 1Malaysia concept which “aims at fostering appreciation and respect for all races…(and) envisages unity that arises from true acceptance instead of mere tolerance…” At home, the slogan remained but one perfect “performance”!

Relentless racism ran deep and wide in the year. Racial baiting was at its worst. Umno leaders had a free hand in playing the racist card to the hilt while they hid behind their hype and hypocrisy over 1Malaysia and went on a hysteria from time to time.

The racism was so glaring. It resulted in Minister in the PM’s Department Nazri Aziz revealing that the Cabinet had conceded that courses by the National Civics Bureau (or Biro Tatanegara, BTN) were racially divisive and used to promote certain government leaders. There was a need for an overhaul.

As the long debate raged on, Nazri told those who defended the BTN courses (which were compulsory for new civil servants and public university undergraduates), they were in a state of denial. Muhyuddin had sided with those who refused to acknowledge Nazri’s contention that the BTN was a mockery of Najib’s 1Malaysia concept.

The controversy began when seven Selangor Pakatan Rakyat lawmakers said a big part of the programme had nothing to do with nation building or education but was an Umno and BN race-based programme during which participants were indoctrinated with propaganda about “Ketuanan Melayu”.

When Dr Mahathir joined in and insisted there was no need to revamp the BTN courses, Nazri called the former PM a “bloody racist”! Mahathir told Nazri he should resign from Umno because if he were against racism, he should not be in a “racist party”. In return, Nazri conferred on Dr M the title “the father of all racists”.

In 2009, the Umno-owned mainstream press, especially Utusan Malaysia, went on a spree of spinning falsehood, spouting lies and spewing seditious articles with impunity whilst enjoying immunity of the Home Minister, who was ever ready to stop or suspend Opposition publications at the slightest and smallest excuse!

The Malaysian Insider reported Utusan’s ugly and unethical ways: “The Utusan (Malaysia) has been a mouthpiece for Umno ultra-nationalists and a tool for defending the party’s “Ketuanan Melayu” (Malay supremacy) policy. The newspaper has also been criticised for being used to attack the opposition and ratcheting up racial tensions.

The paper also suggested that DAP was anti-Islam and said Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim was willing to betray the Malays to be prime minister — both incendiary subjects in mainly Malay-Muslim Malaysia. Its articles have labelled the Chinese community as ‘pendatang’ (immigrants) and the Indian community as ‘keling’.”

As the year came to a close, Nazri Aziz (who had earlier castigated Utusan Malaysia for defending the BTN courses) condemned the Malay daily for its “outdated racist propaganda”, saying that the Umno-owned newspaper must accept that Malaysia is a multi-racial country.

Umno’s insolence also ruled in matters concerning religion. Using Utusan Malaysia as its main instrument, the party continued to politicise religion for its survival by creating unfounded insecurities amongst Muslims and a distrust of other religions and wrongly applying the concept of Malay supremacy and exclusivity to Islam. They also implored the name of the rulers when it was convenient.

Religious bigotry reared its ugly head. The event that laid bare Malaysia’s religious divide took place on 28 August 2009, after Friday prayers during the month of Ramadan, when about 50 Muslim protesters who opposed the relocation of a Hindu temple marched from the Selangor State Mosque to the State Secretariat with a severed cow head. (Hindus consider the animal sacred.)

Amid chants of “Allahu Akbar” they threatened bloodshed, kicked, spat and stomped on the cow’s head and left the severed head at the entrance of the State Secretariat while riot police stood by and watched!  Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein later met some of the protesters and justified their demonstration!

It was only a matter of time before “Asia’s melting pot of races and religion” would boil over…and it did a few days into the New Year — in the aftermath of a landmark ruling on 31 December by the Kuala Lumpur High Court. The court ordered the lifting of the Home Minister’s ban against the Catholic church publishing the word “Allah” in its weekly paper, Herald.

The resultant fire bombs on churches reduced to ashes and made a mockery of Anifah Aman’s boasting of the “true acceptance instead of mere tolerance” amongst all races and religions in the nation. After being PM for nine months, Najib failed to fight the fires of religious fanaticism often fanned by his own party, but took flight behind the facade of 1Malaysia!

Faltering institutions

As Najib and his cohorts portrayed themselves as agents of change, they at the same time manipulated the nation’s democratic institutions to contain, cripple and crush legitimate dissent and/or to hinder genuine change advocated by the Opposition.

Key institutions such as the Judiciary, the office of the Attorney-General, the Police and the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission ended up becoming the tools of the government. They were no longer perceived as impartial. (See accompanying stories on the police and the judiciary.)

In early March 2009, the Pakatan Rakyat Perak state government was forced to hold an “emergency sitting” under a raintree. An Adun, when supporting one of the motions, spoke of an “institutional crisis” in the country. He then corrected it to “constitutional crisis”. He was in fact right: the country’s institutions were in a grave institutional crisis and the nation was heading towards becoming a failed State!

During the Perak constitutional crisis, then Bar Council president Ambiga Sreenevasan said that she was alarmed that “our institutions, that is the courts, the police, etc., are being tested….. What is going on in the state shows a total breakdown in relation to the structures and sanctity of the legislature”.

There is no better and lasting symbol of institutions decaying in Malaysia than the judiciary. In 2009, the V K Lingam video clip case reinforced its rot even further. The government took the findings of the Royal Commission rather lightly. It made the Commission, one appointed by the King, look like a lame duck.

The government ended its two-year charade when the de facto Law Minister made a laughing stock of himself as he lectured Parliament on what may be morally wrong could be legally or politically correct, correct, correct. With his ‘no further action’ declaration, public suspicion of the cattle-trading culture in the judiciary lingers on.

Another institution that allowed itself to be a mouthpiece of the political masters was the Election Commission. In Perak, it made a mockery of the Federal Constitution when it portrayed itself as a court of law and illegally usurped the authority of the Speaker of the Perak state assembly.

The above unconstitutional act was endorsed by a Federal Court ruling which opened the floodgates to potential interference by the Commission in the country’s legislatures including Parliament. During the year the Commision made declarations and decisions that were blatantly biased and undermined public confidence in its independence.

Fatal flaw

Another “institution” that failed was the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC): 2009 was the first year of its existence. It was frowned upon as a “monumental failure” and a farce in its task of tackling corruption. It became a favourite tool of the Umno government to repress the opposition.

Five months after the introduction of Najib’s slogans, the respondents in a Star online live chat revealed that the key national institution that they had least confidence in was both the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) and the police. Only two per cent of the respondents rated the MACC’s performance in fighting corruption as “good”.

The fatal flaw of the MACC was that it was not politically neutral as stated by Lim Teck Ghee. 74 per cent of the respondents in a poll by the Merdeka Centre said that they were dissatisfied with the government’s handling of corruption and abuse of power issues. A majority of them felt that the MACC was biased.

Since its much hyped up launch on 1 January 2009 the then MACC’s chief commissioner, Ahmad Said Hamdan, “has managed to put his mouth into overdrive while shifting his brains into reverse” as observed by Tunku Aziz. He chose to retire early and will remain haunted by how he had handled the “very small case” of the death of Teoh Beng Hock.

By the end of 2009, it was obvious that corruption in the country had worsened since the formation of the MACC. Malaysia’s anti-graft crackdown was, in reality, a breakdown that saw the country plunge nine places in the Transparency International corruption rankings ( The Malaysian Insider)!  It was also a mockery of Najib’s declaration that “the fight against corruption was one of the six KPI priorities of his administration”.

Parliament, the country’s supreme law-making institution turned 50 in September 2009. Sadly, in spite of Najib’s many slogans, it remained a rubber stamp. The shocking scene in February of wheelchair-bound Karpal Singh being surrounded by a hostile group of Umno Youth thugs while the police and security personnel stood idly by at the Parliament lobby said it all!

Speaker Pandikar Amin Mulia revealed in March that “Parliament is no longer like a first-world Parliament anymore”. He had a role in this. He was ever ready to reject the motions moved by the Opposition to debate crucial issues that would enhance radical reform and was at times ridiculously biased towards the government.

The civil service as an institution was also crumbling with civil servants failing to understand their role and the importance of their impartiality. In fact in January this year, Najib said he “wants the public sector in the country to become a fully professional service without political inclination”. It was obvious why he did not say it earlier in Perak.

Collapsed buildings and the collapse of a suspension bridge in Kuala Dipang, Kampar, in October where three young school girls were killed were constant symbolic reminders of the reality and repercussions of faltering institutions.

The impact of the breakdown in institutions could be increasingly seen not only in the political domain but in every arena of life – education, health care, environment, and use of natural resources. It also resulted in the further marginalisation of minority groups in both East and West Malaysia.

Tengku Razaleigh pointed to the source of the faltering institutions when he expressed sadness that Umno has “indeed lost its soul” and “become corrupt, this corruption has weakened it, and as it grows weaker it is tempted more and more to fan racial feeling and abuse public institutions to maintain power. This is a death spiral.”

He sagely added. “Our major public institutions and our political system have degenerated to the point that the public no longer trusts them. A democratic system of government cannot function below a certain threshold of public confidence. The suspicious death of Teoh Beng Hock under the custody of a watchdog body reporting directly to a prime minister who has his own public confidence issues may have pushed us below that threshold.”

He concluded: “What we must do now goes beyond political parties. We need the rakyat to rise up to claim their institutions, and demand that our public institutions are answerable to them. We must wake up to our sovereignty as citizens, reclaim the constitution which constitutes us as a nation and guarantees our rights, and demand a comprehensively reformed government to restore public confidence. We must do this before it is too late.”

A divided nation, decaying institutions, a dour economy and a PM dogged by allegations — perhaps the events and issues of the year 2009 point to the reality that all real, relevant and radical change can only come about by a change in government! There are those with raw courage whom we saw during the year, who are willing to risk their lives for such a change. But we are prompted to ask, is the Opposition ready? — aliran.com

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

” . . . neither did APCO Worldwide . . . ”

This should read ” . . . Israel based and possibly Zionist owned APCO Worldwide . . . ”

Not a bad article which at least mentioned Items (1) and (3), and also vaguely referenced problems related to Item (2).

1) Freedom from Apartheid/Fascism
2) Freedom from Religious-Persecution/Religious-Supremacy.
3) Equality for all ethnicities and faiths in all aspects of policy, Law and Constitution.

Vote only for politicians who believe in the above!

Observations on Parasite Bureaucracy Paradigms (circa Jan 2012) :

In 1% tricks and traps, Abuse of Power, cost saving, criticism, equitable wealth distribution, Malaysia, Political Fat Cats, politics, use of tax monies, Wealth distribution on January 11, 2012 at 5:32 am

*IN THE USA* the below number of civil servants cited in below 2 articles to administer 300 million citizens are already considered 300% too many civil servants under state employ almost 3 million civilian employees.

Unit 8 Bureaucracy: A Controversial Necessity
http://www.learner.org/courses/democracyinamerica/support/dia_8_guide.pdf

USA’s civil service has got to go on record as being quite overbloated… A lean efficient government in USA should be 1 million only

http://www.rense.com/general95/manifest.htm) :

*IN MALAYSIA* the below number or civil servants to administer 30 million citizens by ratio is considered 1500% too many civil servants under state employ :

Deflate the bloated civil service | Free Malaysia Today
http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/2011/10/12/deflate-the-bloated-civil-service/

Malaysia’s civil service has got to go on record as being the most overbloated in the world.  As at 2010, it numbers about 1.2 million employees … A lean efficient government in Malaysia should be 40,000 only if in ratio to USA’s lean bureaucracy version.

Thus the inefficiency and opportunity for collusion become extremely serious, 15 times more than USA as of now, and 15 times as 3rd world-like, should be 15 times less. It is doubtful that even in the Statist Soviet Union era, that bureaucracy was as large as Malaysia’s own today in 2012. No offense to civil servants, but think about your fellow citizens and do the ethical thing. Vote for a government that will consider the reality of where Malaysia is headed.

Then consider the article below :

Panic Over Pay Rise – Sin Chew Daily – Wednesday, 07 March 2012 18:12

Who does not like to get their pay rise? Then why are some people panic over it?

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak brought the 1.4 million civil servants the good news of pay rise on 8 March 2012, and the minimum wage policy for the private sector will also be revealed soon. The country seems to have been moving towards a high-income economy.

Some people are happy, but some are worried. Former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad is worried that if productivity is not improved but only salaries are adjusted, the country might follow the footstep of some Western countries and face bankruptcy.

I believe that he was referring to the pay rise in civil service sector. Adjustments to the benefits of civil servants will affect the overall situation.

For example, former Prime Minister Tun Abdullah Ahmad announced in May 2007 that salaries in civil service sector would be increased from 7.5% to 35%, there was also an additional 20% of increment for military and police personnel, as well as 100% increment for living allowance. The annual expenditure then increased by RM6.8 billion.

The people speculated that it was an election candy and this time, it is estimated that the pay rise between 7% to 13% would again, cause billions of additional expenditure.

Pay rise will worsen the budget deficit and administrative expenditure will further nibble the development expenditure.

The private sector faces a greater pressure, as talents might flee to the public domain. After the implementation of the minimum wage policy, the overall pay will rise. Since foreign workers and non-technical staff are receiving a minimum wage of RM1,000, it is impossible not to increase the salaries of middle level officers.

Another negative impact is, a major pay adjustment would lead to price hikes. Salaries are indeed increased, so do prices.

The current situation is almost the same as the situation in 2007, when the BN was also planning for the general election. However, the involving area is wider this time, as it includes the private sector. Would the country be able to withstand the wave of major pay rise this time?

One of the advantages of Malaysian manufactured products is cheap prices. The increase of costs will cause the fall of competitiveness and weak company performance could lead to lay off.

If the government keeps spending based on political considerations, our children and grandchildren might have to bear the debts and pay the price.

I also wonder, even if everyone gets a RM300 pay rise, would it be enough to afford the rising cost of living? For example, since the My First Home Scheme was launched, banks have never approved a 100% loan for young people earning less than RM3,000 a month. They are not eligible to buy RM400,000 houses.

Would young people be able to purchase houses just by implementing the minimum wage policy and increasing civil servants’ salaries? The root of the problem is not only about salaries, but also uncontrolled market speculation.

Self-sufficient in food could reduce the people’s food expenditure.

According to the World Bank’s growth report in 2008, Strategies for Sustained Growth and Inclusive Development, the key to get rid of the middle-income trap includes to successfully transform economic structure into technology-intensive industry, be active in independent innovation, ensuring a rapid growth for the services industry, accumulating wealth and having a sound system.

Malaysia lacks transformation conditions and would the pay rise bring a negative impact? Would it cost the country a heavy price?

-Sin Chew Daily

Commentator commentaries found on : http://www.malaysia-chronicle.com/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=29539:panic-over-pay-rise&Itemid=2Wednesday, 07 March 2012 19:09 posted by @stupidBNThe repercussion of such implementation will be spiraling inflation that we have never witnessed before. There are many companies that employ thousands of workers who earn around RM500 to 900 per month. Under the proposed scheme, salaries for such workers will have to be doubled. Where does the government think the extra money will come from? So for such companies, the only option is to increase their prices. Think of small business such as food stalls and retail businesses which employ just a few workers majority of which only make enough to live by. Many will also have to resort to employing illegals to cut cost. Unemployed Malaysians will find it much harder to find employment. Many SMEs will have to close shop.

Wednesday, 07 March 2012 19:08 posted by @Cock talks

The civil service sector is getting their pay increase . The private sector especially those from sabah and sarawak may have to increase their workers’ pay by about 40% in order to earn the proposed basic pay . who is going to foot all these extra .

With most of the private sector employers forcing to see their business going burst . Where is the government going to secure the extra taxes to pay the civil sector ?
It is easy to promise , but difficult to fulfilled lah

Wednesday, 07 March 2012 18:57 posted by @coke

Don’t forget. Malaysia also having one of the highest number of public holidays. So if I were a business man. I won’t come to Malaysia as

1. High number of public holidays
2. High income tax
3. Unfriendly government policies
4. Quota systems and others

Congratulation to the lazy workers for it

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Hope there are many thinking citizens in government which are still by themselves not enough to win BN an election. If they vote for BN due to the bonuses, they had better be aware that their decision to vote BN and salaries will destroy the country and in turn send Malaysia into the hands of the IMF. Civil servants and uniformed groups, better vote for a better government than destroy the country, Malays will indeed be extinct if these sorts of salaries are paid out when a full 80% of Malaysian civil service jobs should be abolished to reach USA’s level or 99.94% to reach USA’s preferred ‘lean and mean’ level !

Btw Sinchewdaily, why disallow comments on your site? MC gets the traffic volume because commenting is allowed, the traffic here would be Sinchew’s portal’s otherwise.