Sunday, September 17. 2023
So this is where we are now in 2023. Don't bother going to the police to report a crime, don't bother taking the matter to court to present evidence before a jury. Instead, just skip all of that and go straight to the newspapers and television - anonymously - and make wild accusations of things that might have happened between 10 and 15 years ago. The accusers can hide behind fake names and actors, whilst the accused has his dirty laundry strewn out for everyone to inspect and make assumptions.
Don't get me wrong, these allegations could be true. I'm pretty sure Russell wasn't always a good boy (I doubt he would disagree himself), but the whole thing reeks of potentially being a deliberate character assassination given the alternative critical narative towards mainstream media that Mr. Brand has immersed himself in and been exceptionally successful at.
Here are the facts:
1. Russell Brand was most likely a bit of a bad boy, whom at one time probably ran around allowing his knob to do the thinking rather than his head.
2. There is no actual evidence of wrong-doing to date.
3. We don't know who the accusers are (their appearance or their names).
4. We have to take the mainstream media's "evidence" at face value. Surely they wouldn't lie to us?
5. Russell Brand's criticism of big business, politics and mainstream media has become exceptionally popular of late - perhaps a bit too popular.
For me, I'll ignore it all until something substantial is revealled. I'm no great fan of Russell Brand, but I do watch some of the things on his channel and can't say I disagree. In fact, much of what he says has been blatantly obvious to me for decades.
Now, whilst you're all focussing on this story, are we any further forward with Prince Andrew's kiddie fiddling antics? Last I checked the accuser's name and appearance was well known, and it's not like Randy Andy denied his friendship with Epstein or the fact he regularly visited his island.
media-underground.net
Monday, December 5. 2022
'The Traitors (BBC One) is the Highlands Hunger Games. It is terrible - a pandering to our basest, most voyeuristic, atavistic instincts, an exercise in exquisite cruelty lasting 12 weeks. You’re going to love it.
'Like all the best tortures, the set-up is simple. Twenty-two people are taken to an isolated spot - a huge castle in the wilds of Scotland - to complete a series of tasks together that will increase the prize money (up to a possible £120,000), which will be split among the winners. Fine! Dandy, you might even think! Except that three of the contestants are secretly designated - by host Claudia Winkleman - “traitors”. They get to “murder” one person a night to reduce the competition. The group can eliminate one person a day. They must try to identify the traitors and get them out because if a traitor survives to become one of the prizewinners, he or she will walk away with the whole sum. Thus are the seeds of discord sown with a lavish hand.
'Somehow, I’ve made it sound complicated. It really isn’t. Not least because the rules are, in a sense, immaterial - all you really need to know is that the game has been ruthlessly designed to set individual against individual, exploit every inch of humanity’s capacity for suspicion, dissembling, paranoia, guilt, sociopathy and every other unpleasantness you can think of. The knowledge that there are three traitors in their midst is like a poison creeping through the group. But as it works on them, they must come together to do the tasks as a unified whole to maximise their profit. If the makers had had the balls, they would have called it Headfuck.' (Guardian article).
Sunday, June 19. 2022
Alright you twisted freaks! After a very long hiatus, The Subverse forum is back online.
Why has it come back now?
Well the bottom line is that social media is dead.
Now sure, the normals might not realise this yet, but the death knell of Facebook and Twitter is sounding as society descends into a state of complete paranoia and uncertainty. Operation Mindfuck has been a success, it just didn't quite pan out the way the original architects probably intended it to.
The mere fact that huge online social networking companies were able to replace the likes of the humble user created online forum was, without a doubt, a tragedy. But it was inevitable.
As the masses flocked to share all their data for the chance of centralised peer recognition, the resulting outcome has proven to be precisely what is expected from selling your soul to the devil - a brief period of hopeful yet unfulfilling opportunity, followed by an eternity in hell.
I was never a particular fan of social media, having never bothered jumping on the Facebook death slide, but I did tinker with the Twitter for a while, only to come to the realisation that it was turning out to be exactly what I expected from a centralised social media system; where the advertisers are the customer and the users (i.e. user data) are the product. Inevitably the algorithms that tailor your feeds have lead to an increase in bias and polarisation. The world is now a total clusterfuck and so any sane person has gone back to looking for decentralised alternatives.
So will a return to decentralised forums be a solution? I dunno, but I've now eradicated all centralised social media from my life and, for me, it's a step in the right direction. I'm not, however, particularly interested in reinstating The Subverse for nostalgia - although I am curious to see if any old faces return to the boards - but I've missed the community spirit of a small forum and can no longer deal with the suffocating feedback loops created through profit driven corporate vampirism.
So unplug, tune out and sign up to The Subverse if you find yourself concurring. At the very least we can discuss these issues without troves of personal data being gathered to try sell us ideas and products that none of us really need or require.
media-underground.net
Tuesday, April 19. 2022
No matter how many times I speak out against war there's always some guy playing Call of Duty in the background chiming in with: "What about the Nazis? World War Two was the only just war." Funny you should mention that. Not only did we not finish the job the first time, but they're fighting on our side now with SS Galizien patches on their uniforms.
Face the clear light of reality. For the fifteen millionth time there are ultranationalist flag sucking Nazis still in Ukraine. These are leftovers from Operation Barbarossa when almost half the country collaborated with Germany during the Soviet invasion. The CIA has been supporting them since 1951. I thought everybody knew this. Maybe I’m experiencing the Ukrainian Mandella Effect. Russia invades Ukraine and all of a sudden there were never any Nazis anywhere.
Didn't anybody watch the History Channel on cable in the 90s? They used to play so many Nazi documentaries back-to-back we called it the Hitler Channel. I hate to be the one to burst your freedom bubble but unless Putin was able to go back in time to forge fake CIA documents, rewrite William Shirer's The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich and hack into my cable box we have only two available options. Either Nazis are still in Ukraine or we're dealing with sneaky Russian time traveling disinformation agents.
Quick question, how can Ukraine be simultaneously winning the war and also need our support, a no-fly zone, tanks, billions of dollars in weaponry, NATO intervention and MIG-29 fighter jets from Poland? Because it's Schrödinger's Ukraine! Nobody really knows if they're winning or not until we look under the box twenty years later. By that time, it's either a dead cat or fifteen more battalions of well-armed Nazis. In this version they win and become heroes like Philip K. Dick's classic The Man in the High Castle or a live cosplay version of Wolfenstein.
Continue reading "James Inman: Schrödinger's Ukraine"
Saturday, January 1. 2022
Firstly, I'm not an anti-vaxxer - I've had two AstraZeneca shots and a Pfizer booster - but had I seen this video before being offered the booster, I might've decided against it given that I experienced serious adverse side-effects which left me feeling poisoned and bed-ridden for almost 24 hours. I did, at the time, have my reservations knowing Pfizer's track record, but said "fuck it" and went for it anyway. In retrospect, I'm still unsure if it was the right thing to do.
I also know of someone who was inoculated with the Pfizer booster one day and died the next of a serious heart-attack.
Coincidence? Maybe.
The bottom line is it's difficult to know what's real and unreal in the Disinformation Age, but this video from the Canadian Covid Care Alliance is, I think, worth exploring and raises some serious questions.
media-underground.net
Wednesday, September 23. 2020
Okay, so now the CIA is telling us again Russia is trying to interfere in our next election. Nobody finds that a little bit strange? That the CIA, which is our clandestine, highly secretive, intelligence service tasked with all things—TOP SECRET—somehow finds the need to tell everybody Russia is planning on fucking up our next election, again?
Isn't that your one job? You're supposed to fix the problem in secret and not tell everybody what you're doing. Why are you always telling us what's going on but not doing anything about it? And why are you telling me? What can I do about it? It's not my job. That's your job. Just do your job. And your job doesn't include tricking people on TV how much you suck at your job.
First off, it's not ever your place to tell anybody anything, let alone CNN, NY Times or the Washington Post. We pay you to figure this shit out in the background and find a way to make it go away. We don't pay you to be hanging around the breakroom at CNN. It just looks weird is all I'm saying.
Back in the day Bob Woodward would meet Deep Throat in a parking garage after the bars closed looking over his shoulder. Now you're on primetime with your "intelligence assessments" once a week telling us stuff you're not supposed to tell us. And everything is flipped upside down. Liberals used to be the ones skeptical of our intelligence services, now it's the Republican party calling out their bullshit. Rachel Maddow has CIA cock shoved so far down her throat it's amazing she can still walk and talk at the same time.
Continue reading "James Inman: The Putin Influence Security Update 2.0"
Thursday, January 2. 2020
Some fifteen years ago I remember asking our fearless leader, George T. Mortimer, what he thought of Alex Jones and Info Wars. He paused to think, I could see the alien symbols and algorithms crunching numbers in his brain. It was a very measured response to the question, “He seems a bit sketchy to me.” At the time I thought that was odd. George and Alex were both in the same business together looking beyond the veil of your average mainstream media take on the news. Little did I know how prescient this observation would be.
The thing I always found strange about the Alex Jones ban was on the surface he seemed dangerous. But when accused of promoting violence and taken down off his platforms why no violence at all after he got banned? Nothing happened. No attacks on Google, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube or Instagram by any of his followers?
If you ever scanned his website and read the comments it was creepy as fuck. Half of them were calling for armed revolution, the other half talk of shooting federal agents. It was literally nothing but guns and violence, 2nd Amendment crap and defending the constitution every other comment. Yet when he gets banned no revolt? Nothing blows up? No armed attack on any of the companies that banned him?
I'm not defending the clownhole. I'm saying how unbelievably strange it was. What if most of his so-called dangerous followers in the comments section were sock puppets and fake accounts? What if Alex Jones The Great Truth Crusader was merely playing a role? If you've read any books on disinformation tactics he fits the mold perfectly. What if the reality is more frightening than most people can imagine? What if the whole thing was straight up government funded disinformation?
Continue reading "James Inman: Alex Jones As Disinformation Agent "
Friday, July 20. 2018
The U.S. and the Russians had over 25,000 nuclear tipped missiles pointed at each other during the Cold War (still have over 8000) and we almost destroyed all life on the planet accidentally several times. Not just once. Several times we nearly set off the goddam apocalypse by a misplaced cunt hair.
Here's the deal. I know Trump sucks. But he's a product of the Cold War like we all are. I think whether you're a Republican or Democrat, dove or hawk, deep inside, we all knew eventually one day we would make friends with the Russians because the Cold War was fucking insane. After Trump's Helsinki steaming turd trip does anyone find it just a tad hilarious to watch all these geriatric blind distempered hawk Cold Warriors lose their shit? Come on. It's comedy gold. Obviously, he's not doing what they want him to do. Something's up and they're not getting their way like they ALWAYS get their way. This time he didn't say what they wanted him to say. So the fuck what? The CIA has been treating our own presidents like their own puppets to put their OWN words up our leader's ass. Maybe this time a President said, "You know what? I'm cool. I can speak for myself thank you. You do know you work for me right? Not the other way around. I'm the elected leader. No one really elects you. You guys have been slinging the same shit for 70 fucking years and not much has changed. Whether you like me or not that's how our system works. I think, if I'm not mistaken, Eisenhower warned us about you fuckers."
What did Mueller do during the Anthrax Attack? Oh, right I forgot, he tried to pin it on a lone nut when it couldn't have possibly been Bruce Ivins. It would have taken him 6000 man hours to make those spores. Have we ever seen the 70 some videos of what hit the Pentagon? Nope. The FBI couldn't even get all the hijackers straight because more than a few showed up alive after they were dead. They never even said "Anyone can fake a passport!". They just wanted us to believe they were dangerous, clever, evil terrorists from the Middle East somewhere, so we could start Operation Oil Change. And we were told our intelligence agencies dropped the ball on 9-11. Mistakes were made. I think they were still high on that MKULTRA acid when they came up with the plan if you ask me. That shit was pure Sandoz.
I don't support Trump but I also don't support our intelligence agencies. They're not doing what you think they're doing. They want more war like a hard on. Trump probably doesn't want to go into Syria. They've been planning this war on terror since before 9-11. Remember the plan? They want to control 7 countries in the Middle East and Syria is the next one on the chopping block. Trump is probably getting cold feet because he knows it's going to mean war with Russia. He's stupid but not that stupid. In the Tao te Ching it says you'll always be safe with a selfish man because he wants to save his own golf course and own back yard. An ideological man will fuck shit up every time. The higher the ideals the lower the results. A real Capitalist like Trump wants to save his own ass. He's practical. Fuck ideals. What are they worth when we're all dead?
Continue reading "James Inman: The Cold War & The Trump Treason Rabbit Hole"
Saturday, October 28. 2017
Never trust anyone with an extreme aversion to conspiracy. If they loath conspiracy theories and they're not a covert agent or provocateur themselves, they might as well be since they're doing the same work for them, wittingly or unwittingly. That may sound a tad harsh but trust me, the next time you're confronted by one of these rationalist con-artists and their incessant ridicule, be proud, stand firm and boldly proclaim, "You're goddam right I'm a conspiracy theorist! Fuck you."
Look, I get it. I know what it feels like to be rational, to grasp objective reality without bias. We’ve all experimented with it in high school but the conspiracy theorist, even the craziest test sample have always seemed much more curious to me. Even if they follow all the wrong paths, using flawed epistemology and illogic, at the very least they're still poking around, looking deeper, embracing their insanity or pushing limits. The rationalist seems too confident to me, too afraid to be wrong, too worried what other people think, too stuck in the way things are and too grounded in orthodox.
I'd much rather be batshit, out of my mind insane any day of the week than a reasonable man who sees everything at face value or views the world as it seems to be. To see each part for what it is, in itself and mistaking that part for the whole only leads to our inevitable doom, the abyss of boredom. The calculating mind skilled at complexity can build a car and fly it to the moon, it may one day count each star in the known universe, but do you have the insight and natural instinct to step outside and ponder the totality? The entire vista? The Alpha and Omega with all the dots connected?
Conspiracy theorists are the idea generators, creative thinkers and collectors of lost trivia, history and myth. They’re not serious philosophers but more like risk taking ecstatic thinkers, unattached to ideas, comfortable juggling all kinds of thoughts, points of view, rational or irrational, old and new. Not afraid to think, "What if everything is fucked? What if it’s all been covertly planned and set in motion by highly trained unicorns?" The rationalist will tell their little jokes and call this man a paranoid grotesque miscreant, but you could just as easily say this unqualified clown is not afraid to face his darkest most frightening ideas and visions. The scientific rationalists are too careful of the ideas they cultivate akin to the religious priest. Ever notice how they both have the same concern over what other people think? Always correcting wrong words, thoughts and ideas as if the whole world will explode into a geyser of purple molten shit without their solemn advice or official answer?
The conspiracy theorist is a lot like the artist or fool. They don't care if they're right or wrong so much as they want more ideas, more points of view and every scrap of information until everything is connected. Seeing a vast conspiracy everywhere is also like seeing illusion everywhere which is an unlimited skepticism too, until you begin to doubt your own mind, the deepest conspiracy.
"The fool who persists in his folly will become wise." - William Blake
I took a self-help class years ago back in the 90s at a Unitarian Church. We had a workbook, it was mostly psychology, dream work and imagination, etc. There were only three people in the group. One guy was an extremely sane, levelheaded Federal judge. The other was the richest man in Sioux City, Iowa - Radio Ray (he invented some kind of transistor for RCA). And then there’s me, comedian, conspiracy nut, Buddhist, impoverished artist. In one of the exercises we were told to lay back, close our eyes and imagine our own death. When it was time to tell our stories, the Federal judge said he saw himself dying in bed, old and grey drifting off to sleep. Radio Ray said he’d die at home in his bed, old, with his family all around - peacefully falling to sleep. When my turn came, without thinking said, "I saw myself die in some kind of biological or nuclear holocaust with fire falling from the sky and people running through the streets screaming and looting.” They both just sat there and stared at me. The look on their face was, “What the fuck is wrong with you?” I started feeling kind of uncomfortable, so I said, “What? You’ve never worried about the apocalypse? Am I the only one who thinks about that? Was I doing this wrong?” After the acute Dementophobia (fear of insanity) passed there was a brief moment when I felt kind of sorry for both of them in a weird way, stuck with their conventional imagination and corny thoughts on death but then, I was like, fuck it. They’re sane and rich. I need a beer. What time is it? I should get out of here.
media-underground.net
Friday, October 27. 2017
I'm skeptical of this whole Russian hacking obsession. Everyone seems to agree on it. All 17 intelligence agencies claim Russian involvement in the 2016 election. It's all everyone seems to want to talk about. Hmmm let's see, when's the last time all the intelligence agencies agreed on something? Oh that's right, it was WMDs in Iraq. Turned out they were wrong about that too. All of them. Does anyone ask how the fuck that happened? How did all of our intelligence agencies get WMDs in Iraq so wrong without ONE calling bullshit? The only reasonable way it could have happened is if they wanted to be wrong. Essentially that's what they did. They tricked everyone. Now we're told to just trust them again (when they were ALL wrong before) yet this time it's for real.
I'm not saying this because I support Trump. I can't stand the guy. I also know he's said, when speaking of the Russian hacking intelligence assessment, "These are the same people who told us there were WMD's in Iraq." But Cheeto Jesus is not the first person to ever say that. And it wasn't that hard of an argument for him to make. But once he said it everyone else stopped saying it because they didn't want to sound like they support Our Landlord in Chief. But the truth is the truth regardless of who says it, even if it's Fuckface Von Clownstick. So what, he said one true thing.
My problem with all of this Russian coverage since the election is what they're not talking about. They're not talking about how we could have hacked our own election. We write the software for the Diebold voting machines. We run the election servers. Anyone could have given those DNC emails to WikiLeaks. We have our own ways of rigging an election. We've been doing it all over the world for years.
Here's a story I find a bit creepy. A hard drive on one of our election servers got erased. Do you seriously think Russia has the ability to infiltrate the IT department and plant a technician inside the Center for Elections Systems at Kennesaw State University to completely wipe a server the very day after a lawsuit was filed to retrieve that very data? No they don't and it doesn't even matter if you think Russia might have been responsible because we admitted we wiped it. The IT guys, the technicians who run those servers said they did it. They even made a statement and admitted the server wiping was due to "standard operating procedures".
Oh really? I'll let you in on a little secret. IT guys rarely delete anything unless someone specifically tells them to. It's way too easy to save stuff now on another hard drive. Hard drive space is cheap. They may have deleted crap back when they used floppy discs but today you can buy a four terabyte hard drive for $99 (this one looks like a sweet deal). Do you have any idea how much simple election data you can save on a four terabyte hard drive? It would be close to all the data from every election in the U.S. since we started voting for fuck sake. No one, (if they know what they're doing and they do because they're running the goddam server) deletes shit these days unless they have to wipe it or they're trying to hide something.
Anyway I thought this story was interesting because it's something no one is talking about while all 17 intelligence agencies are pointing in the opposite direction. (AP article).
media-underground.net
Sunday, October 8. 2017
The Las Vegas shooting conspiracy! Yeah whatever. Don't care. What I find interesting is occasionally I'll come across articles on conspiracy theorists, their warped epistemology, their need to feel unique or in possession of insider knowledge, "I know things you don't know", etc. My only problem with this theory is the sheer number of intelligent, rational, sane, professionals who still believe something is not quite right with the official story on 9-11. I know you can find lists online of 9-11 Truthers with master's degrees, architects and engineers, Ph.D.s, scientists, military, former CIA agents, but what I'm talking about are those that I personally know. These are people I'm friends with, college professors, people with master's degrees, one has a Ph.D. in clinical psychology - who fully believe something is still fucked with 9-11.
My only question is this: How is it, these types (who don't believe any other conspiracy theories like vaccine, flat earth, fake moon landing, New World Order, government gun grab, Sandy Hook or Las Vegas shooter crap) are able to accept 9-11 Truth conspiracy when they're obviously not the type to talk about it openly, don't want to be seen as special, know the definition of epistemology and are quite literally very sane people? How does that happen? Now what?
Several Zogby polls over the years have shown at least 50% of the American population don't believe the official story when there is a virtual corporate media blackout on 9-11 Truth (and most progressive media too like The Nation, PBS and Democracy Now) yet at the same time, in addition, when they do mention 9-11 conspiracy over the corporate airwaves it's been completely ridiculed or explained away for the past 16 years. How is it that many people are still delusional? How are they unable to trust the mainstream view on 9-11? How is it the private perception (just sitting around at a bar, family reunion or casual conversation) and the public perception (NY Times, MSNBC, CNN, Fox, BBC, History Channel) are at such odds? Half the people I talk to in private don't believe the official story on 9-11 but it's the complete opposite when you turn on the TV. That, in and of itself, is frightening to me for some reason.
And this Anti-Conspiracy Trust Me The Official Story Is Totally Legit guitar solo has been going on for literally 16 years. On November 10th 2001 George W. Bush gave a speech at the U.N. and said this:
"Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the 11th; malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists, themselves, away from the guilty."
That was only one month after the attacks. Wrap that around your Adderall XR 20 mg addled brain. Remember, this is way back when everyone was still shitting their pants, we were on the doorstep of Armageddon and nobody was even thinking about conspiracy, very few people were asking questions online, there were no 9-11 conspiracy books, websites or YouTube documentaries. None of my friends were talking about it. It's just creepy to me that he would say that. I'll bet half the assembly, in a deep coma bored out of their minds, cracked open their eyes thinking: "Wait, what? What the fuck did he just say? Conspiracy? Jesus Tits!"
Telling someone to not think about conspiracy one month after 9-11 is like coming home at three in the morning saying, "Honey, before I tell you why I'm late and the horrifying experience I just had I want you to know I wasn't out with any hookers so don't think about hookers. Anyone that might tell you I was with a hooker is feeding you malicious lies to shift the blame. I know this looks weird because I'm still covered in cocaine, I smell like Chanel No. 5, there's a very clear video online of my pants coming straight down at freefall speed, all three of our cars are wrecked even though the criminals hit only two, I have five frames of a surveillance video of whatever it was that hit our fourth car, I didn't do that myself but you can't see anything at all in the video anyway. Don't worry about it. I do have 70 other videos of the same wreck but I can't show you those for your own safety. The police were trying to stop these assholes from wrecking into our cars but all their vehicles were in Wichita or some shit getting worked on. They only had like two cop cars available to protect the entire town so they didn't make it in time. The fucking dispatch was all confused. You know how those 911 calls can be so crazy. Anyway, it wasn't hookers so don't even think about hookers, and cocaine, but we're going to need more cocaine, so I'm going to need more money."
media-underground.net
Thursday, February 16. 2017
The argument that you only use Facebook to keep in touch with your family and friends is a bullshit one. It's the same piss poor argument that you make by stating that you only read The Sun or Daily Record for the sports pages and TV listings - yet still you end up adopting the same skewed moral arguments that the newspaper presents to you. Somehow, their agenda has infected your weak and tragic little mind.
Wake up people! Delete your Facebook account. You are being psychologically profiled and socially engineered. The days of an open, free, progressive internet are over unless you learn how to use it and manipulate it properly. As Douglas Rushkoff would put it: "Program Or Be Programmed". This 10 minute presentation by Alexander Nix at the 2016 Concordia Summit demonstrates exactly why Rushkoff is entirely correct.
media-underground.net
Tuesday, January 17. 2017
'There’s no desire for another independence referendum, or so we keep being told. Scotland is perfectly content to be led down paths its people haven’t chosen. We’re happy to get the opposite to what we voted for. We don’t mind that during the independence referendum we were offered a choice between door A behind which was independence or door B behind which was safer faster better change, job security, EU membership, the guarantee that the NHS was safe, and a promise that Scotland would be an equal partner in a family of nations. So Scotland chose door B and discovered that what was behind it was sclerosis, job losses, leaving the EU, and an NHS that the Scottish Government can only protect by making cuts in other spending - a strategy that can’t continue indefinitely. And we discovered the promise that Scotland was an equal partner was just a blatantly cynical lie. Yet if we complain about this the Unionist parties tell us that we chose door B, that’s democracy, respect the result.
'But we do mind. We do care. If politicians lie they need to be held to account. If you’re sold a product that doesn’t do what the seller told you it would you can take it back to the shop and get your money back. We don’t get any redress from the Union.' (The National article).
media-underground.net
Thursday, December 11. 2014
Are you paying attention plebs? No? Well it's time you did. Why? Well, we are truly living in a golden age: the Age of the Bedroom Tax - an age where food banks are all-the-rage and our public services are being squeezed back to the 1930s. But how is our wonderful unelected Head of State doing in this golden age? Well, apparently she - and the other hangers-on - seem to be immune from Tory austerity as 'The Sovereign Grant Fund' (i.e. the replacement for the 'Civil List') for 2015-16 has just been announced (very quietly) and, lo and behold, they've scooped a 12.3% pay rise! See here for this joyous news.
This is such a good deal that the calculation is actually rounded UP to the nearest UKP100K by UKP35K, to a staggering total of UKP4.1million in total (for 2015-16). That should insulate those at the top of this stinking pile from the local food bank...
media-underground.net
Thursday, December 4. 2014
Wow! For Land Reform anoraks such as myself, this last week or so has been truly inspiring. Behind Scottish Independence itself, Scottish Land Reform surely has to be the next biggest ticket on the agenda. I've posted before on the landmark Land Reform Group report, but it now looks like the SNP Government with Nicola 'The Sturge' Sturgeon at the helm is really pushing to make things happen. Hell, it's almost 'cool' to be discussing the future of our land, rather than the likes of me ranting on about it in a bothy to anyone who will listen.
Can you believe that not only do 'sporting estates' (i.e. playgrounds for our establishment fun-killers) get an exemption from business rates, but we actually subsidise them to the tune of £millions per annum? In fact this vile Tory-led Government - the Government of the 'Bedroom Tax' - has almost doubled this despicable subsidy - a subsidy that actually pays for landowners to lay waste to vast acreages of land by slaughtering all manner of wildlife, both 'legally' (e.g. stoats, weasels, foxes, corvids) and illegally (raptors) whom then sell it back to us as 'conservation'. Combine that with heather burning and bulldozing access tracks and you end up with huge upland deserts. If that constitutes 'conservation' then I'm proposing a movement that espouses shagging for virginity.
At last we have a real chance of some ancient wrongs being righted. Bring it on!
'Bring out the violins. The land reform programme announced last week by the Scottish government is the end of civilised life on Earth, if you believe the corporate press. In a country where 432 people own half the private rural land, all change is Stalinism. The Telegraph has published a string of dire warnings - insisting, for example, that deer stalking and grouse shooting could come to an end if business rates are introduced for sporting estates. Moved to tears yet?
'Yes, sporting estates - where the richest people in Britain, or oil sheikhs and oligarchs from elsewhere, shoot grouse and stags - are exempt from business rates, a present from John Major’s government in 1994. David Cameron has been just as generous with our money: as he cuts essential services for the poor, he has almost doubled the public subsidy for English grouse moors, and frozen the price of shotgun licences, at a public cost of £17m a year. (Guardian article, Land Matters article & Raptor Persecution article).
media-underground.net
Monday, September 22. 2014
'The Scots were never big enough to break the Union. That’s always been a job for the English.
'So what do we do now? We’ve just lost a fight, so our instinct is to pretend we can re-organise and regroup immediately, like Rocky Marciano. The hive mind of the Yes movement is already a-buzz across social media with plans and hashtags. We are so busy picking ourselves up off the floor that while we may have grumpily noted that we ceased to be very interesting to the UK media at about a minute past 4 on Friday morning, we probably haven’t quite noticed that the way the story has moved on is entirely in our favour. Quite bewilderingly, our project of Breaking Britain has been taken up with gusto and enthusiasm... by the British State.
'Might it just be that a narrow No vote last Thursday was the best possible result in the long term? Before you reach for a brick and tell me to stop being such a smart-arse, consider this.
'The best imaginable result was a decisive Yes... but that was never on the cards. The bestpossible result was a narrow Yes - and that would have united all the politicos of the rUK against us. While a narrow, not even that narrow a No vote has turned them on each other. Like wolverines in a sack.' (Bella Caledonia article).
media-underground.net
Sunday, September 14. 2014
With just four more days until the people of Scotland take to the polling stations to make the biggest political decisions that they are ever likely to make, trying to capture the essence of this referendum is a daunting task. This campaign on whether to choose self-determination or stick with the same old horseshit has been a long and arduous one, spanning back at least two years, officially, and has taken many twists and turns along the road as the citizens of this country have wrestled with the issues in their heads, hearts and guts.
From the onset of the referendum, I was intrinsically aware that the British Establishment wouldn’t give up Scotland easily – the rich elites who run CorporationUK™ have way too much at stake. What has taken me by surprise is the extreme lengths to which they have gone to and the underhand methods they have employed as the establishment has come to the realisation that the Union is slipping from their clammy little hands like the spouse of a wife-beater who has finally decided to leave her abuser for good.
This analogy, I think, is a good one. For most of my life I feel I have been part of a nation of losers and underdogs. As a teenager growing up through the miner’s strike of 84/85, the repercussions of Thatcher being able to defeat the miners meant that the backbone of the working classes had finally been broken and that through the years and generations that followed, a complacency was systematically bred into our culture that disconnected and disillusioned the poor with the entire political process. During the introduction of the Poll Tax (which in 1989 was unfairly put on trial in Scotland first), many of those who opposed it and refused to pay took themselves off the electoral register in an effort to get out of the loop and avoid local council retribution.
The British Establishment thought they had us by the balls.
Continue reading "Fear & Loathing On The IndyRef Campaign Trail ‘14"
Saturday, August 30. 2014
I know U.S. wars may seem like old news but this is well worth the time. It's the kind of dark absurdity that you can't actually laugh out loud at because you know the horrible reality but I'll bet you'll place both hands on your face and shake your head back and forth mumbling WTF? The first thing that came to mind reading this article is the book Catch-22. I'm going to have to read that again.
'The absurdity runs deep: America is using American military equipment to bomb other pieces of American military equipment halfway around the world. The reason the American military equipment got there in the first place was because, in 2003, the US had to use its military to rebuild the Iraqi army, which it just finished destroying with the American military. The American weapons the US gave the Iraqi army totally failed at making Iraq secure and have become tools of terror used by an offshoot of al-Qaeda to terrorize the Iraqis that the US supposedly liberated a decade ago. And so now the US has to use American weaponry to destroy the American weaponry it gave Iraqis to make Iraqis safer, in order to make Iraqis safer.
'It keeps going: the US is intervening on behalf of Iraqi Kurds, our ally, because their military has old Russian-made weapons, whereas ISIS, which is America's enemy, has higher-quality American weapons. "Kurdish forces are literally outgunned by an ISIS that is fighting with hundreds of millions of dollars of U.S. military equipment seized from the Iraqi Army who abandoned it," Ali Khedery, a former American official in Iraq, told the New York Times.
'So now we're bombing the guns that we didn't mean to give ISIS because we didn't give guns to their enemies because then ISIS might get guns.' (Truth Out article).
media-underground.net
Sunday, August 17. 2014
I'm not sure how this film slipped through the cracks here at Media Underground. Mortimer's prime directive is about bringing you news and information totally unavailable in the mainstream press. We like to keep on top of things and make sure you get the latest inside dope on shit you can't find anywhere else. Maybe this got posted on Disinformation first and I ignored it. Maybe I thought it was you're average UFO debunking documentary. Maybe I just thought the title sucked. I don't know. But we're only a year late. This film came out in 2013. I'm not even sure if this got posted here before and I just forgot. But it needs to be posted again because I just started watching it for the third time today. This is a goddam rabbit hole of fun house mirrors inside a maze fucking a unicorn. I may lose my mind. Anyway, read the review, download and watch. I highly recommend it...
'Is there anything new to say about UFOs and people who believe fervently they have seen one? I wouldn't have thought so, either - but the intriguing Mirage Men casts new light on the topic, unearthing the bizarre fact that the US Air Force and intelligence services have been running a campaign of disinformation about UFOs.
'Here's how it apparently works: a high-ranking intelligence agent takes an outspoken UFO conspiracy theorist into his confidence, tells him (it's usually a him) that his theories are not only on the right track but the US government is itself secretively pursuing similar theories. The agent also sprinkles some deliberate falsehoods about UFO sightings into his disclosures.
'This has the effect of seducing the UFO-believer, making him feel part of some charmed circle of knowledge, but also encouraging him to spout facts that sound absurd outside (and even within) the 'UFO community. Why would the Air Force and US government do it? To 'neutralise' the conspiracy nut, and possibly to throw America's enemies (oh, OK, Russia) off the scene about US defence development.
'Complicated, isn't it? Watching Mirage Men plunges you into a vortex of half-truths, lies, manipulation, bluffs and double bluffs. It's not quite clear who we should believe. And that's before we even confront Special Agent Richard Doty, a government official whose task it was to plant these falsehoods. Doty, a timid, deeply ordinary-looking man blinking behind large spectacles, admits to cynical trickery aimed at throwing gullible UFO believers off the scent.' (The Telegraph review & The Pirate Bay magnet link).
media-underground.net
Saturday, August 16. 2014
Algorithmic Filtering is a good enough term but I think someone needs to dumb it down so everyone can understand exactly what's going on here. I may be overstating the obvious but I like to be completely clear. People tend to ignore wild eyed conspiracy nuts screaming on the sidewalk. I also strive for simplicity and readability. Just imagine the next paragraph is written all in caps. Something like...
"With the right kind of hacking Facebook can make a story almost disappear even though everyone assumes it's a tool to give the general public complete freedom to post whatever they want. News stories can be ignored just as easily as they are in mainstream outlets. Just as Google can target ads from what's written inside your email, Facebook has software that can read your posts and bury certain topics or at least control content from becoming viral to a certain extent. This is especially insidious because the very nature of social media gives people the illusion that it's some kind of tool to give a voice to the voiceless. Nothing can be further from the truth."
'For me, last night’s Ferguson "coverage" began when people started retweeting pictures of armored vehicles with heavily armored "robocops" on top of them, aiming their muzzle at the protesters, who seemed to number a few hundred. It was the fourth night after an unarmed black man, Michael Brown, was shot by a - still unnamed - police officer after a "jaywalking" incident. Witnesses say he died hands in the air, saying "don’t shoot".
'The first night Mike Brown was shot, a friend asked on Twitter whether this would ever make the national news. It deserved to be national news as multiple significant, ongoing crises intersect at Ferguson: the loss of jobs which hit these communities worst; the militarization of US police departments; race; chronic multi-generational poverty.
'But those very factors often make it less likely such places make the news, except as trouble spots. Places to be ignored. Avoided. "We" hear it only through official statements, often dismissing local concerns, painting them as looters, thugs, troublemakers.' (Medium article).
media-underground.net
Wednesday, May 28. 2014
Is Edward Snowden a disinformation agent? What would be the motive? Could it be a test to study our reaction when confronted with the fact the NSA is actually spying on Americans? Maybe they knew it was going to come out eventually and wanted to control the leak? Or frighten everyone into submission to put a chilling effect on what we say and do online? Ease us into the truth before they trash the Bill of Rights? I'm revisiting a year old conspiracy I thought was total bunk when I first heard the idea but now it seems somewhat believable.
Remember the NSA not only listens in on conversations and stores everything we do online but they also filter, analyze, measure and interpret data much like what a corporate marketeer would do. It's basic data mining to study trends. It would be the most accurate type of poll ever conceived in human history. So they could have easily studied what most people thought about the NSA itself, our reaction to total surveillance or whether or not we even cared.
My gut feeling is most people in the US probably already took for granted the NSA was spying on them to begin with. They would fully know it wouldn't be much of a risk for Edward Snowden to come out and tell the truth (the rest of the world has always known because that's been the NSA's job all along). But for the US population they probably already calculated the psychology behind the leak and possible reaction most people would have AND predicted the outcome. You can do a whole hell of a lot with that much data. It's understanding group psychology on a mass scale and knowing how far they can put their dick in our ass.
'Now that the dust has settled after the Edward Snowden affair, it’s time to ask some tough questions about The Guardian’s scoop of the week. Snowden’s story is that he dropped a $200,000 a year job and a (very attractive) girlfriend in Hawaii for a life in hiding in Hong Kong in order to expose the evils of the NSA's Prism programme. But bits of the story are now being questioned.' (The Telegraph article).
media-underground.net
Sunday, May 25. 2014
This article came out two days ago. Maybe you've seen it. Here at Media Underground we don't post too many stories that hit the mainstream but I had to post this just to prove I'm not making this shit up. And by the way I looked all over for an article with the downside to this new app or even a realistic take but they all seemed to have very little or no problem with it. I suppose it doesn't matter anymore if we live under the umbrella of a New Techno Stasi. People are watching it live, these psychopaths are shaking it right in our face and no one cares. And you don't need an army of riot police when the people are this apathetic.
And what is it with the new techno geeks who think this shit up? Are they virtual illiterates? Have they never read Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four? Surely they've seen a few dystopian science fiction films but they probably think: "Oh those are just movies and they don't mean anything. You're paranoid. Just look at this new technology! Isn't it cool?".
It will be the same thing with the new Mark of the Beast app. Here at the Underground we don't have to believe in Jesus to understand why an implantable chip might be creepy. It's just fucking creepy, okay? I don't know why. Some people just feel like they don't want to have a tracking device on their body that's connected to a huge database. Does that mean I'm a paranoid Christian? No it just means I don't want you in my shit. I wonder how they'll spin that one. I’ll bet they’ll find a way to get everyone begging for it. People will wait in line and camp out overnight to be the first ones to get the new iBeast.
"But James if you're not doing anything wrong why would it matter to you?" I don't know. It's just weird for some reason. I can’t explain it. And why in the fuck am I the paranoid freak? How come no one thinks the people who design these surveillance tools aren’t paranoid? You built a fucking gadget that records everything in the room or tracks everyone wherever they go? What kind of person would think of that? What kind of person would buy into that? Those are the people who are never labeled as paranoid. They're just concerned with your safety. Don’t you want to be safe? Or isn’t it cool that a giant corporation is listening in to everything in your room?
'Say, you don't mind if Facebook sticks one of your earbuds into its data-mining cranium, do you?
'As Facebook said in a message posted Thursday, over the next few weeks, it's introducing an optional music, TV and movies recognition feature in the US for Android and iOS gadgets - or what the praiseworthy Register calls "fondleslabs."
'The feature will be off by default. If a user gives it permission to slurp up sound, it will tap into the mic on a mobile device and eavesdrop on whatever's playing in the background.
'The feature will then grind through its recognition machinery to identify the song, movie or TV show you're listening to.
'Facebook didn't say anything about listening in on background noise, including private conversations.' (Naked Security article).
media-underground.net
Friday, May 23. 2014
A comprehensive final report on the future of Scotland's land has just been published, with 62 progressive recommendations, that, if implemented, would change the pattern of Scotland's land immeasurably in terms of use, ownership and funding. It is hard to overstate how important this report is or is likely to be. Of course, will Scotland - either as part of the UK or an independent nation - see these recommendations enacted? Independence will surely help but the jury is definitely out. It will take politicians and principled people with real balls to implement these much needed and long overdue reforms, as the vested interests of the large Scottish landowners and 'slipper farmers' are rich and powerful, not least because they own and control, er, the land...
It is our job (i.e. the people of Scotland) to keep this issue alive and not let this invaluable report become just another paperweight on the desks of the powerful. I live in hope.
'There should be an upper limit on the amount of land held by private owners in Scotland, a government-commissioned study has recommended.
'The Land Reform Review Group also called for a big increase in community land ownership. And the group said the current tax system should be changed.
'Tax "plays an important part in maintaining the concentrated pattern of large scale, private land ownership in Scotland," it stated.
'The Scottish government believes the country needs a fairer distribution of land ownership, and is aiming reduce the dominance of large, traditional sporting estates. The report's authors said the Scottish government should establish a Community Land Agency to facilitate negotiations between landowners and communities, with the goal of achieving a "significant increase in local community land ownership". But they warned that public funding remained "critical" and the Scottish government must ensure there is an "integrated legislative and financial support structure" to help communities in urban and rural Scotland buy and develop land and buildings.' (BBC News article & Land Reform report).
media-underground.net
Wednesday, May 21. 2014
George Monbiot has just written an excellent article in The Guardian explaining why, if he lived in Scotland, he'd vote yes to rid the country of its feudal landowners...
'Power's ability to resist change: this is the story of our times. Morally bankrupt, discredited, widely loathed? No problem: whether it's neoliberal economics, tax avoidance, coal burning, farm subsidies or the House of Lords, somehow the crooked system creeps along.
'Legally, feudalism in Scotland ended in 2004. In itself, this is an arresting fact. But almost nothing has changed. After 15 years of devolution the nation with the rich world's greatest concentration of land ownership remains as inequitable as ever.
'The culture of deference that afflicts the British countryside is nowhere stronger than in the Highlands. Hardly anyone dares challenge the aristocrats, oligarchs, bankers and sheikhs who own so much of this nation, for fear of consequences real or imagined. The Scottish government makes grand statements about land reform, then kisses the baronial boot. The huge estates remain untaxed and scarcely regulated.
'You begin to grasp the problem when you try to discover who owns them. Fifty per cent of the private land in Scotland is in the hands of 432 people - but who are they? Many large estates are registered in the names of made-up companies in the Caribbean. When the Scottish minister Fergus Ewing was challenged on this issue, he claimed that obliging landowners to register their estates in countries that aren't tax havens would risk "a negative effect on investment". William Wallace rides again.' (Guardian article).
media-underground.net
Monday, May 12. 2014
With the current system of Common Agricultural Policy farm subsidies (CAP) ending next year, the Scottish Government is currently looking at the system that shovels vast amounts of public money to landowners and 'slipper farmers' (i.e. people who own or rent land but do not even own a pair of wellies let alone farm anything, yet still receive a shitload of cash for doing fuck all).
Andy Wightman investigates:
'It’s hard to imagine the Government devising a new system of Jobseeker’s Allowance or Housing Benefit where the claimant is told they that their entitlement to such payments is just about to quadruple whether they like it or not. Indeed, with the total benefits cap set at £26,000 per year, the trend is in the opposite direction. It has long eluded me why, when the poorest in society suffer cuts and caps, some of the wealthiest not only appear to suffer no such pain, but are rewarded with largesse.
'I met a tenant farmer recently who told me that under the existing system of farming subsidies he receives £18,000 per year. That’s a fairly generous allocation. But under current proposals for the new system (to be introduced in 2015) he will receive £80,000. “I don’t need it”, he told me. He is not particularly wealthy but he doesn’t need the money. So why does it look likely that he will get it?
'The existing system of farm subsidies is coming to an end in December 2015 and the Scottish Government is currently finalising the details of the new system that will take its place and run until 2020. The existing (historic) system awarded subsidy (single farm payments - SFP) to farmers on the basis of what they received in 2000-2002. This is rather like paying tax this year on the basis of what you earned 14 years ago.' (Andy Wightman article).
media-underground.net
Sunday, May 11. 2014
I've always been a sucker for a good doomy Black Sabbath-esque riff, especially when it's accompanied with powerful female vocals (the greatly underrated Sumo album by The Superjesus springs instantly to mind), but what makes Rooftop Revolutionaries unique is the air of political activism that is present at the forefront of all of the band's lyrics.
Amongst all the tasteless, wishy-washy, celebrity obsessed posturing of much of today's musicians, it is so refreshing to stumble upon a young rock band with a purpose other than to become famous and make a shitload of cash.
The following track 'Folk Devils' sealed the deal for me and I instantly bought their album Resolute from huge corrupt corporate retailer Amazon after hearing it (I haven't 'bought' an album in ages - unfortunately sometimes you gotta use The Man to get the message out I guess)...
media-underground.net
Thursday, March 20. 2014
Today could turn out to be an historic day for Scotland. At last, the way our land is owned, used, traded and subsidised is being put under some long overdue close scrutiny. There is still an awful long way to go before meaningful Land Reform takes place - and powerful vested interests will need to be taken on - but this is undoubtedly a step in the right direction.
Unbelievably the simple question of 'Who owns what?' in Scotland is still not fully answered, but of course many landowners enjoy and subsequently benefit from such blurry murkiness. So the first task, as this report points out, is to create a robust public register of Scotland's land. Vitally, this report also starts to throw some light on the huge tax-break, tax evasion, corporate investment and massive subsidy sink-hole that much of Scotland's land has become. I watch with interest and I live in hope.
'In a Report published on Thursday 20 March 2014, the Scottish Affairs Committee says any government which is serious about land reform needs full and clear information on existing land ownership and values made widely available.
'The Committee says Scotland lags behind most comparable European countries in providing such data and calls on the Scottish and UK Governments to address this as a priority.
'The Committee heard that Scotland is also “miles behind” other countries in terms of the openness and ease of land transactions. Templates exist which allow land transactions to become simple and straightforward, without the involvement of lawyers.' (UK Parliament article & interim report).
media-underground.net
Wednesday, March 19. 2014
The recent promises delivered by the beastly Johann Lamont (of the Labour Party) remind me of those made by the nitwit Alec Douglas-Home (of the Tory Party) during the 1979 referendum on devolution. One only hopes that the people of Scotland remember these failed promises and vote accordingly...
'In 1979, the No campaign was run by the same commercial and political forces now in play. The Labour Government was notionally in favour of its own legislation, which it had allowed to be crippled by the 40% rule. It sat passive, leaving the trade unions and opposing Labour MPs to join with the Conservatives in opposing the creation of an Assembly with minimal powers.
'Yet the deceptions and threats were still being made. The Assembly, they said, would lead to a wholesale withdrawal of Scottish industry with loss of jobs. The oil located in Scotland's waters was British. It wasn't all that valuable. It would run out and where would Scotland be then? Impoverished and ruined was the answer. And weren't we under a duty to be selfless and help out England's poor? Further generations of those English poor - and Scotland's too are still with us - and using food banks for survival.
'Fifteen years after the setting up of the Scottish Parliament, the disaster has not happened. None of Scotland's companies kept to their threats to pull out. Instead many of the objectors have prospered. If there has been any problem affecting Scottish commerce it has come from the mismanagement of the British economy and its cataclysmic failure to control the credit explosion from which came the 2008 depression.' (Herald article).
media-underground.net
Tuesday, March 18. 2014
'Abby Martin takes a look the state of media today, highlighting instances of journalists who have gone against the editorial lines of their respective networks. Abby also speaks with investigative journalist and former CNN reporter Amber Lyon, about her experience with media censorship and the topic of journalist integrity in a time when disinformation is abound.'
media-underground.net
Sunday, March 9. 2014
You've got to be kidding, right? Surely such questions as 'Land Reform' are for the developing world, where nasty corporations are cutting down rain-forests and booting off indigenous people to grow beefburgers on, etc. This is indeed true, but the state of land ownership - and the subsidy system it has - in the UK is a scandal of epic proportions. In fact it is the underpinning reason as to why we have to pay a ridiculous amount for a place to live in the UK; a fact that is then sold back to as: 'high house prices are a good thing for the economy'. Sadly most folks are entirely duped by this nonsense.
This excellent and disturbing article shines some much needed light onto the issue:
'Modern British history, excluding world wars and the loss of empire, is a record of two countervailing changes, one partly understood, one not understood at all. The partly understood change is the urbanisation of society to the point where 90 per cent of us in the United Kingdom live in urban areas. Hidden inside that transformation is the shift from a society in which, less than a century and a half ago, all land was owned by 4.5 per cent of the population and the rest owned nothing at all. Now, 70 per cent of the population has a stake in land, and collectively owns most of the 5 per cent of the UK that is urban. But this is a mere three million out of 60 million acres.
'Through this transformation, the heirs to the disenfranchised of the Victorian era have inverted the relationship between the landed and the landless. This has happened even while huge changes have occurred in the 42 million acres of rural countryside. These account for 70 per cent of the home islands and are the agricultural plot. From being virtually the sole payers of such tax as was levied in 1873 (at fourpence in the 240p pound), the owners of Britain's agricultural plot are now the beneficiaries of an annual subsidy that may run as high as £23,000 each, totalling between £3.5bn and £5bn a year. Urban dwellers, on the other hand, pay about £35bn in land-related taxes. Rural landowners receive a handout of roughly £83 per acre, while urban dwellers pay about £18,000 for each acre they hold, an average of £1,800 per dwelling, the average dwelling standing on one-tenth of an acre.' (New Stateman article and Who Owns Britain website).
media-underground.net
|