Tuesday, June 22, 2010

Deception And Survival

Why is it that we are so readily awed by the changing colours of the chameleon, by the beautifully marked butterfly which blends in with its surrounding foliage to avoid being eaten, by the myriad ways in which nature routinely uses disguise, deceit and deception of both the eye and the mind of those seeking lunch, in order to fool predators? And then why is it that when humans use the same sort of deception we are at once shocked and repulsed? Could it be because in the human species it may more often be the predator who uses disguise, who seeks to deceive others, or that it is more often the occasionally even willing victim who either chooses not to or else somehow fails to disguise themselves sufficiently to avoid predation? Or is it that we have little difficulty balancing contradictory opposites in our own minds, at one and the same time acknowledging the need for survival in the natural world while morally disapproving of the same need in the human world?
Could it be that same mechanism of denial which assures us whenever we pass judgement that we are always unquestionably righteous while it is invariably the others who sin and fall short of perfection?

Labels:

Thursday, May 20, 2010

IGNORING REALITY DOESN'T CHANGE IT

Regretfully, Ignoring Manifestations Of This Reality Doesn’t Change It

Well, this is surely rounding out the picture regarding what the Machiavellian test is all about.

This article takes things further. It explains how High Machs are or become (nature versus nurture?) High Machs. If this article seems to be about human dynamics which some don’t willingly recognise. And yes, it can be very difficult to recognise or relate to anything this sociopathic sounding. However, the more alien this sounds to you the greater the chances are that one’s own resistance to understanding what this article is describing also may indicate that one is probably unconsciously on the receiving end of another’s power machinations rather than being on the power end. Those seem to be the only options. I wonder.

Machiavellian this may be, even terrifying, but this does not make the reality of it any less real. Kind of scary to consider it though, isn’t it? This article clearly illustrates that those who choose the position of powerlessness only are left the option to serve the Dr. Jekyll power mongers who are everywhere. Those who prefer powerlessness apparently enable the use and abuse of power by the Mr. Hyde side of those same disguised but power mongering types. It looks rather as if most must be minions who choose to ignore the reality of how power works, preferring to pretend that the human dynamics of power do not operate in this way. Worse yet, if this Law has any credence, it makes it clear that retreat and isolation are not viable options, as this kind of human power monger is everywhere! So much for living on the fringes?

Care to comment, anyone?

Regards,
MM

http://www2.tech.purdue.edu/cg/courses/cgt411/covey/48_laws_of_power.htm

Labels:

Politics For Profit

CAN’T STAND THE HEAT, GET OUT OF THE KITCHEN!
Once again, the fore warning becomes clearer: Exalt science at your peril. Now, follow the money. It is a proven fact that the Nazis cynically pushed a green agenda for totally brown ends. Why? Because it would be effective and profitable, not because they gave a damn about the real or the imagined environmental issues of the day.

A few years back brown Arnold of Germany starting having play dates with brown Gordon the realtor Premier of B.C. to talk about the best way to make huge private profits with a green surcharge, which would then disappear into general revenues. As for global warming, just ask yourselves which uses more energy for a greater part of the year. Air conditioning? Or heating?

Obviously what we have been haned here is a Canadian premier and and the bankruptcy specialist California governor Arnold in cahoots, with the American wealthy corporate elite yet again telling the Canadian wealthy corporate elite how to cash in together on global cooling while pitching global warming. Then follow that money right back to your own thinning wallet.

What better way could there be to capitalise on global cooling through yet another surcharge on absolutely everything we use or need to survive than to generate self serving mass hysteria, profitable chaos and money making fear about the well publicised imminent Armageddon we are asked to trust them when they tell us we face, imminent doom, now known, almost overnight, dressed up this time as the dreaded spectre of global warming? Needless to say there is a lot of money to be made by a few by carbon taxing and cap and trading the many once they are on board the fear boat to hell.

However, since anything which demands too much inevitably demands its own destruction, remember to also ask this: At what point does the milking middle class cow dry up for good?
Effective a few years ago when the bill below was passed in the B.C. legislature, every single form of energy that exists, everything from natural gas to electricity to propane, any fuel of any description which you use to keep warm when it is cold, all of which has already become the property of privatised corporations, despite the window dressing of sporting “B.C.” logos, now has a hefty surcharge on it.

Everything.

Oh, and by the way? The profiteering fear mongerers are also closing the gate on two other things,
a) the future of any and all incandescent light bulbs, gone forever by 2012 despite the proven health dangers of electromagnetic fields and radiation from using florescent bulbs, and
b) the elimination of any and all wood heating/burning devices, which has already happened elsewhere.

Just ask Cheney - who was always impeachment proof, made of teflon, ask him for his connections to the use of fear mongering for unnecessary wars, all for profit. Hysteria and fear ALWAYS make those who orchestrate it a ton of money. Ddoes not matter if it is cancer or climate, same model.
Then they cover their bases by saying that this will mean temperature extremes. that way if things don’t heat up on schedule it is that bitch Mother Nature acting out again because she has been abused.

Okay so here it is nearly the end of April. Even the bees we do have are in their hives, still feeling way too cold to come out and play the pollen collection game (and yes Canada has still got many honeybees, it is the States which mostly does not). Funny. It sure looks a whole lot like this global warming game is not warming up on schedule, at least to me. still wearing winter duds. Will someone turn up the heat, please, then immediately dig into our pockets deeper to pay the corporate piper so that we can still keep warm, at least for as long as we can afford to do so.

Labels:

Wednesday, May 20, 2009

Bye Bye Miss Canadian Pie

If E=Mc2 Does The EU = The North American Union squared?

Where does one go to grieve this kind of potential loss? Head hiding sands are washing away as Canadians continue to try to hide from the erosion of identity and the final loss of our own country. Is this the true meaning of bringing the Commonwealth home? We won the war against the U.S. only to now lose our country through political and corporate deals?
Is anyone listening? Do people really have to ALWAYS lose it all as the only way to appreciate what they once had? Does anyone truly have the ability to imagine what THIS Regime Change through the LOSS OF SOVEREIGNTY and the globalisation of Canada will look like? Why are our politicians silent on this issue, if it is real? Why is our Prime Minister bragging as recently as this week by asserting: "I make the rules" ? Isn't this just another case of "I'm the Decider" ?

Is it real?
Just another conspiracy theory? The Flip Face of the EU?.

Remember Leonard Cohen’s lyrics? “First they take Manhattan, then they take Berlin”. Are we are not following exactly the same path as Europe and Britain did? Or is that just yet another conspiracy theory?

The EU was sold to Britain as their best hope for the future… But behind the scenes, another, more unsettling agenda was unfolding. The European Economic Community (EEC) began for Britain as a free-trade agreement in 1972. Today’s European Union is a federal superstate, complete with one currency, one legal system, one military, one police force, even its own national anthem. In one shocking documentary featuring EU insiders and commentators, independent author Phillip Day covers the history and goals of the European Union, as well as the disturbing, irrevocable implications this new government has for every British citizen. Whether the viewer is for or against Britain’s participation, this film asked the troubling questions the mainstream media refused to confront.

The Real Face of the European Union: Google Video

Regards,
MM

North American Union, Global Governance
Welcome to the no man’s land of the ‘North Americanist’

By Judi McLeod
from CanadaFreePress.com

Some call it ‘regionalization’, population of which will come to be known as the “North Americanists”. Some call it North American Union, NAU for short, or the benign sounding North American Community.

Few call the coming end of the sovereignty of three nations globalization, but rarely what it really is, the persistent encroachment of One World Government.

The United Nations-like European Union now governs all of Europe. In the latest U.N. move, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has asked New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg whether some of the city’s police officers could be deployed with U.N. peacekeeping missions.” (www.Breitbart.com, April 11, 2007.)

Labels:

Sunday, March 22, 2009

TOO MANY OF SOME OF US

EH EH?

"May you live in interesting times" - Ancient Chinese curse

My mother's family of origin lived in interesting times. This also entailed dying in those same interesting times.
I grew up in the same era as the writer of the article below and was shaped by my resistance to many of the same waves of cultural and global hysteria However, I hasten to add this: There is a different level of betrayal involved here. The periodic irrational convulsions of virtually any culture, on a mass scale or otherwise, are almost predictable. This kind of group hysteria tends either to paralyze almost any one who experiences it into a state of chronic fear, or conversely it tends to to solidify the necessity for staying grounded in realism and keeping a sense of humour, proportion and perspective.

To that ancient Chinese curse some might further add: "Beware of mass panic and avoid the masses when common sense dies".

Anyone with an iconoclastic streak, or even anyone who is simply not a crowd follower by nature, tends to welcome any and all opportunities to listen to any level headed approach.
Maybe this is because a human crowd can behave rather like a strange, sometimes frightening animal, one comprised of many bodies but only one head. Such an animal offers the weak a milieu in which even seemingly responsible individuals can become rather easily lured or incited to do, or at least to endorse, virtually anything.
This irresponsible opting out can run the gamut, manifesting as almost anything, from a zeitgeist as benign as Woodstock to something as virulent and dangerous as spontaneous mass rioting.
Crowds can be tailor made for those inclined to use such situations to abdicate personal liability, thought, reflection, personal choice, culpability, and/or individual responsibility.
Conversely they can start out as anti-corporate protests and degenerate from there into violence in a flash. A crowd can offer an irresistible chance to celebrate an event symbolically, en masse, an opportunity to blur the edges of one's miniscule identity, while feeling like a microcosm submerged in the macrocosm ... or... a crowd can become millions crying out in unison "Zieg Heil!".
The moon's forces affect public consciousness and crowd behaviour which people still believe themselves to be choosing.
Most human beings are nopt capable of independent thought, however, and only think that they think. In reality more often than not they react randomly without much or even any thought at all. It can and does give pause to consider how little humans have changed in essential manners and matters throughout many thousands of years.
Of course, as any teenager longing to belong soon learns, following the crowd can be as restrictive as it is seductive, much like the army, offering the illusions of protection, conformity, exclusivity, belonging, reassurance, acceptance and security. A given group can offer one the chance to become swept up in something larger, the chance to abandon the personal self or any personal choice, except the first choice of running with the crowd .... almost anywhere.
Sadly more often than not the loss of individuality can lead to many a crowd trampling many parts of itself as it goes over any waiting cliff.
So it is with relief that a breath of fresh air offering humour should be welcomed into what some call prefer to call the anthropogenic "global-warming-versus-climate-change" debate, - or into any other stale, or stalemated, debate, for that matter.
This is not to say that humans are not horrifically polluting the planet's air and water and destroying countless species, all at an unprecedented rate, almost as if we need to convince ourselves that we are logical candidates for extinction.
It is only to say that we are not necessarily all powerfully or omnipotent in god like fashion in our effect on the entire globe, even if some, it is theorised, may be genetically suicidal*.
Nature is nature and may continue in some other form without us humans, even if some prefer to drag the ecosystem down with the rest of us. And even if we seem wretchedly indifferent to our collective boot print impact on all the other species with whom we appear unwilling to share and from whom humans seem to have become so irreversibly alienated, even fewer of those who think themselves reasonable actually want to cosy up to a grizzly or cougar or wolverine or even a possum.
Still, those with insight still appreciate such cohesive, connected, instinctive natural design, even if from a safe distance. Pets are a substitute and offer the chance to "live" with nature, or rather the other way around.

In any case, when it comes to the hot button issue of global warming, I just love this reality based satire of the concept of AA.
*"Adam's Curse: A Future Without Men" by Brian Sykes;
"Y: The Descent of Men" by Steve Jones;
"Are Men Necessary?: When Sexes Collide" by Maureen Dowd ("a blistering critique of modern gender relations", this third book should be required reading for anyone with the capacity to appreciate biting wit in a post feminist, male dominated, war torn, and tragically polluted natural world)

http://www.godward.org/commentary/Out of the Box/Apocaholics Anonymous.htm
Welcome to “Apocaholics Anonymous” –

Join Me in a Crusade for Panic-Free Living


Updated for the Atlanta Investment Conference

20th Anniversary Reunion, 8:45 am, April 20, 2007


By Gary Alexander, Recovering Apocaholic


Hi, I’m Gary and I’m a recovering Apocaholic. I am currently Apocalypse free for nearly 18 years. I left the church of the Religious Apocalypse in 1976, over 30 years ago, and I resigned from the secular church of the Financial Apocalypse in 1989. Yes, I still feel the urge to proclaim the end of all things, from time to time, but I white-knuckle my way to a history book for a little perspective, and then I breathe easier. If you wish to join AA, the only requirement is that you give up the adrenaline rush of media-fed fantasies.


Since I spoke to you last on this subject, in 1994, we have survived “Bankruptcy 1995” (the original epidemic of Hockey Stock charts), the Big Bang in Hong Kong, years of Y2K scare stories, a SARS epidemic, Mad Cow disease, Bird Flu, a real threat on 9/11, Triple Deficits (Budget, Trade and Balance of Payments), wars in Serbia/Kosovo, Iraq and Afghanistan, Deflation in 2003, Inflation since then, The Perfect Storms of 2005 (Katrina, Rita and Wilma, the 3 Witches of the Bermuda Triangle), and today’s reigning fears of Global Warming, $200 Oil and the Sub-prime Housing Loan Crisis Implosion.


But before we go from today’s Sub-prime to the ridiculous claims of imminent collapse, let me introduce the depths of my past addiction to the Apocalypse. I was born in July 1945, the day the first atomic bomb exploded in Alamogordo, New Mexico. That mushroom crowd has haunted our lives ever since. As a teenager, I became convinced the world would end before I was 30. Too soon old…too late smart, I was very, very wrong:


50 Years Ago (1957) – The “Duck and Cover” Generation


My apocalyptic addiction began 50 years ago, in the Year of Sputnik, when all of us Seattle-area 7th graders – mostly the offspring of Boeing engineers – were told that we must now learn more science and math, to close the missile gap with the Soviet Union.


Back in 1957, the U.S. was the proud owner of 100,000 kilograms of U-235, in what was termed “45 times overkill” of the Soviets. But the Soviets had more missiles than we did. In that same year, 1957, the first underground nuclear explosion was set off near Las Vegas. In junior high, I soon became addicted to dystopian novels, like On the Beach, by Nevil Shute, a Briton who had moved to Australia, in order to be among the last on earth to be fried by the inevitable radiation cloud following nuclear Armageddon. The novel was adapted for the screen in 1959, directed by Stanley Kramer, and starring Gregory Peck as captain Dwight Lionel Towers of the USS Sawfish. The story was set in the near future, 1963 in the book (1964 in the movie), in the months following World War III. Nuclear fallout killed ALL life, with hot air currents killing off Australia last,


The characters made their best effort to enjoy what remained of their life before dying from radiation poisoning. The film was shot in Melbourne, with a chilling ending of wind-swept but empty city streets there. That image has haunted me, to this day. I am convinced that this hopelessness sewed the seeds for the senseless rush to immediate gratification in the 1960s. With a world about to die, hedonism soon reigned supreme.


In high school, I read Aldous Huxley’s “Brave New World” and the scathing exposes and novels of Philip Wylie (1902-1971), son of a Presbyterian minister father and a novelist mother (who died when he was five). Wylie wrote apocalyptic nuclear war novels like “Tomorrow” (1954), about the atomic bombing of two fictional Midwest cities adjacent to each other in the mid-1950s. One had an effective civil defense program, and the other did not. Later, I read his novel, “Triumph” (1963), another graphic description of the effects of nuclear war story involving a worst-case USA/USSR “spasm war,” in which both sides emptied their arsenals into each other with extensive use of “dirty” bombs to maximize casualties, resulting in the main characters (in a very deep bomb shelter) being the sole survivors in the northern hemisphere, the new Adam and Eve of a new creation.


In the financial realm, I was also becoming convinced that America’s economy was doomed, especially after reading John Kenneth Galbraith’s “The Affluent Society” (1958), which said the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, while advertising creates artificial demand in the West. The same theme was echoed in Vance Packard’s “The Hidden Persuaders” (1957). He followed up with “The Status Seekers” (1959) and “The Waste Makers” (1960). Also popular was a book we young cynics all read, “The Ugly American” (1958), by William Lederer and Eugene Burdick. America was supposedly incredibly shallow and bigoted in the 1950s, soon to be rescued by the Liberated 1960s.


P.S. The world is still a dangerous and violent place, but the most chilling example of violent death now is in Africa, with machetes. We’ve now gone over 61 years without using nuclear bombs against humans – thank God. Back in the late 1960s, Herman Kahn wrote “On Thermonuclear War” and “Thinking the Unthinkable,” in which he demonstrated that we can survive a nuclear holocaust, but that didn’t seem likely in 1962:


45 Years Ago (1962): The Cuban Missile Crisis and “Silent Spring”


The closest we came to a nuclear exchange was in October, 1962, during the Cuban Missile Crisis, in my high school senior year. That was one of the events that caused me to throw away a National Merit Scholarship and decide to attend a small church college that seemed to made sense of these global threats. Another impetus was the collapse of the global ecology, as demonstrated in another best-selling book that I read in 1962:


Rachel Carson (1907-1964) published “Silent Spring” in 1962, based on a compilation of articles she had written for The New Yorker. Her book is credited with launching the environmental movement that culminated in Earth Day (1970), including a worldwide ban on the main villain in her book, DDT. Silent Spring was a Book of the Month Club main selection, spending several weeks on the New York Times best seller list. It was actively endorsed by one of my heroes at the time, a Washington State native, Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, as well as many other nature advocates in my school.


As a result of that book and further research, I wrote an extended scientific article for a national magazine in 1970, linking the chemicals in DDT to many of the pest sprays commonly used in homes. I wrote other articles supporting the ban in DDT, which I am ashamed to say, has caused the deaths of millions of Asians and Africans since then. Many insect-borne diseases were on the verge of extinction in 1970, when the U.S. tied foreign aid to poor nations to their “voluntary” banning of DDT, to our great shame.


Knock, knock!

Who’s There?

Armageddon!

Armageddon Who?

Armageddon outa here!


In 1963, I threw away my future to apply to Ambassador College and join the Worldwide Church of God, in effect saying “Armageddon Outa Here.” The book that motivated me the most was Herbert Armstrong’s “1975 in Prophecy,” in which he showed from several perspectives that the world couldn’t make it past 1975. After four years of their college indoctrination, I became a leading writer, editor and researcher for a decade (1966-76) for their publications, turning secular trends into Apocalyptic rhetoric in magazines and in the electronic radio media, writing radio and TV scripts for the voice of “The World Tomorrow,” the late Garner Ted Armstrong. I didn’t have long to wait for ammunition:


40 Years Ago: “The Population Bomb!” and “Famine 1975”


Upon graduation from college, my job of predicting the End of the World by 1975 was made incredibly easier by a wave of new books proclaiming the inevitable end, based on the centuries-old (and easily discredited) theories of Thomas Robert Malthus, who wrote in 1798 that population grew geometrically, but food production could only grow in small (arithmetic) increments. In 1967, the brothers William and Paul Paddock wrote a book called “Famine 1975,” in which they said it was impossible for food production to keep up with population growth. The title of their first chapter said, “The Population-Food Collision Is Inevitable; It Is Foredoomed.” The Paddocks believed that the Malthusian formula was on a collision course and all we could do was starve a little less than others.


Then came Paul Ehrlich’s “The Population Bomb” (1968), in which he opened famously by saying, “The battle to feed humanity is over. In the 1970s and 1980s, hundreds of millions of people will starve to death, in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.” Writing in Ramparts magazine, he went even further, “Hundreds of millions of people will soon perish in smog disasters in New York and Los Angeles…the oceans will die of DDT poisoning by 1979…the U.S. life expectancy will drop to 42 years by 1980, due to cancer epidemics.” Hepatitis and dysentery would sweep America by 1980 and nearly all of us would wear gas masks. Over 65 million Americans would starve in the 1980s, leaving only 22.6 million starved Americans alive in 1990. In 1990, he incredibly justified his claims as being right – a trait common to Doomsday prophets. *


* “The individual will frequently emerge not only unshaken but even more convinced of the truth of his beliefs than ever before. Indeed, he may even show a new fervor about convincing and converting other people to his view.” – Leon Festinger, “When Prophecies Fail.”

In the meantime, Dr. Normal Borlaug was launching the Green Revolution, which has managed to feed billions more people on moderately more arable soil than in the 1960s. Instead of starving against our will, millions of us are trying to starve voluntarily – by dieting. Food is far cheaper, relative to the overall growth of the cost of living, than in the 1960s. From 1977 to 1994, food costs fell 77% in real terms. Grain is in surplus, despite 46 million idle arable acres of U.S. farmland, and 11 million idle acres in Europe.


In the first 15 years after “Earth Day,” we made great progress against pollution. The amount of particulates spewed into the air fell by 64%, carbon monoxide emissions fell 38%, ocean dumping of industrial wastes was cut by 94%, and the number of rivers unfit for swimming dropped 44%. By 1990, cars emitted 78% fewer pollutants. Yet Lester Brown’s annual “State of the Earth” keeps saying the opposite, that pollution is growing.


And for anyone who still believes in Dr. Malthus, I have one word to share with you: Chickens! Are they food, or are they population? Do they grow arithmetically, or geometrically? On the Delmarva Peninsula alone, 90 million cluckers live their nasty, brutish, crowded and short lives on the way the chopping block and your local KFC.


The famine/population fear is older than Malthus. Confucius thought the earth was full, 2500 years ago. Romans thought they had “worn out the earth.” St. Jerome said “the world is already full, and the population too large for the soil.” Tertullian wailed about “teeming populations of Carthage” with “numbers burdensome to the world.” He saw death from famine, war and disease as “the means of pruning the luxuriance of the human race.” In truth, Rome was rich when it was crowded, and a wasteland when it was empty.


35 Years Ago – The Club of Rome and “The Limits to Growth”



In the early 1970s, Garner Ted Armstrong pulled me aside and gave me a challenging new project, which might take years to finish. He said that all the globe’s trends are getting worse, and that if we could only “feed all these trends into a computer,” we could predict the precise time of the end. Maybe it’s 1975, as we all still thought at the time, or maybe it’s a little later than that. After all, we can count the hairs we lose each day and predict when we will go bald. So we could do the same with all other trends – depleting resources, increased crime, nuclear overkill, chemical and environmental pollutants, etc.


Ambassador College had a new IBM 370 computer and a huge programming team at my disposal, so I set out on this impossible project full of hope. Two years later, I gave up, but a bunch of secular statisticians in Cambridge, Massachusetts did not give up. They fed all the same kind of data into Harvard’s massive mainframe and came out with their magnum opus, “Limits to Growth,” modeling the future consequences of growing world population and finite resources. The study was commissioned by the world’s aristocracy, gathered into a group they called the Club of Rome. Limits to Growth was written by Dennis and Donella Meadows, among many others. The book used computer simulation to project a rolling Doomsday. (All this made me feel like less of a religious nut….)


In short, the report’s authors projected that, at the exponential growth rates they expected to continue, all the known world supplies of zinc, gold, tin, copper, oil, and natural gas would be completely exhausted in 1992. They set specific dates for each commodity. President Carter later bought into this idea and published his gloomy Global 2000 report.


Then, along came Dr. Julian Simon, who bet Dr. Paul Ehrlich $1,000 that the price of commodities would FALL, not rise, implying an expansion of resources, rather than a contraction of supplies during the decade in which they were all to disappear – the 1980s.


By 1985, instead of running out of oil, an oil glut pushed the price down from $40 to $10 a barrel. Shortages beget higher prices and more exploration, not depletion of resources. In the extreme cases, shortages create new technologies. A wood shortage in England in the early 17th Century led to the use of coal and the birth of the industrial revolution. A shortage of whales led to the use and discovery of petroleum, and electrical lighting. The stench of horse manure in urban streets led to the invention of the horseless carriage.


30 Years Ago – Global Cooling and “The Next Ice Age”


My final TV script for Garner Ted Armstrong came in 1975, when I was about to leave the cocoon of the Church of the Apocalypse for a more mundane job at the University of Southern California. He wanted a program on Global Cooling, or the Coming Ice Age. In 1975, there were several covers in major news magazines about the Coming Ice Age.


One example was Newsweek, for the week of April 28, 1975. It said that leading climate scientists were “almost unanimous” (sound familiar?) in their predictions of global cooling. Time Magazine had “The Coming Ice Age” on its cover, and the November 1976 issue of National Geographic had a lead article on the problem of global cooling.


Later on, physicists combined the threat of natural cooling with nuclear war to predict a “Nuclear Winter.” Our future was clearly frigid. The trend from 1935 through 1975 was a gradual cooling of temperatures, since the Dust Bowl of the 1930s. (Most record-high state temperatures, to this day, were set in the 1930s, not in the 1990s, Mr. Gore.)


One day in the control studio, Garner Ted Armstrong showed me a news clipping that pointed to the potential threat of carbon-dioxide emissions contributing to future global warming – a threat that currently assaults us in the daily media. He looked me in the eye, as his trusted researcher, and asked point blank, “Which is it – warming or cooling?”


“With any luck, sir,” I quipped, “We’ll get both, and then they will offset each other.”


He was not amused. But I was on my way out and no longer cared what he thought. I was happy that a peaceful new job awaited me at a less Apocalyptic California college. But that did not stop me from reading a series of best-sellers and coming back to the Doomsday business three years later. In the 1970s alone, all of this was “Coming…”


* The Coming Dollar Devaluation (1970) by Harry Browne

* The Coming Dark Age (1971) by Roberto Vacca

* The Coming Credit Collapse (1974), by Alexander Paris

* The Coming Bad Years (1978), but Howard Ruff

* The Coming Real Estate Crash (1979) by English and Cardiff


The 1970s were also book-ended by two big #1 best-sellers telling the same story from the religious and secular angle: “The Late Great Planet Earth” by Hal Lindsey (1970) and “Crisis Investing” by Doug Casey (1979). They were the biggest best-sellers each year.


25 Years Ago (1982): The Coming Kondratieff Collapse!


I didn’t stay out of the Doomsday press for long. By 1979, I was back in the business, in Virginia, writing free-lance special reports for a leading direct mail marketer on a more secular version of The End of the World. As “Mr. X,” I wrote a series of reports on survival havens, banking secrecy, the collapse of the stock market and the fiat currency system. I was consulting editor to Survival Tomorrow, Tax Angles and Personal Finance (formerly the Inflation Survival Letter) at KCI. In 1982, my first special report for Jim Blanchard was on the coming Third World Loan Crisis, leading to the demise of major New York City money center banks, including the much maligned Citibank.


In brief, I said, trying to re-arrange loans to Third World nations was “like re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic.” At the time, most Latin American nations were following the Juan Peron model, as military dictatorships, starting in Peru (from 1948 to 1980), then Venezuela (1952), Colombia (1953), Bolivia (1964), Brazil (1964), Uruguay (1972) and Chile, under Gen. Auguste Pinochet (1973 to 1988). The giant of the region, Brazil, was ruled by a succession of four-star generals from 1964 to 1985, as their economy reeled from one crisis to another. Central America was in the same condition. El Salvador was under the military’s thumb for over 60 years, from 1931 to 1992. Then came military juntas in Guatemala (1954 to 1986), Honduras (1963-82), Nicaragua’s Sandinistas (1979-90) and Panama under General Noreiga (1968-89), so the situation indeed looked bleak.


Latin America dominated the news in 1982, when I was writing that Third World debt threatened to bring down the region, and perhaps cause many major North American money center banks to fail. The major New York money banks and the U.S. Treasury of the late 1970s had loaned too much money to the “ABC” nations (Argentina, Brazil and Chile), who were each in default on those loans, after crippling back-to-back recessions.


Like others, I said it was futile to re-arrange those loans. But behind the scenes, several New York bankers and Reagan-era Treasury officials quietly negotiated with the Latin American debtors, offering to reschedule their debts at lower interest rates, in exchange for some political concessions – such as free elections – which resulted in the gradual forced retirement of several military dictators. Throughout the mid-1980s, military juntas were replaced by democracies, the last one by a dramatic invasion of Panama in 1989.


As a result of increased economic freedom south of the border, between 1987 and 1994, external debt as a percent of GDP declined by fully half in most Latin American nations: In Chile, external debt fell from 109% of GDP in 1987 to 42% by 1994. Argentina’s debt fell from 58% of GDP to 31%. The biggest basket case of the early 1980s, Brazil, reduced its external debt to the lowest level in Latin America, at just 25.8% by 1994. Even Mexico’s debt fell significantly, from 79% of GDP to 44%. We heard all about their high debt levels in the 1980s. But I bet your never heard the rest of the story. In 1975, there were only 31 global democracies, but now, we have over 120 democracies.


By the way, Nikolai Kondratieff was proved right: The 1979-82 depression came exactly 50 years after the 1929-32 depression, but none of the Doomsday prophets noticed that.


20 Years Ago – A Wave of “Coming Crash” Books (after the Crash)


The #1 Best-seller in 1987 was Dr. Ravi Batra’s “The Great Depression of 1990.” Dr. Batra turned out to be right on his timing, but wrong on his geography. Japan suffered a decade-long Great Depression in the 1990s, but according to Batra and others, Japan was the last place this could happen. Many other best-sellers of 1987 were proclaiming the superiority of the Japanese management system, Japan’s work ethic, its currency, its wealth and ability to “buy up American assets” from Hawaiian hotels to Hollywood studios. (As it turned out, Japan only knew how to pay way too much for those assets.)


Several other authors (including me) tried their hands at “coming crash” books, sadly published about the same time the crash happened, failing to warn anyone in time, and keeping them from re-investing in stocks, which would have been the smartest move at the time. In the next wave of “coming crash” books, the overextended American debts were the paramount threat. Harry Browne wrote “The Economic Time Bomb: How You Can Profit from the Emerging Crisis” in 1989. Harry’s “bullet points” predict this:


Be ready for both a deep recession and severe inflation.
Why deposit insurance doesn’t make your bank account safe.
How the trade deficit could trigger the next depression.
Budget deficits have reached a limit – causing the worst recession since 1937.
An economic time bomb is set to implode – one wrong move can set it off.

Not one threat came to pass, despite deeper budget deficits and trade deficits in 1990-91.


Then came “The Great Reckoning” (1990), also predicting a “Depression in the 1990s.” But the 1990s turned out to be the best decade ever for global economic growth and the stock markets of free countries, as the Dow gained 5-fold, from 2,365 to 11,723.


It was at this time (1990) that I wised up and, mercifully, partook in the bulk of that rise:


10-50 Years Ago DOW 10-Year Gain

April 18, 1957 488.03 192.8%

April 20, 1967 878.62 80.0%

April 20, 1977 942.59 7.3%

April 20, 1987 2270.60 140.9%

April 21, 1997 6660.21 193.3%

April of 2007 c. 12,500 87.7%

60-Year Gain: 75-fold +7,400%


For my grandchildren’s generation, I look for another 75-fold gain in the next 60 years, despite threats from Global Warming, the Housing Crisis, the Triple Deficits in America, and anything else Doomsday prophets dream up in the future. I have been inoculated against such fears. Please join me in abandoning the siren song of the Prophets of Doom.



“Apocaholics Anonymous” Bibliography: For Further Reading


(1) Proof that “Things Really are Getting Better”


Anderson, Terry L., editor, “You Have to Admit It’s Getting Better: From Economic Prosperity to Environmental Quality,” Hoover Press, 202 pages.


Goklany, Indur M., “The Improving State of the World: Why We’re Living Longer, Healthier, More Comfortable Lives, on a Cleaner Planet,” Cato Institute, 2007


Lomborg, Bjorn, “The Skeptical Environmentalist: Measuring the Real State of the World,” Cambridge University Press, 1998, 352 pages + 153p of notes and bibliography.


Moore, Stephen & Simon Julian L., “It’s Getting Better All the Time: 100 Greatest Trends of the Last 100 Years, CATO Institute, 2000, 265 pages.


Simon, Julian L., “Population Matters: People, Resources, Environment and Immigration,” Transaction Publishers, 1993



(2) Countering the Current Global Warming Scare


Avery, Dennis T. & Singer, S. Fred, “Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years,” Rowman & Littlefield, 2007


Horner, Christopher C., “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism,” Regnery Publishing, 2007


Michaels, Patrick, “Shattered Consensus” (2005) and “Meltdown” (2003)



(3) How Media and Mass Psychosis Mislead You



Chafetz, Morris E., MD, “Big Fat Liars: How Politicians, Corporations, and the Media Use Science and Statistics to Manipulate the Public,” Nelson Current, 2005.


Mackay, Charles, “Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds,” 1841 first edition, 700+ pages


Simon, Julian, “Hoodwinking the Nation,” Transaction Publishers, 1999, 127 pages



(4) Currently Popular Doomsday Books in 2007: Random Sampling


Arnold, Daniel A., “The Great Bust Ahead: The Greatest Depression in American and UK History is Just Several Short Years Away.”


Brussee, Warren: “The Second Great Depression: Starting 2007, Ending 2020”


Panzner, Michael, “Financial Armageddon: Protecting Your Future from Four Impending Catastrophes.”


Rubino, John, “How to Profit from the Coming Real Estate Bust”


Schiff, Peter, “Crash Proof: How to Profit from the Coming Economic Collapse.”


Wiedemer, David & Robert, “America’s Bubble Economy: Profit When it Pops”


In addition, Bill Bonner’s & Addison Wiggin’s “Empire of Debt: The Rise of an Epic Financial Crisis” (a 2005 best-seller) was turned into a documentary film in 2008. Perhaps they may join Al Gore in the Apocaholics Hall of Fame in Hollywood.

Labels:

Wednesday, March 11, 2009

"COMMON PURPOSE": IS SOCIETY'S INFRASTRUCTURE 'FALLING APART' OR ARE NATIONS ARE BEING DISMANTLED & ABOLISHED?

MARTIAL LAW & ITS EVENTUAL ROLE IN GLOBAL GOVERNMENT

What is COMMON PURPOSE - and why should you care?

Although it has 80,000 trainees in 36 cities, 18,000 graduate members & enormous power, COMMON PURPOSE is largely unknown to the general public. CP recruits & trains “leaders” to be loyal to the directives of Common Purpose & the EU, instead of to their own departments, which they then undermine or subvert, the National Health Service being an example.

Common Purpose is identifying leaders in all levels of our government to assume power when the British nation is replaced by the European Union, in what they openly call “the post democratic society.”

They are learning to rule without regard to democracy, & intend to bring the EU police state home to every one.

COMMON PURPOSE is also the glue that enables fraud to be committed across these government departments to reward pro EU(ropean) local politicians. Corrupt deals are enabled that put property or cash into their pockets by embezzling public assets.

COMMON PURPOSE in Britain has members in:
- NHS, BBC, the police, the legal profession, the church, many of Britain’s 7,000 quangos, local councils, the Civil Service, government ministries, Parliament.

COMMON PURPOSE controls many RDA’s (Regional Development Agencies). Cressida Dick is the COMMON PURPOSE senior police officer who authorised the “Shoot to kill” policy without reference to Parliament, the law or the British Constitution. Jean de Menezes was one of the innocents who died as a result. Her shoot to kill policy still stands today.

COMMON PURPOSE trained Janet Paraskeva, the Law Society’s Chief Executive Officer. Surprising numbers of lawyers are CP members. It is no coincidence that justice is more expensive, more flawed & more corrupt. And it is no surprise the courts refused to uphold the law, when a challenge was made to the signing of the six EU treaties, which illegally abolished Britain’s sovereignty.

COMMON PURPOSE is backed by John Prescott’s “Office of the Deputy Prime Minister” (ODPM), & its notional Chief Executive is Julia Middleton. The Head of the Civil Service Commission is a member

It is close to controlling Plymouth City Council, where it has subverted the democratic process.
Local people cannot get CP’s corrupt activities published, because the editors of local papers are also in COMMON PURPOSE, & refuse to let journalists publish the articles.

COMMON PURPOSE started in Britain in 1985; in the 1990’s, with its members’ cross departmental influence, it was involved with what then became the disasterous New Millennium Dome Company & the squandering of £800 million; it appears £300m of this was diverted into the web of quangos set up by COMMON PURPOSE. There is a fraud case over this, stalled in the courts thanks to COMMON PURPOSE’s influence in the legal profession.

Over £100 million of UK taxpayer money has been spend on CP courses alone, & its been hidden from the public. Members names are a guarded secret. CP charges substantial figures for its courses.

Matrix for example costs £3,950 plus VAT, & courses for the high flying ‘leader’ can be as much as £9,950 plus VAT. This money is public money, paid by government departments financing senior staff to become agents for COMMON PURPOSE, instead of loyal to their own jobs.

COMMON PURPOSE (Ltd by guarantee, No. 2832875) is registered as charity No. 1023384. It describes itself as being involved in Adult Education.
Given it preys on the rich & powerful, charges expensive fees, & its aims are clearly power & control, its charity status stinks & should be revoked.

Potential COMMON PURPOSE subjects are selected for training.
- Are they susceptible to being converted; are they in the right job, with the right colleagues & friends?
- Do they have power, influence & the control of money?
If the candidate has some, or all of these key attributes, then the local COMMON PURPOSE Advisory Board decides if they can do the course.

COMMON PURPOSE - training our future EU rulers - continued Trained leaders are encouraged to act as a network, enable other members’ plans, & have meetings under the so called Chatham House rules. This effectively means their statements are not attributable to them, nor can attendees reveal information heard at a COMMON PURPOSE meeting.

Council Officers are having secret meetings with, for example, property developer COMMON PURPOSE friends. No agendas & no minutes.
COMMON PURPOSE Graduates from the public quango sectors such as the Regional Development Agencies attend, & have the power to award large sums of public money to projects. It is the worst national example of cronyism, closed contract bids, fraud & corruption. And all is unseen to the general public.

COMMON PURPOSE undermines traditionally effective & efficient government departments with an overwhelming influx of new language, political correctness & management initiatives.
The talk is of empowering communities, vision, worklessness, mainstreaming (sucking EU money into a project to sustain it), community empowerment, working partnership, regeneration & celebrating diversity etc etc.
Documents appear about change, & reorganisation. As CP “leaders” become more senior they employ countless managers & bureaucrats. In time confusion rules, & things don’t seem to work properly. Management decisions are made that seem stupidly destructive. The organisation’s performance becomes sluggish. Undermining the NHS is COMMON PURPOSE’s biggest success so far, with bureaucrats outnumbering hospital staff three to one.

David Cameron, who is pro Europe, used the language of COMMON PURPOSE; he appointed Ken Clarke, the most committed of the pro Europeans, in charge of his “Democracy Taskforce” - rather like putting the cat in charge of the safety of mice.

COMMON PURPOSE specifically targets children from the age of 13, & more recently younger, for special leadership & citizenship training. Yes, it is active in schools, & again, the average parent has no idea.

People have contacted us to speak of their experiences with COMMON PURPOSE or "CP". A common theme is it's all sweetness & light, - until you fail to follow the direction set by the COMMON PURPOSE leadership. Then interesting things happen. Ladies in particular have been bullied at work, some have lost their jobs, some have become paranoid & depressed at the pressure from people ganging up on them.

A typical story is a husband describing the decline in his wife from the time she became a COMMON PURPOSE graduate. Loss of sparkle, enthusiasm, anxious & ‘changed’, she initiated a divorce. Other COMMON PURPOSE people lie when they are challenged as to their involvement.

COMMON PURPOSE candidates are given a two day residential course in which they are ‘trained’ in a closed residential environment, such as a small hotel. They are encouraged to reveal personal information about themselves, such as their likes, dislikes, ambitions & dreams. Discussions are then controlled by the course leaders.
Some participants have likened this to Delphi technique or the application of group psychology such as Cognitive Dissonance or brainwashing.

If you suspect COMMON PURPOSE is active in your organisation, or see a pattern of incredibly bad decisions, money being wasted, notice bullying, fraud, or threats, note the names of those involved (we’ve tracked down over a thousand) & please contact us.
And publish the truth about COMMON PURPOSE as widely as you can.

Brian Gerrish 07841 464187, David Noakes 07974 437097;

http://eutruth.co.uk for action.

The links for the entire video is a series for one interview with Brian Gerrish (broken up into 5 segments on “YouTube”).

I STRONGLY ENCOURAGE ANY READER WHO HAPPENS TO FIND THIS BLOG TO WATCH ALL FIVE.

You will understand more fully what is happening in today's world, to its economy, & the direction of ALL governments – & WHY.

WARNING: It is truly frightening.

COMMON PURPOSE: Exposing The Real Agenda

Brian Gerrish exposing the “COMMON PURPOSE” agenda ... circa February 2009 on Edge Media TV
- in 5 YouTube 10 MINUTE segments


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtzhMvutuvU


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UwE4qS1BZPo


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwc_n-cOzEg


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ty6oJLFJ2IA


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yK5UqvvtICc



A long time ago, many people everywhere began to realize that when the answers that they get to their most fundamental questions are puzzling & make absolutely no sense, they are asking the wrong questions.

Ask a different set of questions, & all of a sudden the “clandestine - now obvious” leaps out at you. However that “now obvious”, carefully cloaked in camouflage, is extremely & seriously unsettling & disturbing.

Even in this modern-day society, which has undergone several decades of “conditioning into a different social paradigm”, most awake people have this eerie feeling that “something is not right” (although they can’t put their finger on it).

Everywhere they look they see society’s infrastructure is falling apart, & no longer serves the needs of citizens.

The brutally hard fact is this – Society is NOT "falling apart, it is being TAKEN apart.

Brian Gerrish, is a former naval officer and anti-submarine warfare expert, who, together with colleagues throughout the country, has conducted detailed research into 'COMMON PURPOSE', this mysterious collective which seeks to by-pass the British democratic system by setting up unelected quangoes with extreme European federalist agendas.
According to Gerrish, there is now almost no strata of the BBC, NHS, local government, police forces, regional structures, armed forces, government departments, communications media & industry, which has not in some way been infiltrated or influenced by COMMON PURPOSE & other related initiatives designed to weaken British sovereignty & increase outside control.

Brian Gerrish states:
"The power of the state has grown dramatically in the last ten years. Spending on Quangoes is now five times greater than the defence budget. To whom or what is this new army of officials loyal? Is there a common ideology driving the transformation of the police forces, public services, local councils, public/private partnerships and other agencies, many of whose officers are members of the 'Common Purpose' organisation?"


Watch this interview, & you will learn HOW & WHY.

If, after watching this interview in its entirety (all 5 segments), you begin to understand, & feel concerned about what is really happening, I would encourage you to distribute this information to everyone you know - to family, friends, & colleagues. (especially UK recipients).

This agenda is unfolding globally – so everyone needs this information.
All of a sudden the many pieces of the puzzle fall into place, & the big picture is clearly visible!

Brian Gerrish discovered Common Purpose when he was involved with a group in Plymouth in the west of England helping people find jobs. One of their projects was repairing wooden boats. He said they had lots of public support & backing from the local authorities & everything was going fine. But then it suddenly changed & the council support was withdrawn. When they tried to continue alone, he said that within a short time key people were being threatened:

‘When we started to explore why we were being threatened we were absolutely staggered to find a very strange organisation called “COMMON PURPOSE” operating in the city. And we were absolutely amazed that there were so many people involved but they were not declaring themselves …
‘[Common Purpose] was operating throughout the structure of the city, in the city council, in the government offices, in the police, in the judiciary. Essentially we discovered what is effectively, at best, a quasi secret society which doesn’t declare itself to ordinary people.’


Further research has led Gerrish to establish that Common Purpose is recruiting & training leaders to be loyal to the objectives of the organisation & the European Union & preparing the governing structure for what it calls the ‘post-democratic society‘ after nations are replaced by regions in the European Union.
‘They are learning to rule without regard to democracy, and will bring the EU police state home to every one of us’, Gerrish says.
Common Purpose ‘graduates’ are increasingly everywhere, as you will see from the partial list at the end of this article.
When the organisation was given an award in 2005 by one of it clients, Newcastle University in the North East of England, it was revealed that among its graduates in that area were:
Michael Craik, Northumbria Police Chief Constable;
Andrew Dixon, Executive Director of the Arts Council England, North East; Glyn Evans, City Centre Chaplain;
Chris Francis, Centre Manager of the Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust;
Anne Marshall, Chief Officer of Age Concern;
Anthony Sargent, General Director of The Sage Gateshead;
Miriam Harte, Director of Beamish Museum;
Sue Underwood, Chief Executive of NEMLAC (the North East Museums, Libraries and Archives Council).

Brian Gerrish has found them to be throughout the government structure with more than £100 million ($200,000,000) of taxpayers money spent on Common Purpose courses for state employees. CP has members in the National Health Service, BBC, police, legal profession, religion, local councils, the Civil Service, government ministries, Parliament & Regional Development Agencies.
The official founder & Chief Executive of Common Purpose is Julia Middleton who in her profile at the Common Purpose UK Website (www.commonpurpose.org.uk) fails to mention a rather relevant fact: she was also Head of Personnel Selection in the office of John Prescott, the Deputy Prime Minister to Tony Blair.
Prescott was the man with responsibility for creating ‘regional assemblies’ around the United Kingdom which are part of the plan to abolish nations & bring their powerless ‘regions’ under the jackboot of the European Union. He has, of course, sought to sell this policy as ‘devolving power to the people’.

Prescott has common purpose with Common Purpose & Julia Middleton because they are all committed to the same end. The European superstate was designed to be centrally controlled & managed at lower levels by bland & brain dead ‘leaders’ who are all programmed to think the same.

This is where Common Purpose comes in.
You can always tell an CP front by its desire to centralise everything & that includes the centralisation of thought. Diversity is scorned, ridiculed and dismissed in favour of a manufactured ‘consensus’.
You will also see the Orwellian Newspeak technique in which the organisation claims to stand for what it is seeking to destroy - Common Purpose says its aim is to develop ‘diverse’ leaders.
The CP as a front always tends to use language that actually says nothing when describing what they do.
When you look at the propaganda for Common Purpose it is bland & without specifics, just as you would expect. So what does this organisation teach its ‘leaders’? You wouldn’t know by reading its blurb, & with its courses costing thousands of pounds it would be expensive to find out. But for sure it will manufacture consensus among its ‘diverse’ clientele.

This is a key technique used throughout society - to manipulate agreement on a range of issues that then become the norm to be defended from all challenge & true diversity. It has been developed by organisations like the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations in London which was funded into existence in 1946 with a grant from the Rockfeller Foundation, one of the global centres for developing the ‘hive mind’ mentality or ‘group & organisational behaviour’. Tavistock works closely with ‘public sector’ (state-controlled) organisations including the UK government & the European Union. The Orwell-speak on its website could have come straight from the pages of Common Purpose. Or the other way round. Jargon is always the language of the junta:

‘Multi-organisational working, cross-boundary working and the global-national-local interface each raise their own set of organisational dynamics which must be surfaced and worked with if collaboration is to be effective. They also raise particular challenges for leadership (and followership). The Institute’s approaches to organisational consultancy and leadership development, based on organisational theory and systems psychodynamics are particularly appropriate for helping organisations to address these complex issues.’

Like working out what the hell all that is supposed to mean.

What we can see is that Tavistock and Common Purpose share the same pod. Both want to develop ‘leaders’ & they do it in the same way by manufactured consensus which then stamps out all diversity by using those who have conceded their right to free thought to the group psyche.

Mind manipulation techniques like Neuro-Linguistic Programming or NLP are also employed in the language employed to engineer consensus.
NLP is a technique of using words to re-programme the body computer to accept another perception of reality - in this case the consensus agreed by the manipulators before their victims even register for the ‘course’. Apparently the CIA refers to these pre-agreed ‘opinions’ as ’slides’. As one Internet writer said:

‘A “slide” is a prefabricated, politically correct, blanket pop opinion, “view” or “take” upon a particular issue of general interest which is designed to preclude further consideration, analysis or investigation of the issue in question. In other words, it is a “collectivised” mental position which is never to be questioned. This is precisely the “product” of the Deputy Prime Minister’s insidious neurological linguistic control programme “Common Purpose”.’

Anyone who resists the programming is isolated & the group turned against them until they either conform or lose credibility to be a ‘leader’. Look at global society in any country & you will see this happening in the workplace, among friends down the bar & in television discussions.

The consensus on global warming has been manipulated to be that carbon emissions are the cause & that anyone who says otherwise is an uncaring, selfish, racist & quite happy to see the planet & humanity face catastrophe. The fact that carbon emissions are not the cause of global warming, but rather follow warming cycles, is irrelevant because the ‘truth’ is what the consensus has agreed it to be.
In short, if you don’t agree with the extreme consensus you are an extremist.

It is the manipulation of consensus that has turned the three main political parties in Britain into one party with their leaders all standing on the same ground. They might offer slightly different policies - and only slightly - but they are all agreed on the fundamentals & this makes elections irrelevant..
The Tavistock Institute has been working this flanker for decades & Common Purpose seems to have the Curriculum Vitae of a Tavistock front. One of the Tavistock founders, Dr. John Rawlings Rees, who also became co-founder of the World Federation for Mental Health, talked of infiltrating all professions & areas of society - ‘Public life, politics and industry should all … be within our sphere of influence … If we are to infiltrate the professional and social activities of other people I think we must imitate the Totalitarians and organize some kind of fifth column activity! The salesmen’ of their perception re-programming (mass mind-control) must lose their identity & operate secretly. We must aim to make it permeate every educational activity in our national life … We have made a useful attack upon a number of professions. The two easiest of them naturally are the teaching profession & the Church: the two most difficult are law & medicine.’

The common purpose of the Tavistock guerrilla war on the human psyche is to wipe clean any sense of the individual and uniqueness because only that way can they impose the global dictatorship & have the masses accept it.
Brock Chisholm, former Director of the UN World Health Organisation, was right when he said:
‘To achieve One-World Government, it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism’.

Enter Common Purpose & its training of ‘leaders’.
If you can get the leaders to think the same, it makes it much easier to transfer that to the general population. Julia Middleton’s organisation, & whoever & whatever else is really behind it, has been making dramatic inroads into British society while it has flown below the radar. It is time we gave it a much higher profile as it goes ever more international.

EXPOSING this agenda is the first step in STOPPING it!
And stop it we all MUST!


NOTE: EQUALLY LITTLE HEARD ABOUT, 'COMMUNITARIANISM' (see also Fabian Socialism) IS AN ADJUNCT TO COMMON PURPOSE, MORE OF A DOPPLEGANGER OF 'COMMON PURPOSE'.

MOST OF THE CURRENT 2009 UNITED STATES ADMINISTRATION & MUCH OF CONGRESS IS COMPRISED OF ARDENT COMMUNITARIANS, WHICH IN SHORT IS A PLAN FOR THE DISSOLUTION OF NATIONS & THE GLOBAL MERGER OF COMMUNIST RULE & CAPITALIST INTERNATIONAL MONETARY SYSTEM, TO BE PRECIPITATED BY AN ORCHESTRATED GLOBAL FINANCIAL COLLAPSE
.

Labels:

Tuesday, August 12, 2008

WATER WARS

WATER WARS:

PART ONE

THE FUTURE OF POTABLE WATER:

WHY CANADIAN GULF ISLANDERS ARE THE CANARY IN THE WATER MINE AND WHY THEY SHOULD HAVE IN PLACE A SPECIFIC VISIONARY BY-LAW TO PROVIDE FOR PREREQUISITE RAIN CATCHMENT SYSTEMS AND RAINWATER CISTERNS AS AN INTEGRAL PART OF CONSIDERATION OF NEW DEVELOPMENTS, BUILDINGS AND ANY AND ALL FUTURE ISLAND HOUSING.

Only a few years ago a mini water war broke out into full fledged finger pointing and accusatory water scarcity backlash behaviour in a less known Bay on a well known Canadian gulf island.
Did anyone elsewhere on island know about it?
Maybe a few.
Probably not most.
When this happened, all it took was for water to go from being taken for granted to becoming scarce, almost overnight.
Part and full time residents living there over at the Bay immediately took on that classic human stance, the first choice of so many otherwise seemingly mature people, namely, blaming others for the problem while disowning their own culpability in not having anticipated its inevitability.
Of course each in turn claimed to be innocent themselves of any water sins of excess.
At the same time, people began to accuse everyone else living around them of taking showers too often, of flushing too many times, of having too many additional guest visitors during the summer.
Things got ugly fast.
Bear in mind that this Bay has very few seasonal rentals compared to most densely populated other parts of the island.
It was already "well" known that saline intrusion had, years earlier, been detected in the Bay's own communal water cistern.
This was to be expected, even if ignored, especially given that any increasing demand for fresh water had already pulled the Pacific Ocean into fresh water wells in too many locations all over the rest of this Gulf Island.

The Bay is not unique when it comes to ignoring warning signs.
Undetectable saline was already known to be present in wells along much of the road near the ferry landing area, for example, back in the late 80's, or even far earlier.
After a fire which burnt down parts of the local pub, it was seemingly already a well known fact, even if at that time ignored, that apparently a compromised septic system was not rebuilt when the buildings which use it were rebuilt.
Even eighteen year ago many already often witnessed the bar water routinely run out in mid summer, at which point the glass washing machines would have to be shut down.
Nothing has changed since then - except for the worse.
Ostriches breed and abound at almost the same rate as do those in search of the effortless deal.

Saline, especially undetectable saline, meaning ocean water intrusion into fresh water wells, is deadly. It is a serious health risk for pregnant women and their children, for creating heart disease and high blood pressure, and really, for anyone, even for pets.
Imagine drinking water and getting more and more thirsty by doing so.
The number of wells which produce saline water after the driller is done and paid might astound most locals living in wilful ignorance or oblivious bliss on island.

However, the real question is this:

Why would the local situation be otherwise?
Any Gulf Island is, after all, a remarkably small land mass with distinct limits.
Such islands tend to be rather similar to an oversized stationary cruise ship. They are by turns buffeted by winter winds and then, after developing amnesia, they then bask in the summer sun. Each is like a mother ship which has, for years, been facing overstrained limits on that island's collective water, with no port in site for a refill, ever.
Does this make any Gulf Island a logical destination for the homeless. Not really. Nevertheless, a policy is in place to encourage just that portion of the population to relocate, a policy which promises to house any uncapped number who take the trouble to pay for multiple ferries. Indeed homelessness is the platform used by at least one local politician to fire up the loyal votes of those inclined toward an effortless deal in a remote setting. The reasoning is that if the islanders build such homes and tax fund them in perpetuity, the most desirable contributors to a community will be certain to line up. Island of dreams: Build it and they will come.

Economic "enhancement" schemes aside, population reduction through people who choose to leave the island would appear to be a mixed blessing in its own right, at least from the point of view of the present limitations revealed by both the results of top expert water studies and by the island's own overview studies of the upper limits of water and sewage vis a vis development.
And that seems to be exactly how at least some often find themselves arriving right back at the lifeboat logic again.
Instead, say, for example, islanders might pursue other options, beginning with developing a true willingness to face the following facts:
It is well past the time to consider a completely sustainable island future while we still can.
Perhaps we need to create new by-laws. Couldn't we consider a by law which demands combining rainwater collection and cultured wetlands septic all in one? How about putting this into a small footprint of densely constructed, collectively attached houses.
Is there some really good reason why this necessary conservation of precious water could not be be built into the future of any consideration of housing construction on that most vulnerable lifeboat itself, Hornby Island, a microcosm of the globe's dilemma?
Call me a voice in the wilderness.
Or is that a voice in the former rain forest which later became another desert? Or write it all off as a voice in the wilderness, doomed to see too far ahead.

Ironically, the aquifers which Gulf Island dwellers do share tend to be over demanded and then they show the first symptoms of running dry on many properties which are those doomsday foretelling small half acre lots, which means only that properties in subdivisions are the first ones to manifest the problems of the future of water which we all face, the problem of exceeding the carrying capacity of the island itself.
Imagine gigantic fresh water taps, in at least several of the average Gulf island's year round densely populated subdivisions, which are turned on and get left open to run non stop, year round.
Well, that seems to be pretty much what we are looking at with island subdivisions.
To add to that problem further, imagine a community which looks the other way, or cries poor or victim when people flush sewage directly into the ground with no septic tank, no septic field, and with absolutely no means to filter either their own wells or those of their downhill neighbours from the bacteria laden filth they dispose of without a second thought.
Welcome to reality. You think you are poor now? Try later when the bill for disease and social chaos arrives.

Interestingly, there also seems to be some kind of will to collectively ignore the following fact about our most densely populated areas:

On at least one Gulf island in particular, there are three criminally small subdivisions (approved decades ago by a gang of politicians in cahoots with a realty comapny for obscene profit) all properties in those subdivisions have in place, part time ONLY recreational residential use ONLY restrictive covenants, which are sitting right there in plain print on the land title document for every property there and elsewhere on island.

Okay, okay, don't shoot the messenger! Don't blame fact finding journalism for awakening Rip Van Winkle.
Why let the most limited thinkers be the ones to drag every else down?
Why not try to solve the problem instead, one ozone water filter at a time,- or by investigating whatever works?

Sure, the realty company and greedy developers had an incentive to subdivide too small lots when selling off properties on this and other Gulf Islands, so they ignored the very problem they knew existed in the first place. They did so by putting that very same restrictive covenant on every proposed subdivision application for the subdivision's approximately half acre properties on this Gulf Island. That is precisely how the rich developers got around the sticky legal problem of knowing that there would not be enough water in the future to supply so many households, once the subdivisions got built out.
That was way back when the realty vendors did the dirty deed for this island.
Now, of course, that gang of indifferent developers is long gone. But are we any different? By that I mean, what about our collective indifference to our own island limits, an attitude which is right here, right now, still alive and growing unwell?

However, lest we too easily dismiss the legal obligation of current property owners to uphold that RECREATIONAL USE ONLY covenant, it is a fact that at least one covenant holding member is also still alive and well.
And, along with every property owner, and every renter, that covenant holding man, too, is responsible for enforcing the legality of the "Recreational Use Only" restrictive covenants for all individual island properties in subdivisions
That means that each and every one of the covenants is still valid.
Did these ever make an iota of difference?
No.
Who is to blame?
Everyone.
Are the covenants ignored?
Of course.
Do those affected first, meaning those in the subdivisions, see it as someone else's obligation to clean up the problem they too created? Probably. How many see it as a situation to be solved individually, by owners? Not many.

The reality is this:
Those covenants mean that those who rent, those who own, and or those who, however temporarily, occupy housing in these three subdivisions are actually in violation of the original intent of the "Recreational Seasonal Use Only" legal covenants on title for on each and every subdivision property on this Gulf Island. Indeed one of the covenant holders is still alive.
And that situation describes a LOT of full time residents.

So much for the meaningful application of a covenant as an environmental or legal tool to prevent exceeding the land's carrying capacity, or pollution, or both.

Granted, on larger acreages this filtration problem does not present the same problem, nor does it become evident when it does, and granted there is naturally more land available to absorb the errors of excess, at least in the summertime.
Does that solve the problem? Not really. It only speaks to the carrying capacity of larger properties exceeding the carrying capacity of tiny ones never intended for full time use.
Still, when one then learns that several subdivisions were long ago privately nicknamed Hepatitis Hill, or that other name of notoriety, Dry G Gulch, it certainly puts a whole new coloration on the emerging problem and whose private responsibility it is or should be for solving this serious situation now, not later.
Of course, this also means that there is a far higher risk of sewage pollution spreading, in several ways.
One way would be through encouraging further year round development.
Another way would be through ignoring further year round demand on the island's carrying capacity, by larger numbers, be it by those who own property and have non paying visitors, by those who rent out existing houses, or by those who own resorts which encourage exceeding the carrying capacity.
It makes little difference to the water table whether the rentals are carried on seasonally or year round.
One larger year round family makes the same demand as weekly large groups do.
In fact, if the off islander ignores the rules they tend to run dry.
Impact for the island as a whole is strictly a feature of the carrying capacity of any individually owned land.
Carrying capacity means water in and sewer out.

Densely populated areas are the first ones to manifest how water is going to become polluted by those who, for whatever reason, do not pump their septic tanks or have none.
The fact is that the water table carries such pollution far and wide during the wettest winter months, not during the summer.
This is when the water table carries failing septic system contents everywhere else.
In summer the ground is parched dry and can then absorb more flushes per household, This does not, however, excuse any landowner permitting the land in question to exceed its own carrying capacity.
But neither is seasonal rental the only way to pollute.
As for summer demands, it would seem that most discover the limits of the water table we all share only when water simply runs dry or gets detectable salt, or both, - just as it did in the Bay.
By late fall sewage excesses have presumably been filtered, if the field has not failed, that is, and the flushed water then returns to the water table, theoretically renewed.
Or so one would hope, since anything we drink comes from the same place into which we flush our sewage.

An international water authority warned these islanders some years ago that they had long ago used up all fossil or old stored aquifer water.
We are, and have been for some time, one hundred percent dependent on rain water renewal.
With climate change, there may even be more rain than ever, but there is also far more water run off into the ocean than there has ever been before.

80% of rainwater runs off. If islanders are lucky, 20% at most is retained.
Hornby is in a negative gain position regarding that most essential resource, fresh water.
None can live without it for more than three days.

Meanwhile, back in the Bay, one of three local "canary subdivisions in the water mine", otherwise "civil" people soon found that tempers flared.
Accusations flew in all directions.
Neighbours turned on formerly friendly fellow neighbours.
Anger mounted.
Then ....
Someone thought to simply raise the foot valve in the Bay Association's communal well.
Since the Bay's "temporary" over demand on the fresh water table had already caused the dangerous intruding salt water to rise even further, it seemed that the only "logical" answer was to raise the pump's foot so that it was once again resting in fresh water.
Salt water, by definition, is heavier than fresh water.
PROBLEM:
Scarce, salty water.
SEEMING SOLUTION:
Raise the foot valve.
Okay, so maybe most also cut back somewhat, at least temporarily, on fresh water usage and also, since use goes unmonitored, most hoped that their neighbours did the same.
And then it all "went away".
End of the Bay's salt water intrusion problem, right?
Well, it would seem that the problem had been solved.
But in truth, had it?
Apparently, this neighbourhood thought so.
Sadly, such may well be an example of about how far ahead the average human thinks or plans, even in a very dry location.

WATER WARS: PART TWO


The Scoop On Poop:

Well, no water story would be complete without a sewage story to round it out, since the two issues are unavoidably intimately linked.

Once upon a time there was a serious hepatitis outbreak on a well known Canadian Gulf island, an outbreak which was then carried off island by those who were served food (this was well over a decade and a half ago) at a makeshift local restaurant. Those who ran the "no cooking on site" restaurant apparently brought home cooked meals and sold these to the seated public.
However, those who had served those same meals to the paying public had handled the food and cleaned up after the patrons without benefit of any running water and with access only to an outhouse with no actual place for them to wash their hands.
The Environmental Health investigating inspector who ultimately closed down this notorious restaurant at that time arrived to close down this operation which was in total violation of the Health Act.
He was confronted by a group of upset restaurant wannabes and their support group. The supporters brought forward a person from the midst of the gathering crowd of protesters. This fellow they said had the natural authority to act as their spokesperson, someone whom they referred as one of Hornby's "deeply respected elders".
The Elder, who shall remain nameless, pulled himself up to his full height and quietly but decidedly informed the Health Inspector that he and his fellow islanders did not "believe" in "the theory of germs".
Apparently soon thereafter Environmental Health, the precursor to VIHA or Vancouver Island Health Authority, unofficially "signed off" on actively pursuing similar Gulf Island health violation issues on this island. Wonder why?
Rumour has it that this was due in part to the the initial protest by locals at that time, those who not only voiced loud objections but insisted that such inspections constituted a draconian form of "persecution" against those whose priorities were such that they simply could not afford to be environmental or even to meet any official health standards at all.
Ironically, although the price tag back then was a mere fraction of the one now, at the rate at which the cost of being environmentally conscientious is rising, that line of reasoning, once considered absurd obfuscation, even if those at the time held intransigently to a world view not informed by science, has a point. It costs money to be conscientious.

In fact, since those simple times, it has become prohibitive to install even the most affordable choice of all, a conventional septic field, let alone to maintain one effectively enough so that it will continue to operate properly.
Consequently, VIHA's standard, while reasonable in theory, in practice creates for some a prohibition mentality and continues to serve as an effective deterrent to any real solution to existing septic violations on island.
Given the risk of being fined, or worse, some people do nothing at all other than hide their untreated sewage.
After that notorious hepatitis outbreak incident, septic pollution complaints were more often than not ignored on this island.
In fact, in reply to those who found escalating faecal coliform counts in their downhill wells and who therefore deemed themselves to be at risk from neighbouring septic leaching and contamination, the Enviro Health took to saying:
"We don't want a witch hunt".
While largely ignoring the subdivision mess already created on the island in question by a certainn realty company's earlier dealings, instead EH tightened up sewage installation standards for future subdivision approval.
Those who did nothing but try to go by the book to install a septic field were subjected to this new "spare field" strict rule. Meanwhile those who were quietly polluting their neighbours drinking water by dumping existing raw sewage into the ground uphill from or in the vicinity of same were simply left to do so.
To some this result might seem like a case of the classic "bottom up" dictatorship of the honest many by the cheating few.
Whatever else it may be, the fact remains that attaching too steep a monetary price to being or becoming domestically environmentally friendly is hardly any true incentive to find a way to live lightly upon the earth without fouling it and making one another ill.

Locally on this island there is plentiful innovative talent, an extraordinary amount of creative thinking which has been applied to legitimising progressive alternative approved septic treatment systems. All are offered choices such as peat moss sewage treatment, cultured wetlands, vegetative filtration systems, closed ozone/ultra violet re-circulating systems, and small treatment plants for condensed septic fields.
The catch, though, is that virtually every environmentally aware approach is far more expensive than a conventional field and can cost $25,000 to $35,000 to install (compared to $15,000 to $18,000 for a conventional field). And that does not take into consideration VIHA's additional requirement that one hire an independent engineer, that is if you want to do anything except install a conventional field (plus a spare field). Even then, you must already own a large enough parcel of land to accommodate the two requisite conventional fields plus leaving enough room for a house and correct distances to a well.

However, when it comes to the owners of such fields taking individual responsibility for our own shit, -er, sewage, it seems we have not come very far.

Maintenance of one's own system, whatever kind it is, remains "voluntary and optional".
Manifest democracy is filled with such counter productive contradictions.
On the one hand, VIHA is a bureaucracy which is obliged to impose on you the obligation to place your septic field a minimum of 100 ft away from anyone else's well, with a distance of 150 feet currently under future consideration, due to increased recent flooding over saturating the soil.
On the other hand, health authorities and/or neighbour each seem to have little power over whether or not those who don't care fail to take precautions and continue to pollute a neighbour's well, - so long as that particular situation pre-exists the new regulations.
Oddly, it does permit one's neighbour to install his well as close as he may so desire to your pre-existing septic field, ... just not the other way around. Anyone who already has had a well drilled thereby legally pre-empts any plans for a neighbour's septic field, if such will encroach in any way.
Of course, on 150 X 150 half acre lots there is already barely enough room for one septic field, one house and one well, let alone for meeting the new standard (which does not apply to existing subdivisions), namely nearly 6,000 sq. ft of space to provide room for two septic fields. One can only suppose that any existing older septic field which fails anywhere in one of Hornby's subdivisions must be reconstructed all over again, probably on the same spot.

A half acre lot is all of 14,400 square feet in total.
This only sounds like a lot of room, that is until you realise that in order for one's well to have potable water it must be an absolute minimum of 100 feet from all surrounding septic fields, from all ditches, all water courses, any and all wells, and all steep slopes, as well as set back from any boundary, including any of these being your own. And then there must still be left over sufficient space and requisite distances for placement of even the smallest of houses.

As mentioned, VIHA's new rules appear to be that every new subdivision development must leave enough room for not only ONE conventional septic field and the attendant land clearing (and potentially tree gobbling) which that normally involves, but for TWO fields, the second one a prerequisite separate "back up" field which must be left fallow and equidistant from the well, to serve as a fallback system when the first field eventually fails.
Less trees, more global warming.
More global warming, more flooding.
More flooding, more septic contamination.
In addition, the rule is that no driveway or structure may be situated either too near to or on top of this 6,000 sq. ft. dedicated sewage area.
This regulation often leads to landowners bulldozing forest land in order to create enough room for two required fields, one dormant.

Okay, so maybe this regulation is supposed to act as a deterrent for controlling future development.
Here is one question, though.
Exactly how would it do so?
Does prohibition stop people from drinking?
Of course not.
Well neither do rigid septic regulations stop people from covertly polluting existing subdivided land and other adjoining parcels.
Only the new applicant pays the price after applying for a permit, and only those with cash to spare can afford to hire an engineer if they want to install an enlightened approach to septic treatment.

Meanwhile, this same island's subdivisions already has more than a few instances of multiple dwellings sitting on half acre lots while exceeding the septic capacity of the original field.
That short sightedness creates an automatic doubling of density without consideration of the land's carrying capacity, while dramatically increasing water demand and sewage out fall on any given half acre lot.
And for those who argue that a Gulf Island can easily afford well planned higher density, first check how other more densely populated locations currently handle their sewage.
The Capital Regional District has plans, certainly, but so far to date still continues to pump its directly into the ocean and has done so for countless decades, well before it grew as large as it is now.

In addition, ... Catch this "22":
Conventional septic systems are known, even in official health circles, as "creeping failure systems".
Even if one flushes the system by "dosing" the exit pipes with high pressure water and/or otherwise maintains the initial exit pipes and/or pumps the two partition conventional septic tank, these still can and do eventually fail or turn anaerobic.
And even if one decides to install a composting toilet in any new island construction, one still must still install two conventional fields, one for back up, whether these are ever going to be used or not.
Yet despite acknowledgement by VIHA that there are indeed better approved treatment systems out there than the conventional one, systems which are low impact and which do not fail if maintained, conventional systems have been the only septic system field sizes permitted by VIHA, in new subdivisions on island, at any rate.

LOOSELY TRANSLATED HERE IS MY TAKE ON THE SEPTIC POLICY:

SOONER OR LATER, A CONVENTIONAL FIELD IS GOING TO FAIL.
THEREFORE, WE WANT ALL FUTURE SUBDIVISIONS TO HAVE TWO OF THEM.
FURTHER WE WILL NO LONGER APPROVE ANYTHING ELSE, EXCEPT ON EXISTING SUBDIVISIONS.
THIS LOGIC DOES NOT APPLY TO EXISTING 25 or 30 YEAR OLD SYSTEMS WHICH MAY ALREADY BE FAILING, NOR TO THOSE RESIDENTS WITHOUT A PUMP-ABLE OUTHOUSE, AND/OR WITHOUT ANY FORM OF GRAY WATER TREATMENT AND/OR EVEN WITHOUT ANY OUTHOUSE AT ALL.

Can you think of an approach to health and the environment which would more effectively cause some people (and yes, we do have them) to hide what they are currently doing, or, more to the point, not doing about their own polluting sewage?
Can you imagine such persons proactively approaching health authorities in search of reasonable solutions if such persons already live in a house without benefit of any septic system?
I wager they'd be more likely to run the other way, if only to avoid inviting in any authority which would have the power to ultimately take away the status quo of the way they are living their lives.
On the contrary, I think the current approach drives people's private sewage behaviour "underground", pardon the pun.

Something must be responsible for the discovery of sudden surges in faecal coliform count out of tourist season, discovered by those dedicated stewardship people at the bottom end of Hepatitis Hill subdivision, but who do you know who openly admits to flushing directly into the ground?

Conventional septic systems, which also treat grey water, create the largest footprint of any system, yet they are considered by VIHA to be as close as it gets to "idiot proof", - meaning even with little or no maintenance they take a long time to fail.
Not to say that they won't fail.
They definitely do.
Just continue to not ever tend to yours, nor maintain balance in, minimise impact on, or ever pump your septic tank and maybe even drop whatever tank killing agent you want into your toilet.
You will soon see how long it takes for a conventional septic tank's exit pipes to clog completely.

Visualise the conventional septic system as analogous to your heart.
Imagine those septic tank exit pipes just as if they were increasingly clogged arteries from years of a poor diet.
Arteries carry oxygenated blood out to the system.
Septic field tanks require oxygen too, to keep cooking and carry on.
If they turn anaerobic (having to do with or caused by anaerobes or by the absence of free oxygen) they stop working.

(A similar analogy holds true for the human heart).

Supposedly, conventional fields are hard to harm and theoretically are designed to last for 30 years.
However, no one seems to be able to confirm if this holds true when they are actively abused or ignorantly neglected.
The conventional approach to sewage disposal is deemed the only choice approved by the "Health Authority", unless, as mentioned, a privately hired engineer becomes involved in the process.

So, to compound the dilemma of making personal environmental choices affordable, while they do have their place, so far the conventional creeping failure system is also far and away the most affordable, as well as being the only one (make that two) system directly approved by VIHA in that specific and until very recently notoriously backward location, at least.

In addition, even if anyone wants to be environmentally conscientious, and can afford the mandatory requirement to privately hire an engineer who will approve an alternative system, they STILL first must get their land approved for two traditional large septic fields anyway!
Only then, I gather, will the health authority step back out of the issue and permit the stamp of approval by yet another authority.
So, not only do enlightened alternative systems cost far more, but on top of that one must be very flush in order to be environmental.
Welcome to Catch 22, the circular logic on which most bureaucracy runs.

Labels:

Saturday, April 05, 2008

INHERIT-DANCE: God Bless The Child That's Got It's Own

THURSDAY, APRIL 05, 2008:
In Celebration Of Cesia's Life And In Honour Of The Sixth Anniversary Of Her Death

'GOD BLESS THE CHILD THAT'S GOT ITS OWN'

"Photographs Don't Know How to Lie"

Those with narcissistic personality disorders, and even just the hopelessly self absorbed, often refuse to grasp the simple truism above, especially once their parents pass on, at which point some, (though not all), siblings may set about attempting to rewrite their own family history, painting it in a new and more personally favourable light.
Place the average family album next to the average challenged estate’s legal documentation.
Then compare the pictures to the the legal accusations.
Pull back from any distracting emotive facade.
Ignore anything from whining to righteous arrogance.
All of this tends to surround estate litigation procedures, despite the inherent clichés about same which abound.
If any potential inheritor decides to have a closer look, and if they are even remotely perceptive, they will soon find that there is often a distinct discrepancy between some of the verbal "he said/she said" historical revisions and any actual underlying story which is readily revealed by a decade or two of documentation, specifically and especially through family photos, that quintessentially undeniable record of family history and accurate indicator of the degree of health or dysfunction of certain family relationships.
Observe which family member tends to invariably be self possessed, and calm or even relaxed and smiling in virtually every photo. Then observe which person in the many photographs more often than not looks sullen or insecure, or both.
Take a moment to perceive which participants in various family photos appear to be gregarious by nature versus those members who appear withdrawn.
Note who it is who seems to glow or looks healthily integrated within the family structure, or, who is clearly doted upon as the darling baby of the family, or, who is held the closest, who is strong and sturdy, or who may by the one with little or no real connection or contact or reciprocity, or even if touched at all may yet appear as if disconnected from the rest.
Sometimes this scene will replay over and over again in picture after picture, until a theme soon emerges for those willing to invest the time to be analytical.
The entire story of any family is all right there for the asking, right in plain sight in most any family photo album. Given even only the most amateur knack for photoanalysis, the truth of the family pecking order soon readily surfaces, all on its own.
Words can lie, since certain people, especially those who are all too quick to righteously go on the offensive, can and do try to legally revise the truth in their own favour, particularly after the fact, for instance when a particular deceased parent or parents can then no longer set the record straight.
Nevertheless, countless dozens of well taken pictures which have been faithfully recorded over the course of many years will serve as a living document, one which cannot successfully hide the truth of any family's real dynamics, dysfunctional or otherwise.
Rarely, however, is any immediate or even any extended family all that interested in learning this truth.
Family secrets, no matter how terrifying or ugly or squalid, are apparently supposed to implicitly stay just that, secrets.
In fact, the truth of any family matter is usually the first item to suffer the ravages of attrition, especially as soon as any estate battle ensues.
These days, it would seem, so entangled with their own self image are so many growing numbers of ageing narcissists, so often so righteous and dogmatic even while so lacking in perception and empathy are they about anyone other than themselves, that the more self centred the family member is the more often they usually ignore the rest, unable or unwilling to comprehend or to care about anything except, perhaps, finally being recognised at long last as the star of the show, as the "only child", perhaps deserving of special recognition, the chance to restore the mantel as the "first born" or the "baby", either who was for far too brief a time an only child, or who colelcted all the dotage by being the last to arrive, and in either case who therefore feels they are now deserving of extra entitlement, if only after the fact of death itself.
In these situations, everything which is said by those who were spawned during the parent indulging "me generation", and everything which such narcissist prone types tend to do, seems to be driven exclusively by sheer self indulgent, and certainly wilful projection, rather than, just for example, being shaped by any real capacity for perception or any desire or motivation to facilitate revelation of any less than attractive truths.

Even the closest of families will soon be smashed to smithereens once things go legal in ensuing battles over wills and estates.
And if a given family was never close in the first place, the existing divide all too soon becomes a yawning, unbreachable and horrifically costly chasm.
The rule of thumb is this, that lawyers are the only real winners, defendants never win, they only lose by measurable degrees, and even the winnings of plaintiffs are often pyrrhic in nature.
The game, by design, is meant only for those with very deep pockets.
Pyrrhic victory, by definition, is a victory won at too great a cost.
Therein lies human tragedy, coiled at the root of the all too human condition, as Shakespeare, Dickens, Twain and so many others have amply illustrated.
And few learn such lessons the easy way.

Once, a few years ago, I was sent a link for a site called Family Fight.

http://www.familyfight.com/canadian/email_us.htm

After perusing the countless variations on a theme which tend to repeat themselves throughout family estate battle stories posted on that eye opening site, one thing did become abundantly clear.
In the average family group, running the gamut from the mildly conflict ridden to the hopelessly dysfunctional, meaning any family comprised of more than one potential inheritor, one thing tends to hold true most of the time: Whomever it is who assumes the often complex, arduous, even relentlessly exhausting and often thankless task of serving as the caregiver for elderly parents, or whomever it is who is delegated by the others less willing the primary responsibility for that family's ageing parents, in whatever manner, the following almost seems to be a given: This will be the very same person who often later becomes the target of fellow inheritors, specifically those who may have considered hands on care of their parents to be a low priority, either not at all or usually not until either a year or so before, or sometimes only just before, or even only after their parents’ deaths.
Invariably those who had choices, yet who also abdicated responsibility during most or all of the later years of those same parents, will be precisely the first ones to deflect from their own lifetime of selfish demands or non involvement.
At that point revisionist history kicks in. Then and only then they tend to distract from their own selfishness by going on the legal offensive, either before, during, or right after the will reading time draws nigh. Count on it, no matter how fairly and evenly drawn up that same will may be.
If lifetime bequests have been given to those same ones who go on the offensive, such that in the end all receive equally, this too will be conveniently forgotten and those who have received years before will go after any chance of additional gravy.
If everything from years on end of support checks throughout adulthood to parental payment of repeat tuitions for career shcolars was gifted, or even loaned and never repaid, all of this parental philanthropy (or guilt) may later be redefined as being rationalised as entitlement, rewritten as the very least that the parents could have done and having no bearing whatsoever on the estate division.

Conversely, and perhaps in inverse ratio, it would seem, those who do NOT involve themselves directly in day in and day out care for (and occasionally those who do not even care about) their declining parent or parents, particularly those who are conspicuously absent except for the bi-annual visits, even if only until just before the parents' final decline, will often suddenly appear to have a burning desire to express a sudden renewed interest in their parents well being, usually not long before any approaching "deathwatch" ensues.
After the final one of both parent dies, such absent potential beneficiaries will then proceed to try everything in their power to wrench away any fair share of any inheritance or estate from the those whom they nevertheless expected to selflessly bear the protracted burden of parental caregiving as if it had been the obligation of one child alone.
Then too, the parent may be astute enough to only trust one of their children to do the job well or at all. As for later, parents too can be selfish and may prioritise the importance of their own carefar above any later legal or sibling dilemma which settles upon of those whom they ask to care for them
Only the very exceptional parent knows each one of their children well enough to effectively anticipate the potential for this grasping scenario after their death.
Only the most shrewd and savvy parent is realistic enough to take it in hand legally and strategically, while they are still able to do so.
Such an insightful parent may well clarify their final wishes in detail, theoretically making everything indisputably clear. They may well leave with their lawyer all necessary records of intent, documented in unequivocal and legally sound terms, and may well have a record of all anticipated problems placed on file well ahead of that inevitable day of final departure.
However, even if such a parent is exceptionally perceptive and even if they do take care of estate business extraordinarily well, such preventive actions will still do little to prevent what is effectively a later reenactment of rivalrous resentment in the form of a harassment suit, often as not an attempt by other siblings after the memorials are said and done to shift deceirful debate out of any public arena and into a more private, judicial forum, in an attempt to threaten and to to dead-end sibling opposition.
After the death of a final parent, a legal action may then be initiated with the conscious intent to break both the will and the wallet of the targeted sibling, meaning the defendant(s), even if this action is admittedly undertaken as an unsubstantiated bluff.
This whole process tends to then rapidly become an exceedingly ugly, often deeply harmful war zone, one in which the actual target, even if this is never admitted, is the revision after the fact of that family's own true history, and even if the actual agenda which fuels the greed of a given plaintiff(s) may be a neurotic, desperate need to rewrite their own now starring role in the family play, to completely revise and reinvent that family history itself, - if only after the fact.

I call it "She/he loved ME more".

And make no mistake, this chapter in itself can become sibling rivalry’s final death struggle.
It can be an all too lethal, deadly war, as indiscriminate in its intended damage as a nuclear bomb dropped from a great height.
If such an attack does not actually kill the defendant(s), it usually is designed and intended, at very least, to threaten and to permanently maim the target.
Worse yet, those who attack may disguise their true intentions and may often deflect whkle they whine to all in sundry, telling lie after lie, all the lies now very believable, even to themselves.
If this legal agenda later fails, ironically, the entire process, while gruelling, may occasionally even strengthen the defendant(s), with the plaintiff who intitiates the litigation threat sometimes achieving only the all too slim, grim satisfaction of maiming without self gain, even if inadvertently.

Still, there are no real winners in this kind of replay of childhood history, unless winning is about learning life’s lessons through pain.
Every conceivable underlying residual resentment will often be reenacted at great soap operatic length, no matter how foolish, wilful, lie filled, deluded, fanatical or malicious is the position of the one(s) initiating such action. Defendants will learn the hard way that the law often has as little taste for the truth as does the litigant, that documentation can be irrelevant, that proof means little, that to have attacked first might well have been the only way to avoid later being libelled without recourse.

All of this hate fest will unfold while the meter ticks away at $250 to $400 legal dollars for every single professional hour involved. Remember to double that figure when one considers the cost is the only real equality, the same for each side, whther willing involved or involved by force. Whether or not each of the participants is willing or unwilling, more often than not the seige continues for many years on end, including endless detentes and expensive legally technical moves and counter moves, as nauseum.

And lest you think that this is a deadly serious game indulged in only by those who can afford to play, think again.

On top of that, many a plantiff may have spent half a lifetime wheedling, whining and and begging parents, may have even coerced and abused a guilt ridden parent who felt alienated into giving the one they least cared for endless advances on their own "living" inheritance. Or, conversely, they may have doted on one, feared another, and asked the one they favour to pay the ultimate price by taking care of them.

Many a plaintiff may have failed to admit or will "forget" that they borrowed heavily against their parents’ estate all their lives. Yet they will later conveniently leave out this same fact, once they are later faced with the reality of receiving after death what they now may righteously deem to be "too small" an inheritance, when that which is left from the remainder of that same estate they earlier savaged now is their remaining due.

In some instances, the battle itself may be carried out over who thinks who else deserves a few sentimental mementos, with or without the cash reward included.
Nevertheless such litigants often seem more than willing to spend far more than they would ever have inherited on their all too eager lawyers who know they will be the only real beneficiaries of these ugly, greed driven attacks by the self sentred against their own siblings.
The story is as old as Cain and Abel.
It goes without saying that encouraging the participants to engage in a protracted fight, showing them how to attack one another and reduce the estate like wild Mexican curs snarling over a tiny piece of meat, still works wonders for any lawyer's bank account, even if done on a contingency basis.
Some plaintiffs do not care.
These ones tend to be relentless and may be unashamed that they have engaged in a spite suit. They may even say " Better that my lawyer gets her money, rather than my sister (or brother) benefiting". And they may well really mean this, no matter how petty and childish this sounds.

Perhaps such litigation may be intended to get back at an life long envied sibling rival, perhaps aimed at one who received what the envying one deemed to be undeserved, finite attention.

Often such litigation will be carried out over what is tantamount to pocket change, or less.

If, as is common, a certificate of pending litigation is first placed on the title of the home of the defendant(s), this too effectively give3s the appearance of threatening a folow through lawsuit which the plaintiff often knows full well from the start will never materialise. Still, this action will sometimes be how the plaintiff's bluff is carried out for years on end, no matter what the cost.

Why is this kind of tragic, greed driven destruction so prevalent?
T’was ever thus.
An ancient ego driven destructive streak has always led one or more offspring, etc., to devour in this manner a third sibling, for example, seemingly over money, but more likely it will be over festering sibling rivalry, unresolvable inatiable envy, and just plain greed.

Often legal action may be brought on solely for base, venal reasons.
Or perhaps a plaintiff, even one who has suffered a lifetime of wilful alienation from a rejected parent, may be suffering from a narcissistic personality disorder which tends to spin wildly out of control.

Still, one has to ask at some point, what kind of profligate, credit card driven, debt ridden, overextended existence does it take to feed that kind of self justified desperation and transform it into such damaging aggression against some soon to become "former" family member?

How many sound, long lasting marriages and/or the health of defendants so attacked are then destroyed by protracted legal battles, often beyond all hope of repair, by just such actions from those who themselves may have been the author of a succession of their own financial failures, even though they were the cause of their own undoing, or such a lawsuit threat may be precipitated by those who may have failed to hang on to even one successful marriage themselves?

How many loved ones of defendants suffer such acute distress that it results in a heart attack, - or worse?

What does this kind of conflict do to the long term health of defendants? Do the plaintiffs as litigants even care? Or does the mercenary count the cost?

How is spending more money in the pursuit of less money any kind of logical way to live?
And if so, what in hell is the question?

More to the point, what kind of pathetic fool so little understands the nature of the law itself that they obstinately implement what is often tantamount to a self defeating spite suit?
The proof that the agenda is one of spite, not justice, may often be as simple as this:
In many cases, (for instance on familyfights.com), the players invariably seem all too willing to destroy not only all any good will and hope of future trust but any and all hope of future communication. Additionally, as mentioned, the other proof of spite is that the plaintiff(s) often appear more than willing to forfeit a greater sum than the amount of any final inheritance they would have ever hoped to gain, had they not given in to arrogance and self righteousness in the first place.
Sometimes, it only seems as if they get swept away, while in reality they may simply be dogmatically intent on winning at any cost.
They may be pretending to the world that they, and they alone, are miraculously in a position to second guess the original written intent of their own deceased parent(s), after the fact, parents whom they may suddenly proclaim to have been intimate with, a lifetime of historical evidence to the contrary notwithstanding.

"Fighting over the sugar bowl" is now a thriving legal industry, mostly driven by boomers, with or without benefit of a sustainable bank account to fund it.
Worse yet, in B.C. which is one of the most notorious for the ease of so doing, under the Wills Variations Act absolutely anyone can become easily empowered and is effectively encouraged to second guess the original intent of their own provably compis mentis parents, sometimes by arguing that what the parent(s) said and wrote in detail is somehow not at all what they really meant, or that even if they did so knowingly it must be because they were coerced, or abused, (though, of course, never by the righteous plaintiff(s)) or both ... or whatever.
Not all that amusingly, what becomes most evident as the years of legal harassment continue on is that there is a distinct pattern the repeats itself wherein the more coercive and/or parentally abusive such plaintiffs tend to have been toward their parents and even toward a sibling while they were still alive, the more likely they will be to protest too much, to later argue that their parents were, for example, the abuse victims of arguably non abusive, caregiving siblings, those who actually did the looking after of the parent(s), those who sacrificed to do so, sometimes during many prime years when the plaintiffs were often conspicuous by their absence, rarely visiting their parents for most of the time for all those interim years prior to that parent's death.

B.C. law itself is so intentionally equivocally written and so non definitive that it is rife with expense generating technicalities which line lawyers pockets, through time extensions, settlement fees, variations for altering the intent and extent of various liens, countless mounting fees for everything from paperwork to changed dates, for endless appeals and counter appeals.
It is the main business of the law to cater to these kinds of idle threats, to encourage protracted and costly delays, irrational detentes, and conflict ridden escalations. All of this is intended to make rich bread and fat butter for many a litigation lawyer who is more than willing to step in and become the only real inheritors of sibling rivalry fuelled estates. In fact, it is not ever lost on the legal profession that the more dysfunctional the litigant the more the lawyer(s) stands to gain.
If one were, instead, to make it compulsory beforehand to measure the emotional I.Q.s involved in being plaintiffs who make empty but expensive years of pending threats of a lawsuit against a sibling, one might well find that this kind of common sense, practical intelligence is woefully lacking.
Yet this is happening more and more often on behalf of the same generation which thinks itself so exceptional, so superior, and brilliant beyond all measure.
How 'smart" is that, really?
If all of this cannot serve the reader as a well meant example, then let it at very least serve as a terrible warning.
As for the up side?
It is a an expensive but occasionally offers relief as a satisfying way to rid oneself of oppressive family members. At very least, such actin certainly can give fresh new meaning to that legally reassuring fallback, a restraining order,
the most expensive yet often necessary final wrap up document of all.

Labels: