Why is there a Corporate-Media Complex Sponsored Police Prison State?

Through subliminal programming embedded in the product of the entire 'corporate-media complex', everything necessary for guided modern living is instilled: not just how to behave in a prison state. Its sum is indoctrination of the finest quality - nothing happens by accident, if it happens you can bet it was planned that way.

So if it is planned this way: what is the plan? The plan cannot just be for a 'police/prison state', as that alone is a pointless, non-productive, endeavour. The fact is: if the police are not held in check, they will enter this cycle of 'absolute power corrupting absolutely'. That alone does not serve a greater purpose, true it will happen if not kept in check, but in isolation it will rapidly become detrimental to the state as a whole. At a critical point, the whole state will be seen as having become unnecessarily onerous whereas it may, in fact, be that only the police have become 'careless' and oppressive to no good aim other than for their supposed own ends and foolish interpretation: of just being a club for bullies and for apparently achieving optimal policing effectiveness.

There must be more to 'the state' allowing its police to be become oppressive than just simply failing to prevent runaway oppressive police standards. To my eyes, the day the 'worm turned' was when in 2007 University of Florida student Andrew Meyer was assaulted and Tasered by campus police whilst he was poignantly questioning Senator John Kerry at an official student Q&A session. It was a disgraceful for such an inappropriate use of force to take place in the presence of this ex-Presidential candidate and for him to have not fiercely reacted at the time, or subsequently, to this violent infringement on legitimate discourse.

I say the ever worsening levels of police oppression and their apparent unaccountability is a symptom of the ever burgeoning tyranny at the core of government. Plato wrote: The secret of freedom lies in educating people, whereas the secret of tyranny is in keeping them ignorant. The corporate-media complex not only normalises the actions of the police but obfuscates the illegitimacy and corruption that is at the very heart of 'the state'.

Prism Planet

Anyone to which this flap over Prism is a surprise is, frankly, naive and ill-informed.  The only news to me was being introduced to this new name.

Five Eyes SIGINT or ECHELON has been known to exist for decades and was the feature of a European Parliament report back in 2001 where the threat of industrial espionage is understood as paramount. It is clear that every action on every phone and web based system, across the world, is possible to have been subject to intercept and likely subject of analysis.

 See: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//NONSGML+REPORT+A5-2001-0264+0+DOC+PDF+V0//EN&language=EN

The technical possibilities remain unknown but it is evident that these systems employ super-computers of gigantic capacity capable of robotic artificial-intelligence analysis of all interactions and associations, including geographic, to seek-out correlations of interest and so identify subjects for closer observation and deeper analysis.

It is also clear these automated systems have the same ability to examine actual communications content, including spoken, on a wide and random scale to further identify and analyse targets of interest.

Whilst it is comforting to think this is only done to protect society from extraordinary threats it is evident even from the synopsis of the EU report, sighted above, that this system is prospectively used for a far wider mode of operation than that: ranging from industrial espionage to the political subjugation of other sovereign states.

But rather than the EU acting to curtail these activities the closing remarks of their 2001 report demonstrates no less than a jealousy and a desire to form the same system or to even integrate and share.

See P192 - 12. The EU's external relations and intelligence gathering

So I would ask the question (but do not anticipate an answer):  How deeply involved is the EU with Prism and indeed does it benefit from the intelligence derived, especially in relation to the EU member state's sovereign governments?

Whilst for the US to risk allowing the intelligence services of each and every EU member state to draw from the intelligence and analysis they derive from their vast network is improbable it is more likely a focused EU intelligence service would be considered a less risky partner to develop.

Once all the tools desirable to a draconian and authoritarian state have been put into place all that remains is for that state to arise, to become evident, when resistance will have be made all-but imposable.

My view on YouView

"YouView will be everything you've ever wanted from TV in one easy-to-use box: Freeview, catch-up TV, High Definition and a personal video recorder (to pause, rewind and record live TV). It means the programmes you love will be ready to watch whenever you want. Simple."

 Telegraph:

Lord Sugar blow over YouView delay

It was supposed to revolutionise the way we watch television, blazing onto our screens in 2010 and doing for every broadcaster what the iPlayer has done for the BBC.

I am confused. How technically difficult is the YouView objective to achieve? Not so very me thinks.

I think there is a sub-plot behind the endless delays that is more about not being accused of launching a platform that is so easy, agreeable to the public and focal of free content that it all but corners and stifles the market. Pay to view and cable content providers can see the monster on the horizon. A platform that works, that is stuffed with free content and potentially provides an open pathway to each and every independent provider will kill 9/10th of their lucrative captive market.

YouView is the BBC: disguised in the outfits of its slowly dying terrestrial broadcast mates. Sky begrudgingly appeared at the table late on and apparently declined to join-up, but until the News International Murdoch 'phone hacking' debacle reaches its termination and the wooden stake is finally hammered home, they will not risk a launch; for fear it will all end-up in court where the international media power players may well then rule the day.

Between times they will stall even at the apparent cost of market share: if only because by allowing the market to commence and develop they cannot stand accused of monopolising and stifling it from the outset.

Perhaps the show will get smartly onto the road when it is clear the last nail has been hammered home to the door of the Maxwell Black Murdoch family mausoleum.

Fat little worms sitting in a tin - the time is nigh

In matters of 'hacking'.  However hard it looks like this shower will all eventually come tumbling down, police, press and government, I suspect there remains a can of really big juicy worms that will never be opened. That can is tucked away on a top shelf out of view. The one being kicked down the street, for all to wonder and gloat at, is a decoy.

Just one of these fat worms is hinted at with a story in The Sunday Times: ‘Apps spy on phone messages’ (which you cannot access without a subscription).
But the gist of it below is at this link : http://www.theweek.co.uk/daily-briefing/45566/ten-things-you-need-know-today-sunday-26-feb-2012
3. PHONE APPS SPY ON MESSAGES
Companies, including Facebook, are using smartphone apps to spy on users’ phone messages and gather information about their lives. A Sunday Times investigation also found that some apps can access users’ internet history which is transmitted to third party advertisers, while other apps can remotely control a phone’s camera.

My reading of the publication of this item is to set the ground for if and when it comes out that Screws Indigestible has been doing a lot more than just hacking mobile answer-phones or even computer e-mail. It is to say ‘look folks; everybody’s doing this stuff, its not really so bad and scary. It's the new normal’.
See here an idea of what else is possible when actually 'hacking' mobiles: http://eubrainwashing.blogspot.com/2011/07/more-to-phone-hacking-than-accessing.html

But the effect of such revelation still has the potential to be devastating for NI and the Mudoiks.

The can chock full of juicy worms could well go deeper still. That would be who helped, who allowed powers reserved for the highest levels of police investigation and state security to be usurped for ‘third-party’ surveillance. Surveillance not only of a meaningless celebrity’s toilet habits but such that could compromise national security and those in positions of real power and authority. And yet deeper; is it only the news rooms of NI that benefited from such knowledge and leverage that may have resulted or could this spying network have a darker beneficiary than just pennies on a news-stand.

Trust that such would not occur, just because it should not occur, is misplaced.

Who Pays Charon ?

In August 2009 James Murdoch spoke at the Edinburgh International Television Festival saying:

"In this all-media marketplace, the expansion of state-sponsored journalism is a threat to the plurality and independence of news provision, which are so important for our democracy," and "As Orwell foretold, to let the state enjoy a near-monopoly of information is to guarantee manipulation and distortion"

From about this point in time the 'phone hacking' issue has become harder and harder to keep in the long grass.



My reading is James Murdoch does not have the blessing enjoyed by his father. He is having his wings clipped. He is being chastised.

And there are useful messages that can be transmitted from this unfolding series of events, such as: there is a difference between a mogul and a maverick.

On the 29 March 2004 the Guardian ran a 'joky' item revealing Evelyn de Rothschild was at the Department of Culture, Media and Sport on the day candidates were being interviewed for the post of BBC chairman.

The BBC is blessed by the real ruling oligarchy, whoever that may be. The BBC is one of the most effective tools in the elaborate mechanisms of control. Trust in the BBC is paramount, both domestic and international, its credibility must never be brought into question; especially by one of such news-media standing. Calling the BBC "state-sponsored journalism" and casting its lack of "independence" to be a threat to "plurality and democracy" is a sin. And worse; using the 'Orwell' word in connection to the BBC, highlighting its 'near-monopoly of information' as being a 'guarantee' of 'manipulation and distortion' could not be allowed to remain unpunished.

Far from the BBC having the monopoly on information, it is the Maxwell organisations that has the international spread and keeping them under check is important to the elite too. Too much power in any pair of hands is not to be allowed. No invitations to the high table are granted.

This is a trial of strength. That does not mean the Maxwells (oops I mean Murdoch) will spend the rest of their days breaking rocks in Dartmoor. They will, though, be broken, whipped, pilloried and left to the scavengers as an example to whoever else thinks they hold a whip hand, who are careless with their granted powers and wealth or who think they can trample upon the labyrinthine and win.


Of cause, I do not doubt such a news empire has cupboards full of skeletons which many, on the rungs of power and authority, know of and fear revelation. It patently looks that this is why two UK governments, and their police, have strived to bury and minimise the affair. They are all implemented, deeply I have no doubt, and if the case expands to its full potential its destructive force will be unprecedented. In comparison Watergate will look like a washout.

The press will lose its confidence and power for any meaningful investigation and will instead just publish simple reiteration of the news agencies output.

From time to time, our glorious masters believe, the pack must be shuffled. Predicting the exact order of play is hard but, if they do not like the hands against which they play, they can keep causing a shuffle, again and again.

The outcome of this shuffle may include the end of the UK as it is absorbed into the EU as a series of regions, its economy shattered, the credibility of its government and law enforcement irrevocably discredited. Indirect collateral damage may be unintentional but it is also inconsequential. More likely it is also included in the plans or even is at the core of the plan.

Wiki, wiki, little bat! How I wonder what you're at.

I have noted over the last few weeks that Jimmy "Jimbo" Wales, of Wikipedia founding fame, has been prominently fronting a Wikipedia campaign seeking donations on a header added to every Wikipedia entry I have looked at. As the 'fountain of all knowledge' perhaps he has had the foresight and happy timing to clarify resoundingly that Wikipedia is NOT WikiLeaks and that he is NOT Julian Assange.

Julian Assange may appear to be being dragged around the floor as revenge for WikiLeaks' recent and ongoing US diplomatic cable leaks but these rape allegations have been ongoing for over three months - although he clearly appeared to be no friend of the US administration since before then too. Is Assange a victim of reprisal false allegations or honey trap?

Nothing WikiLeaks revealed yet has looked like a knock-out blow to this US administration or to its Bush/NeoCon predecessors. Indeed nothing has greatly tarnished the US diplomatic service or whispered squat-diddle of its uglier underbelly - the CIA. Funny that!

In a world of smoke and mirrors I would ignore the relevance and veracity or these cables or selection thereof. Even Assange's lawyer admitted on BBC News-Night that WikiLeaks were being careful to 'redact' details that may damage individual's security. (who, one may wonder, are they troubling to lookout for; Americans or everybody).

Bitter pills they may appear to be but every cable leaked so far can be seen also to assert the US view on the world, mostly at the expense of other leaders and nations.

If these documents had found their way directly into the hands of say a UK National newspaper they may have been resistant to publishing them. Now they know it would meet with the wrath of the US.

If independent news media publishers are confronted with leaked information to publish or whistle-blower's information, they too have now seen the writing on the wall. Indeed the US will use this episode to help them justify tighter controls of the internet.

As Franklin D. Roosevelt is attributed to have said "In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way."