Where's the fire? The phoenix?

Just when I think Obama can't surprise me any more, he goes and does it again. Just when you think it's all dead on done, along it comes in the news again like a "phoenix rising from the ashes". If you click on the link above, you read the article saying that Obama has declared a state of emergency because of the 1000th death at the hands of H1N1. However, you have to also ask yourself why the most powerful man in not only America, but the rest of the world, is talking about emergencies when just as many people die on roads in a typical week in the same country? Why then the "crisis mode" approach? The "situation room" stance? Why the focus on emotive and reactive words like "national emergency"?

For those who've read earlier blog entries by me, this is part of another hidden agenda - just another way of keeping the H1N1 thing in the news so that when the second wave of flu deaths occurs,they'll be able to get even more people to take the vaccines; chemicals that are largely untested and if anything like the Flu Epidemic of 1976, deadlier than not taking them at all. The primary lesson learned back then was that inaction to the flu outbreak really was better than action where the latter resulted in unnecessary deaths. If you don't believe me, read other posts from my blog which are referenced and read about how many doctors on both sides of the Atlantic have refused to not only administer the vaccine, but also refused to treat themselves or their families with it either.

One more thing, always be wary of governments when they decide to bypass normal regulation as evidenced in the following information from the article as above:

"However, the White House said that declaring an emergency was a largely precautionary step aimed at allowing medical officials to bypass certain federal regulations in the event of a genuine disaster."

How interesting! This is also significant:

"White House officials say the move was similar to precautions taken by coastal areas before a hurricane. "As a nation, we have prepared at all levels of government, and as individuals and communities, taking unprecedented steps to counter the emerging pandemic," Obama wrote in the declaration that he signed late on Friday night."

Isn't this eerily reminiscent of what happens in Naomi Klein's "Shock Doctrine" book? A major shock comes along (H1N1?) and while we are all busy dealing with the major event, certain things are taking place in government (bypassing certain laws?) in order to reinstate a new world order. You can think of it in Hegelian terms and how Hegel believed history advances i.e. in three stages like a syllogism:

thesis - causes of both world wars

Stage one: thesis possibilities:
- rise of excessive nationalism/fascism/communism
- rise of leaders like Hitler, Stalin & Mussolini
- all use expansionist tactics to invade weaker countries - war

Stage two: anti-thesis - UK, USA et al bind together, form pacts to fight the war:
- to fight fascism, communism -
- stop expansionism
- ultimately to stop these leaders

Stage three: syn- thesis - creation of pacts/agreements/international bodies:

- creation of European Union (single currency, ECHR)
- League of Nations (now NATO)
- creation of treaties e.g. Treaty of Rome, Treaty of Lisbon,

This was done so that we could all have Peace in Our Time as Mr. Chamberlain famously said. What's interesting is that when we reach the third part of the tripartite system, there is a new order created out of the ashes of the old one like our proverbial "phoenix rising from the ashes".

BMW? BOMFOG? WTF?

This is a fantastic website with so many great ideas encapsulated in different word forms e.g. initialisms, acronyms, and general abbreviations.

Here are a few of my favoutites:

BOMFOG

Brotherhood Of Man (under the) Fatherhood Of God. Paternalistic - and thoroughly patronising - expression of traditional values still held by many, including some who lead us. Accepting modern politically correct adaptations, BOMFOG attitudes typically sit snugly alongside the marginalisation of women and all other historically brow-beaten groups. Nowadays more importantly, BOMFOG thinking undermines humankind's independence and development. Nigel Rees, the commentator and language expert refers to BOMFOG as an acronym for a pompous meaningless generality. This interpretation - and the wider implications of BOMFOG - have a very relevant modern resonance with a certain arrogant deluded leadership style (akin to Theory Y, but altogether more deeply insidious) that we often see in the western world, which seeks to suppress and control all good and honest folk - people like you and me, capable of mature independent thoughts and actions of far greater purity and truth than those exhibited by our leaders, supported incidentally by much of our media. Leadership - and government, and any organized system - should be a force for genuine individual aspiration and emotional maturity. Regrettably however many sorts of leadership - especially of significant scale - eventually degenerate into control, manipulation, sham, and BOMFOG principles. By the way the term BOMFOG is linked most famously with certain very grand quotes attributed to the Rockerfellers (Nelson and John D) around the mid 1900s, generally pronouncing how a new world can be established, based on their own (superior, western, 'enlightened') view of life, and the assumption that holding such a view somehow includes the right to impose it on others. Sounds familiar?...

BMW

Bitch, Moan and Whine/Whinge. Behaviour that can be exhibited by a group when stressed, demotivated or unhappy with their situation. Also a common subject area in meetings where the purpose and facilitation perhaps requires a more a positive focus or perspective. (Ack Denise) If you are a manager or team leader and ever find yourself having to handle a BMW session, give the group encouragement, responsibility and suitable freedom to identify and pursue constructive response, change and improvement. Focus on positive response rather than blame. Here are a couple of helpful quotes in this connection: "You have a choice whether to be part of the steam roller or part of the road.." (unknown) and "If you're not part of the solution you must be part of the problem.." (the commonly paraphrased version of the original quote: "What we're saying today is that you're either part of the solution, or you're part of the problem.." by Eldridge Cleaver 1935-98, founder member and information minister of the Black Panthers, American political activist group, in a speech in 1968). More relevant motivational quotes are on the quotes page. BMW is also interpreted in some police circles (ack P&J) as Break My Windows, being a reflection of the car make's tendency to attract envious attack, either through envy or because the mark is a favourite among gangsters who attract aggressive attentions. Additionally (ack Ed P) BMW is interpreted to form other ironic meanings such as the somewhat offensive Built by Migrant Workers; the irresitibly smile-inducing Big-up My Willy, and probably funniest of all to the folk who particularly resent the car brand and what they think it stands for: Bought Mainly by Wankers. There are some other automotive-related interpretations of BMW in the automotive aconyms list, interestingly including (ack G Boyle) Bersten Mal Wieder, which is apparently used by German folk, and means 'Bust Again'.



CHIP

Come Home I'm Pregnant. Another acronym gem from the 2nd World War, and potentially applicable today for husbands on prolonged residential training courses, drilling rigs and overseas work assignments - see also ITALY, HOLLAND, SWALK, BURMA and NORWICH, etc. (Thanks Sandy Fox)

CRITWATNF

Currently Residing In The Where Are They Now File. The full expression perhaps originated, certainly features and achieved prominence in Rob Reiner's 1984 classic rock band spoof masterpiece movie This is Spinal Tap. A radio DJ refers to the band in this way. It's not the most easy to pronounce acronym, but is a fine example of the genre nevertheless. The term is widely applicable for all ideas, fashions, trends, personalities, must-haves, etc., which were once actually or hoped to be significant, but are now lost, hidden or conveniently forgotten. Use it to illustrate the fleeting nature of success, the whimsical nature of swarming humankind, or the fact, simply, that every dog has its day. What can seem in people's lives utterly crucial today, will almost certainly be insignificant given a little time. (Thanks P Smith for suggesting it.) See the CRITWATNF game.

DILLIGAFF

Do I Look Like I Give A Flying Fig? Polite version. Alternatively again DILLIGAF, which omits the 'Flying' element. And the variation (ack A Burger) Does It Look Like I Give A Fig? The possibilities are almost endless. Popularly used for emphasising a lack of time or concern for a particular issue arising. DILLIGAFF illustrates a personal view which could result from pure apathy, or more excusably from having more essential responsibilities and priorities, hence the expression's use in the modern heathcare industry, and similar sectors where there's more demand than resource to meet it. DILLIGAFF is the opposite to empathy, and can also be used to illustrate the 'apathetic worker' syndrome. (Ack Dr N Roney and S Didlick and the many others.)

EDINBURGH

Elated Darling, I'm Near, Book Usual Room, Grand Hotel. Lovers code from way back. You see, people have been using social and flirting short-hand for generations - before texting was ever imagined, see also SWALK, NORWICH, etc.

FART

Fecal Air Rectally Transmitted. Daft and amusing restrospectively devised acronym, so it's technically a 'backronym'. The word fart in fact is derived from Old High German 'ferzan' (pronounced fertsan) from older Germanic roots 'fertan', both of which are clearly onomatopoeic (sounds like what it is), as is the modern-day word, unchanged in English since the 1200s. Words and language might change over time, but the sound of a fart is one of life's more enduring features.

And many, many more!!

Phishermen's Blues...

Most people will remember the news that came out this week about how a fake Microsoft Hotmail page was replicated and 10,000 email passwords were stolen in some kind of elaborate phishing scam and 10,000 email passwords from other web email provider's customers were also affected e.g. Gmail and Yahoo. Apparently up to 21 million email users could be affected by this.

I saw this article in The Bangkok Post today. It says that the next global war (and this time I don't mean the "global war on terror" so happily espoused by George Bush and his cronies!) will not be fought on a battlefield but in cyberspace! Wahoo!

According to the article, at the ITU's Telecom World 2009 fair in Geneva people are queuing up to cast all kinds of negative predictions about what will happen with cyber attacks in the not too distant future. According to Hamadoun Toure, the secretary-general of the International Telecommunications Union, "Loss of vital networks would quickly cripple any nation, and none is immune to cyber attack."

This seems a little dramatic to put it on a par with world wars and give us a Doomsday scenario e.g. call it the next WW3? However they do at least provide some evidence for their assertions. For a start, they highlight the absolute dependence on technology for all developed as well as developing countries to the point were any disruption of business and services is vital and will result in calamities not to mention huge loss in revenues.

According to Hamadoun Toure, many countries have become "critically dependent" on technology for commerce, finance, health care, emergency services and food distribution, so any disruption will affect some or all of these and in major ways. Because of these reports, many countries are hiring additional experts in this field of cyber attacks. IN the USA, they are hiring 1,000 extra security experts. US Secretary for Homeland Security Janet Napolitano said Thursday that she has been given the go ahead to hire up to 1,000 cybersecurity experts to improve the United States' defenses against cyber threats. In S. Korea they have gone a lot further and are hiring 3,000 such experts what they are calling "cyber sheriffs". Why? "to protect businesses after a spate of attacks on state and private websites."



Many people believe that the main reason for the ease with which cyber atttacks can be launched is because of software protocols that have changed little since the 1980s when a lot of software rules were established.

"Experts say that a major problem is that the current software and web infrastructure has the same weaknesses as those produced two decades ago."

According to Cristine Hoepers, general manager at Brazilian National Computer Emergency Response Team,"The real problem is that we're putting on the market software that is as vulnerable as it was 20 years ago."

She suggest that if we want to seriously tackle the problem we need to educate ICT students at university level to be aware of these limitations on current software and help them design new ways that will help protect the security of future software based systems.

Somehow, I think this seems all a little bit too easy to eradicate such a global problem. In the same way that criminals have always been one step behind new security measure for forging banknotes, or laundering money, or breaking security codes using technology to get password, so the new crop of cyber attackers will be just one step behind and when as in the case of Microsoft above, they take their eye off the ball for a brief period, the cyber attackers will strike.

Do you feel any safer with your online bank account now after reading this? I certainly don't!

The function of Intellectuals in society?

I just read an interesting article on a UK based online magazine called "Transforming Management - Original Thinking Applied" and felt compelled to reply. Click on the link above to read the original.

Here is my reply:

You write well and ask a good question, but ignore your own answer, Buddha like e.g. the answer lies within…

“Time was when a shared classical education could be assumed. The whole of the electorate was highly and similarly educated. That is no longer true. Shared references are less common; the nation does not in fact have a shared curriculum, even about its own identity.”

Absolutely true. Because of the splintering of knowledge (the decline in religions and a subsequent civic-minded sense of public morality, Deconstructionism and the Breakdown of the grand meta-narratives et al) we all have lost a shared sense of identity. Where once we could appeal to not only a higher altar of truth, but also one that had largely been agreed on over time, now we are left without any place to appeal to, and like Nietzsche’s idea of ressentiment and master-slave morality we are like the latter who have no identity because the rulers, the masters are the ones who define what is good, right, noble and true.

It stands to reason then that there can be no higher ideal to appeal to, nor such person as a modern intellectual who can appeal to us collectively, en mass. It is ironic that the only thing that nowadays successfully appeals to us on this plane is consumerism and so the intellectual has in some senses been replaced by the latest brand or marketing gimmick. (This is also incidentally why the sound bite has been so successful in recent years.)

I was surprised that you mentioned Christopher Hitchens and his own definition of an intellectual yet neglected to mention Socrates who, if ever there was someone who epitomized the essence of an intellectual, then it is he in following all of Hitchens’ defining characteristics and one or two more…

“Public intellectuals, he says, are “men and women who do their own thinking; who are willing to stand the accusation of “elitism” (or at least to prefer it to the idea of populism); who care for language above all and guess its subtle relationship to truth; and who are willing and able to nail a lie….. the attitude towards authority should probably be sceptical, as should the attitude towards utopia, let alone to heaven or hell. Other aims should include the ability to survey the present through the optic of a historian, the past with the perspective of the living, and the culture and language of others with the equipment of an internationalist.”

…the other to be able use rhetorical devices (the syllogism in particularl) which you mentioned and, most importantly, to be prepared to die for his principles which Socrates aptly demonstrated.

John Stuart Mill’s dictum about the philosopher and the pig also underscores the value of the intellectual idea over others,

“It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig, are a different opinion, it is because they only know their own side of the question. The other party to the comparison knows both sides.”

This sense of blissful ignorance is exactly where most people are nowadays when it comes to intellectual debate and not because of a lack of imagination or some perceived idea of snobbery. It is in many ways a cocoon against the vagaries and uncertainties of their lives, their mistrust of politicians, bankers, religious leaders and yes, intellectuals. In short, they are fed up of being lied to. If intellectuals are present at all these days, they have been reduced to scarecrow puppets of the real thing and there is no better example of that than Boris Johnson. I rest my case.

Tom Tuohy

What me! A Bully?

It's surely taking things too far when the biggest bully in the playground finally declares that "I have never bullied anybody in my life. It’s me who was bullied." Delusional would be a nice way to out it - hypocrisy would be more way accurate though.

This is a man who routinely sought revenge on anyone who disagreed with him while he was a primeminister of Thailand; who routinely expelled foreign journalists for having the gall, neigh, the temerity to impugn something the great man had a said; who routinely had beat, imprisoned, or killed, anyone even suspected of selling drugs in his so-called declaration that he would rid Thailand of all drugs within three months. Let's be honest - anyone who could make such an impossibly bold assertion needs a doctor not a playground protector. Oh yes, sorry I forgot, you are a doctor - of Forensics I believe. Then, in the words of a great philosopher - "Heal thyself!"

We haven't even mentioned the Tak Bai protesters of whom about 100+ were beaten, then rounded up in 36C + heat, herded onto a truck with tied hands behind their backs whereupon they all perished through suffocation while in Thai police custody.

So it comes as no small surprise to hear him say these words yesterday for anyone but a megalomaniac could actually get into a position of power (which as everyone knows requires considerable bullying and jockeying for position and a drink at the trough) and actually expect sane people to believe these sentiments.

The saddest part of this episode is that there are people in Thailand who have been sufficiently brainwashed (by the millions he stole from the country) into believing that Uncle Thaksin is a "good guy" and that all the millions of people (over 5 million at the last count) who signed the anti petition to say they disagreed with him getting a pardon from the king are completely wrong about this kind, benelovent, caring individual who now seeks our sympathy because he is the one who is actually being bullied!

Mr. Thaksin, you have your safe haven in Dubai so bully for you! I suggest you stay there and let Thailand be ruled by leaders less corrupt than you. After all, doesn't that make good business sense given that two thirds of Thai voters when asked said they didn't mind corrupt leaders as long as they did something for the country as well? You're a businessman so work it out! If you really want to do something for Thailand, stay away from the country.

Blocking your broadband access?

Has the world gone mad? The latest is that anyone caught illegally downloading songs or software will have their broadband access removed or blocked!

God, isn't this Big Brother state lovely? A real friend in need eh? I'd rather have my goolies lopped off than have my Internet connection severed! Ok, maybe that's a bit of an exaggeration but it is something that creates a strong feeling among many people not just myself.


In an article entitled "Government details proposed filesharing crackdown" we are informed that "The government has confirmed it is considering tough new measures to tackle illegal filesharing, possibly even cutting off the internet connections of repeat offenders". Well I never!

A bit Draconian isn't it? Why not come up with some punishments that actually fit the crime? If people are illegally downloading files, it's because (a) there are no barriers to stop them, and/or (b) it's considered morally permissible by many peopel to do so. Why not introduce legislation first rather than having a knee jerk respobse to a global problem?

As was stated in the article, tinkering with or cutting off a person's broadband access was ruled out in the government's Digital Britain report released on ly a couple of month's ago in June.

"In the report, the then communications minister, Lord Carter, said illegal filesharers should receive letters warning them their activities could leave them open to prosecution. If that failed to reduce piracy by at least 70%, Ofcom would have the power to call on internet service providers to introduce "technical measures" to combat piracy. The most draconian penalty considered at the time was slowing down persistent filesharers' broadband connections."

This was at least a reasonable attempt to combat a growing problem especially when you take into account the wider problem of artists and creative people in general being unable to collect well earned royalties for their creative endeavours.

They are right when they say that the government's response is a complete farce and completely out of sync with what other people feel is a normal response to this problem. As they say,

"Digital rights groups condemned the move. Calling it a "knee-jerk reaction", Jim Killock, the executive director of the Open Rights Group said: "Suspension of internet access would restrict people's fundamental right to freedom of expression. It would also fly in the face of the government's policy of universal broadband access."

And they are right when they say this a breach of the fundamental right of freedom of speech?

Just as silly is the government's idea of getting the ISPs to shoulder the costs and the responsibility of policing their customers!

What will the UK government do next I wonder? Charge you for breathing "British air"? Remove your right to vote for watching too much Coronation Street? Remove your invalidity benefit for not reading the last Labour Manifesto?

I repeat - has the world gone mad?

"Messing about on the water..."

It must be great to have a hobbie like owning a barge and lazily watching yourself drift down a canal as this picture taken on a canal in Birmingham, the UK shows.



I am here again teaching at the University of Birmingham and when the sun dos actually decide to grace us with its presence, it can be really nice to take a stroll down the canals where, during The Industrial Revolution, much of the business of transporting goods took place.

Nowadays, of course, it is just a place to get away and relax, savour the smells of the summer, watch the geese flap noisily, the birds gently sway and swoop for the canal's small fish, and gently and lazily wile away the hours thinking of former times.



Umm....maybe...just maybe...I'm gonna get me one of them barges!!