.........'Austerity': Follow the MONEY..................Corporate Fascism: Murdoch Megalomania



see also: 6.7.11...&...16.7.11....letters (replies) to MP


The worst aspect of arch-Fascist Murdoch's empire is, doesn't everyone know, Fox News. He has filled this outfit to the eyebrows with sycophants who spin lies, support for invasions, wars, killing, mayhem and destruction around the world: Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya... 1.4 million deaths in Iraq alone, costing the US > $1.2 trillion while >25% in the US live below the poverty line... Will this same hideous 'empire' run BSkyB? It will if the UK's so-called coalition government has its way.... unless recent exposés make it impossible - exposés that have been widely known in certain circles, and at least suspected elsewhere, for maybe a decade (together with various other devious activities emanating from since Thatcher's reign)

Glimpse the Villain 'here' (on STW website)

Until now, there wasn't much chance of Murdoch being thwarted - not while he had the whole Establishment in his pocket. Who else decided the outcome of elections and had senior MPs of all parties grovelling? Who else has had a foothold in Downing St for almost three decades? Even the Met (cops) was in his grip! Imagine... all the Bignuts he's intimidated over the years from his 'Mafia' high-chair!

NOW he's ditched his popular trash-comic - a lucrative asset 'The News-of-the-World', which I'd have at least expected some other media outfit to pick up pretty quickly - for free (if they dare... doubtless they'll have been warned off). But if someone else did have the guts to recruit the staff, hire an office and produce 'News-World' (or some such imitative title)... it might do us all a favour. Certainly it'll be back under a new title; though I'd wager under the same ownership...

Maybe it was ditch the paper or ditch the kid (ie, James Murdoch)? Maybe he thinks that by closing the outfit he can save his kid from the consequences of juvenile incompetence? If so, it's an attempt that will fail... if the cops catch-up with them, assuming the cops are no longer vulnerable to intimidation, as - according to what emerged yesterday - they have been for a decade or so: Murdoch paying them off and gaining co-operation either by threatening revelations of indiscretions (and who isn't guilty of some little indiscretion or other?), or influencing various career prospects. No surprises anywhere there, but I guess it's all history now.

I've never read the lousy rag myself, nor would I, not even (well, maybe a glance) if it appeared through my letterbox free - how does anyone know what's true and what's tosh? But the scandal is interesting because of the power play. And now Murdoch's former Downing St insider is on bail... I'm still wondering who the plant was that replaced him, and what might happen about that plant?

We all know now of some of the heinous underhand activities this major crook has been guilty of. I've 'known' for years, and have been banging on intermittently for ages about Murdoch's harmful influences - and those of other corporate moguls - on government. Anyone who cares to scan the archives on this site will see my attacks. These moguls seem to believe, entirely correctly, that government is their principal tool - and will continue to be. I've always been under the impression that Murdoch was their 'chairman-representative'. In his time he might have taken one or two worthwhile initiatives - ie, satellite broadcasting - but then, according to one commentator: Hitler built the autobands. It should be realised though, as ever, that everything Murdoch has done has been with the principal aim of increasing his power and making a financial killing. The prospect of a power-grab that would dwarf his already top-heavy position of supreme corruption... ie, total acquisition of BShyB... looks now like a pipedream - but even if Fascist Murdoch is finally stopped, some mogul or other will get it! Such is the capitalist quagmire.

----------- // ----------




F O L L O W - T H E - M O N E Y

... & grab it back!



The AUSTERITY being imposed on the Greek public and the public of other western countries due to colossal debts from bailing-out the banks, is actually a MONUMENTAL THEFT. As usual with theft, no money disappears, nothing vanishes, not a single € or £ or $ ceases to exist - all that happens is that the money changes hands. Like a stock value collapsing, the first investors to perceive some reason for an imminent drop will cash-in before other investors notice and create an avalanche down to some new generally perceived value - ie, one person's loss is another's gain (and vice-versa).

For the issue under the spotlight here, the public - unlike the investor - took no gamble in the hope of pocketing a bonanza.

The 'lost' €100billions were apparently due to the banks buying bad loans. These could be traced - and RECOVERED. The loans carried huge commissions that could also be traced - and RECOVERED. Those who commissioned the buying should be prosecuted. Either they were lunatics, idlers-on-the-job or outright fraudsters. I'd wager 100% the latter. Either way, what happened means that retrospective regulation should be introduced that enforces recovery by sequestration from those who profited. This would include all who gained from the banks' losses... both from bad loans and from cashing-in on associated investments.

Although investors in banks are not directly responsible, their stupendous gains from hyped share-values should be used to supplement for whatever amount is unrecoverable.

And just because a government underwrites savings, it doesn't mean the banks that hold those savings should be underwritten. Nor too should a THEFT go UNRECOVERED just because it's not technically illegal.

Some money will be untraceable, but the bulk when dealing in such enormous trades (which have crippled several countries, and put them in danger of bankruptcy) - would be easy to follow - AND RECOVER. Even if passed through several transactions, these would have to be reversed: like SYSTEM RESTORE on a computer, the whole system, so far as is possible, should be re-set.... most of it is mere figures in computers anyhow!

All this might be a bit tricky, perhaps, and doubtless highly controversial, but unprecedented events call for unprecedented solutions... AND WHAT'S MORE CONTROVERSIAL THAN SWINDLING WHOLE POPULATIONS OF THEIR SERVICES, PENSIONS, INCOME...etc. FOR MANY YEARS TO COME? WHAT'S MORE CONTROVERSIAL THAN BRINGING A WHOLE LIST OF COUNTRIES TO THEIR ECONOMIC KNEES?

Far better to upset a few billionaire investors - they'll doubtless squeal like stuck pigs, but they'll stay - for the continual bonanza they rake-in anyway.

Objections that these suggestions of mine would undermine confidence in the stock market are misplaced for two reasons:

First - implicitly and uniquely, rightly or wrongly, BANKS have been underwritten by governments, and should therefore be treated as the exception they are. Investors will complain that: "One exception means there could be another, so our investments are not guaranteed safe in future." My answer is simple: "No investment is safe. But in this instance they are, because you won't lose a €; you just won't keep your ill-gotten gain; you'll get back precisely what you originally invested."

Second - this mechanism would set a useful precedent to be applied to other stocks, and recovery threatened, for dubious or potentially dubious market transactions. Large investors would hence be shy of investing in obviously dubious outfits, or engaging in dubious investment strategies. Which means, ultimately, that the kind of regulation I've outlined could form the basis for gradually taking some kind of responsible control of what is actually an inherently unstable and mendacious market-system that's set fair to rip the planet apart... if it hasn't begun doing so already...

The sole problem with all this is that those in a position to activate these suggestions, or some similar approach, are precisely those who stand to gain most from NOT doing so (or who are under the control of those who stand to gain most). Which is why austerity will be enforced - UNLESS EVERYWHERE THE PUBLIC TAKE ACTION AGAINST IT AND PERSIST TO THE BITTER END.

So activate SYSTEM RESTORE and let the figures return to somewhere nearer their former state. The plundering billionaires can scream their mansions down... but they won't be going anywhere (unfortunately) - banks are just one tiny section of their market, the billionaires are not going to forego anytime soon their continual creaming of billions from the toil of us bird-brained Ragged Philanthropist plebs!

* * * * *

SIGNIFICANT ENDNOTE: The Greek government does NOT represent the Greek people - nor for that matter do any governments involved in this fiasco represent its population. They are All totally under the thumb of the IMF, Washington, Tel Aviv and the Corporate Elite. This doesn't only apply to financial matters either, but a whole gamut of other 'hot' political issues too - so again: THE PUBLIC EVERYWHERE SHOULD STRIKE, HELP ONLY ONE ANOTHER, AND RESIST TO THE BITTER END THE ASSERTIVE, AGGRESSIVE, RUTHLESS, SLAVE-DRIVING POWER-ELITE WITH THEIR INCREASINGLY OPPRESSIVE CORPORATE MACHINE.


...Any Aliens reading this - ie, creatures from another planet - don't try to fathom WHY the power-elite do what they do. I call it INSANITY - ie: acting 180 degrees out-of-phase with the ideal. It's reckoned that the cause is a residual dominating primitive leftover from our reptilian past and a concomitant weakness in the neocortex which when it prevails makes being alive feel so brilliant and worthwhile, and the concept of meaninglessness entirely irrelevant. No-one has yet discovered a cure; and unless they do very soon, our species is in for a catastrophe the likes of which haven't been seen since the end of the dinosaurs.

Back in the present: the fact is, as (like intelligent aliens) you'll know, and which you probably find quite amusing, all the money (figures in computers) that existed before the recent little fiasco, which sparked me into writing this item, still exists. The only difference being - between then and now - which (or whose) computer file the figures exist in.

--------- // ----------