Skip to main content

Question Less?

RT's questions are clearly getting under somebody's skin
In a massive blow to free speech in the UK & 24 Hours after US Secretary of State, John Kerry, met with British Foreign Minister Boris Johnson  to discuss the situation in Syria, television station RT (Channel 407 in SA) received a letter from Natwest Bank to inform them that their bank account had been closed.  Natwest is a 73% state owned bank and their letter gives no reason and simply states that the decision is final and that the matter is not up for discussion.  This issue is much bigger than one broadcaster because the issue of free speech in general is addressed, as well as whether other institutions beyond broadcasting authorities are involved in enforcing censorship of non-establishment agenda's. This is very curious and of course the timing  is very interesting, but is this a surprise?

No, of course not.

RT has been a massive spanner in the works for the establishment media and a key instrument in putting an alternative perspective into the public domain to break the war-machine’s propaganda instrument for selling the idea of war to a war-weary public.  RT has made it their mission to give the Russian perspective in Syria and other regime change hotpots and in doing so has undermined the rationale that a forced regime change via military means is a reasonable path to take.  I would take this a step further and propose that RT has introduced the element of debate itself into the public realm and this is very, very bad for the establishment because the more questions that are asked, the more likely lies are to be uncovered. To “Question More” is a terrible idea for the political and banking class because they do not want the average Joe running about asking all sorts of annoying “questions” about how their tax money is being spent.

Image Courtesy RT

I guess congratulations are in order, well done RT, this is yet another sign that your disruption in the media marketplace is worthy of intervention from above and a testament to your success.  Please, for all of our sake keep up the good work, this is a battle that transcends your station and Natwest Bank and gets to the heart of the very notion of free speech in Western society as a whole.


Popular posts from this blog

Scientific Consensus is that Consensus is overturned 100% of the time

Everything you know is wrong. There is a very good reason why science succeeds more often than politics does.  Unlike politics, It's not a consensus or a vote,  it's actually method.  The scientific method. Anyone who has read this blog before probably knows I'm a lifelong science junkie as well as someone who spends thousands of hours breaking down the the political and economic agendas behind the special interest groups that guide public policy.  In many ways I'm actually uniquely qualified to tie these angles together in ways not well understood by the overwhelming majority of people.  That actually includes scientists. Scientists are notoriously naive in the political and economic forces that drive the human world.

First and foremost,  what is this so called 'consensus' anyway.  You will be horrified to find out,  it's not specifically that global warming is man made.  It's simply that humans contribute to climate change in an unknowable way and to…

CO2 is not a pollutant, it is greening the earth!

Whatever your persuasion is on CO² and AGW, nobody disagrees on the tremendous benefit it provides plant life. Many of the past famine disasters and desertification has CO² decline listed as a contributor.

http://dwahts.blogspot.co.za/2018/04/sheep-science.html?m=1

I feel I've already blown the notion that humans are the main cause of climate change out of the water. Or rather I've used the reasoning of others and put it together in a convenient outline. See my previous post above for starters.  However, I recognize that humans do increase CO² levels, no matter how tiny. Increases are likely to be very short lived because the earth has an effective feedback mechanism, but we can apparently get small increases, and it's been put forward on very poor science that this is a bad thing. That assertion hinges completely on bad models. More on that in the bottom most link.  Model's and the measurement sample dates are dubious at best.


Furthermore, the main increase in CO²  as…

You Don't Know What Capitalism Is So Stop Using The Word!

I am writing this for one purpose, to be able to post it every time the issue comes up in conversation to prevent myself from dying of boredom on a few key issues with label intellectuals, you know, the sort who drop labels for the singular purpose of demonstrating their talent at dodging real issues by posing as someone who knows the definition of a word.

When it comes right down to it, I personally think most economic and, for that matter, socio-economic systems across the entire capitalism/ socialism spectrum could work if corruption could just be reasonably controlled.  Many forget that Socialism still runs on the capitalism economics system and the finer points actually come down to policy and regulations. This is often missed.  That being said, I am fairly sure that many of the criticisms of communism for example are valid, and views that it does not work especially well because it tends to kill the inventiveness and passion of the human spirit do stand, but not for the reasons…