By Bray52-Does anyone else here share my feelings that this rumpus over the seizure of the three foster children is just a bit too accurately and conveniently timed for those who stand to benefit from it?
Cui Bono? That's the salient question …...... just who is likely to benefit from this affair?
If you only look at things superficially, it appears that Labour is on the losing side, they are taking lots of stick and everyone else is apparently set to gain at their expense, but if you look at the situation more perceptively, I suggest that a different picture emerges.
The first point to realise is that this issue has acted as a “headline absorber”. It has redirected the media away from Labour's scandals, namely, their local corruption, which is the sole reason why this by-election has had to be called, and also the grooming and paedophile issues, both local and national.
On the corruption and local sexual crimes, the diversion works to Labour's advantage by shoving those damaging subjects into the background, and on the wider issue of the national paedophile abuse scandal which is now embroiling politicians, diverting the media away from that subject will work to the joint benefit of all three branches of the one party with three names, because if the sheeple become aware of the information which is now widely available on the internet, they are likely to rebel against all of the mainstream parties and either abstain or vote for one the smaller parties, including the BNP.
Therefore, on the last issue Labour will win as well, albeit sharing their win with the Lib Dems and Cons.
The second point is extremely subtle and very abstract, but also exceptionally powerful. This child seizure act has caused agitation around the subject of race.
Because of the decades of subtle brainwashing, the British people are not fully in control of their own brains. They have been programmed at a deep subconscious level to react negatively to certain subjects and certain trigger words.
The main trigger word is the word “racist” which is a word that exudes an almost indefinable fear factor and concurrently activates the subliminal programming of the people.
That word has been used a lot recently, which will have had the consequential effect of activating the voters subconscious programming, and in that subconscious semi autopilot control mode, they will be less likely to vote BNP or any of the other nationalist parties, which obviously benefits Labour.
If what I have just said sounds “over the top”, please consider this similar example of human behaviour being controlled by words, but without the victim being aware of it.
The word in question is the word “cheap”. Have you ever seen a supermarket stick the label “cheap” on their goods? Have you ever thought why that word seems to be off limits to retailers?
Supermarkets main selling weapon is often their competitive pricing, and yet they avoid the word cheap like the plague.
They get up to all sorts of linguistic contortions to impact on you what good value they offer such as ….reduced, low price, special price, bargain, special offer, sale price ..Etc. etc. But not the simple word cheap.
The reason is that the managers know that if they use that word, people will not buy.
The customer's brains are pre programmed to interpret cheap as meaning poor quality, crap, cheap and nasty etc.
There is no logical reason for that because cheap does not necessarily mean poor quality, it just means costing less than the perceived ambient price level, but that makes no difference to the buying behaviour of the customers.
If it is labelled “cheap”, it will not sell, but it isn't the conscious brain that is causing that rejection, it is the customer's subconscious pre-programming being activated by the trigger word “cheap”.
The third point is that the child seizure is likely to give UKIP lots of publicity, media exposure and victim status. That is almost certain to enhance their vote.
Most of those votes will probably be taken off the Tories. If UKIP beat the Tories then that will throw the Tories into turmoil and delight Labour.
A fourth point is that if Labour lose the seat, they can blame a social worker in the council offices.
Put that portfolio together, and I would place my bets that this adoption dispute is the contrived work of a very clever spin merchant.
It will be the Tories and the BNP and to a lesser extent the other nationalists parties who will most likely lose votes because of this dispute.
Does anyone still believe that this affair is accidental?