Sunday :: Jul 16, 2006

The ISO Nation

by pessimist

In reading about Arlen Spector's latest abrogation of his sworn duty as a United States Senator [Upon taking office, Senators-elect must swear or affirm that they will "support and defend the Constitution." See how he violates his oath here, here, here, here, here, here] - a move which completely abrogates the Hamdan decision [PDF] just handed down recently by the Supreme Court, the thought struck me that our governmental structure itself has been corrupted by the corporofascists.

When Bush promised to run this nation "like a corporation", we were only thinking of his role as the executive. We weren't thinking that he was going to treat the other Constitutional entities of the Federal Government as corporate executives treat their corresponding bodies - as hostile.

Think of the Supreme Court as the Board of Directors. Their job, for the purposes of my discussion, is defined as being the power that limits executive behavior. The Congress is the analog of the corporation's shareholders, a body which in theory is supposed to be the ultimate authority, with the power to override the actions of the executive if necessary.

Neither Constitutional body is able to do its job thanks to blatant manipulation by the Executive branch.

In actual practice, each is either manhandled by the executive into ineffectiveness by stuffing the membership with cronies, or stifled through stage-managed shareholder meetings in which all issues have already been decided by the executive.

Ever since the Rise of Saint Ronnie, the courts of America have been the primary target of opportunity. It has been their rulings which have made it possible to slant the will of the people - the shareholders - through gerrymandered Congressional districts. The vast majority of challenges to this practice have been dismissed for the most convenient of reasons, making it possible for the wrong-wing of this nation to gain sufficient power - immune from interference from any quarter - to cement themselves in place for generations.

It also made it possible to ensure that only approved cronies (see: Roberts, Alito, Thomas, Scalia) make it to the SCOTUS Board of Directors, where their job is to ensure that no legal challenege to the executive ever sees the light of day to wield the sword of the law.

The real test of this activity is going to be the coming November elections, during which (IF fair elections were to be held) the expectation is that the Congress will shift columns. This would make it harder to complete the job of stacking the SCOTUS Board deck against Shareholder America as represented by the Proxy Congress. the only problem is identifying whose Proxy the Congress holds, for it isn't that of the public.

I sincerely doubt that the elections this fall will be fair. There is far too much power to wield at stake, and already captured away from the exercise of the Consititutional will of We The People. I expect that, like our Southern international neighbors just found out the hard way, and as some of our Northern international neighbors suspect, that electoral fairness is another of those quaint notions that ISO executives like Alberto Gonzales declare as now belonging to the ages.

I've been reading up on ISO, the standards organization that is responsible for much of the chaos that many of us face in the working world. It is their version of standarization that is driving governments today as the corporate puppets that they have become due to the strings-attached campaign funding that governments continue to defeat any attempts at other forms of campaign funding which would weaken corporate control.

The lap dog governments captured through control of campaign financing are expected to adhere to ISO 9000 in their behavior. I'm going to present exerpts from ISO's own documents to illustrate what these standards are.

The Basics

Large organizations, or ones with complicated processes, could not function well without management systems - although they may have been called by some other name. Companies in such fields as aerospace, automobiles, defence, or health care devices have been operating management systems for years.

As our government is made up of corporate executives, it is - or should be - no surprise that such a management organization system would be applied to the operation of a nation-state. Because so many of our 'elected' officials come from the corporate world, they are used to adhering to such standards.

Management system standards provide the organization with a model to follow in setting up and operating the management system. This model incorporates the features on which experts in the field have reached a consensus as representing the international state of the art. A management system which follows the model - or "conforms to the standard" - is built on a firm foundation of state-of-the-art practices.

Such a 'system' defines the level of control necessary to keep a large organization - or a country - under executive control. But the question is: who benefits from the exercise of this control?

[I]n the ISO 9000 context, the standardized definition of quality refers to all those features of a product (or service) which are required by the customer.

ISO 9000 is primarily concerned with "quality management". "Quality management" means what the organization does to ensure that its products or services satisfy the customer's quality requirements ...

This is where the Golden Rule meets National Governance.

Suppose that a customer's 'quality requirements' include reinterpreting of workplace safety regulations, or reducing if not eliminating pension obligations, or redefining laws which allow for collective bargaining rights?

Under Bu$hCo, anything Lola Corp. wants, Lola Corp. gets. It's his job as 'leader' to get the rest of us to accept this dictum, which is where KKKarl and FAUX 'Newz' enter the picture. Both are necessary to hammer home the following meme:

It isn't the results that matter,
but the process by which it was accomplished:
ISO 9000 [concerns solely] the way an organization goes about its work, and not directly the result of this work.

In other words, they both concern processes, and not products - at least, not directly.

But like everything Bu$hCo ever said that can be shown to be factually-challenged, ISO 9000 always provides a logical 'out':

Nevertheless, the way in which the organization manages its processes is obviously going to affect its final product. In the case of ISO 9000, the efficient and effective management of processes is, for example, going to affect whether or not everything has been done to ensure that the product satisfies the customer's quality requirements.

Many companies are claiming compliance, ...

ISO 9000 contain[s] a single "certification" standard. "Certification", "registration" and "accreditation" are three words that will certainly crop up on your ISO 9000 journey.

In the context of ISO 9001:2000, "certification" refers to the issuing of written assurance (the certificate) by an independent, external body that has audited an organization's management system and verified that it conforms to the requirements specified in the standard.

"Registration" means that the auditing body then records the certification in its client register.

In the ISO 9001:2000 context, "accreditation" refers to the formal recognition by a specialized body - an accreditation body - that a certification body is competent to carry out ISO 9001:2000 certification in specified business sectors.

Therefore, it is okay to state that your organization has been "certified" or "registered" (if, indeed, it has!), but inaccurate to state that it has been "accredited" (unless your organization is a certification/registration body).

... but few actually subject themselves to such a review by outsiders:

You can implement ISO 9001:2000
without seeking to have your management system audited and certified
as conforming to the standards

by an independent, external certification body.

You can implement and benefit from an ISO 9001:2000 system without having it certified. Like all ISO standards, ISO 9001:2000 are voluntary standards.
Your organization can implement them
solely for the internal benefits they bring
in increased effectiveness and efficiency of your operations,
without incurring the investment required in a certification programme.

Or, to simplfy this for our wrong-wing friends, you can just claim you have done so - and no one can challenge you on it!

This last is especially vital for the realization of the current ISO Five-Year Plan:

Global Vision for ISO in 2010

The ISO Strategic Plan 2005-2010 outlines the global vision for the Organization in 2010, together with the seven strategic objectives set out to meet the expectations of its members and stakeholders and the results ISO expects to achieve.

ISO’s International Standards and deliverables support :

facilitation of global trade
• global dissemination of technologies and good practices

• improvement of quality, safety, security, environmental and consumer protection, as well as the rational use of natural resources
• all of which contribute to economic and social progress.

All as defined by ISO itself, natually!

ISO contributes to a more efficient and sustainable world economy. This Strategic Plan identifies the actions to be pursued or undertaken to achieve these results.

If you read the Seven key objectives for 2010, you note that every one of these goals involves seeing to it that ISO standards are the mechanism which controls all economic activity in any of the countries which pretends to conform with these standards.

I find it amazing that those who fear the One World Government
haven't picked up on ISO Standards [PDF] yet!

But I digress.

For example, see Principle 2: Leadership:

Leaders establish unity of purpose and direction of the organization. They should create and maintain the internal environment in which people can become fully involved in achieving the organization's objectives.

Where here is the realization of one's personal potential and achieving one's personal goals? They are violently suppressed by the twisted and connived statements of KKKarl hammered home repeatedly until the majority believe them to be factual by the FAUX 'Newz' Talking Heads.

Awareness by the target group of this principle isn't included in the ISO standards - it would violate Principle 3: Involvement of people

People at all levels are the essence of an organization and their full involvement enables their abilities to be used for the organization's benefit.

There is a commercial being shown on cable involving a black female engineer for one of the cellular companies (I think it's Varizon). She's talking about how Verizon gave her the opportunity to become and engineer, which results (I paraphrase here) in both her personal improvement and [CUE: Valley Girl Euphoria] also benefits the company!!!

It's as if the First Commandment has been rewritten by ISO to read: I am The Boss, Thy Employer. Thou Shalt Place NO Benefit Accruing To You Before I Get MINE!

The Repetition of the Message adheres to yet another ISO principle:

Principle 4 Process approach

A desired result is achieved more efficiently when activities and related resources are managed as a process, systematically defining the activities necessary to obtain a desired result.

This is why, as I see it, Bu$hCo never deviates from its most basic messages. To do anything else would violate the principles which regulate process effectiveness:

Principle 5 System approach to management

Identifying, understanding and managing interrelated processes as a system contributes to the organization's effectiveness and efficiency in achieving its objectives. Structuring a system to achieve the organization's objectives in the most effective and efficient way.

What changes they do make in their are seen as 'fine tuning' - which follows this principle:

Principle 6 Continual improvement

Continual improvement of the organization's overall performance should be a permanent objective of the organization.

Such as:

# Performance advantage through improved organizational capabilities.

You can read this as adjusting the wording of the message to neutralize organized opposing evidence.

# Alignment of improvement activities at all levels to an organization's strategic intent.

This is why, when a major embarrassment to Bu$hCo occurs, the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy appears to be reading from the RNC Talking Point Memo for the day. Occam's Razor: This isn't just a coincidence, especially when the language is identical.

And lastly, providing the means of continuing to remain on message:

# Providing people with training in the methods and tools of continual improvement.

Think back to when Ari Fleischer - the exemplary prototype ISO mouthpiece - was replaced with Scotty 'Boy' McClellan. It was clear that he wasn't filling Ari's Shaquilles, even after a period of training. His effectiveness just wasn't there, and he was losing control of the White House Media Room. So, in following Part A of this very principle, Scotty 'Boy' was replaced with an already experienced ISO mouthpiece - Tony Snow of FAUX 'Newz' .

Before I can continue, I need to review a couple of points.

ISO 'compliance' is 'voluntary'. An entity, such as a usurped national government, can CLAIM ISO 9000 "certification" completely unchallenged. Bu$hCo minions don't even NEED the artifice of 'national security' to hide behind their LACK of ISO "accreditation" in their management organization, for no one is allowed to challenge their "written certification" of ISO compliance - and there are no enforcement mechanisms. To have any defeats the claim of "voluntary" compliance.

Having reviewed all those points, there are ways to ignore those 'inconvenient' ISO principles which don't fit in with the 'corporate' plan to turn the democratic republic of the United States into a corporofascist wage slavery state.

Of what do I refer? Let's use Iraq for an example. The evidence of Bu$hCo going to war, using manufactured information needed to justify an illegal war, piled up so high that even Hizz Hindni$$ had to admit that there were no WMD in Iraq - just like Colon and Con-di did.

That alone violated this ISO principle:

Principle 7 Factual approach to decision making

Effective decisions are based on the analysis of data and information.

But Bu$hCo also violated these verses in the ISO Hymn #7:

# An increased ability to demonstrate the effectiveness of past decisions through reference to factual records

* Ensuring that data and information are sufficiently accurate and reliable.
* Making data accessible to those who need it.
* Analysing data and information using valid methods.
* Making decisions and taking action based on factual analysis, balanced with experience and intuition.

In addition, Bu$hCo strove mightily (think of the not-so-Swift Boaters as an example) to ensure that the Democratic Party could not raise objections in any meaningful way - another violation of this ISO principle:

# Increased ability to review, challenge and change opinions and decisions.

Such incompetence and neglect of standards leads to defeating the very purpose for which these standards were agreed to by the world's corporate interests (and their governmental lackeys) - taking care of the needs of the customer.

Remember all the back to June when I published posts [Not Following The Leader... June 3, 2006 07:38 AM, Recession Is For The Little People... June 8, 2006 11:46 AM, America Must Want It This Way... June 9, 2006 12:12 PM, Keeping The Crowd Amused... June 14, 2006 02:40 AM] in which I reported that China is telling the world How to deal with the US$ as a "spoiled child"?

In many ways, China is a customer of the ISO(lated) president and his ISO regime, and they don't feel like their needs as a cutomer are being met by Bu$hCo. they feel that Bu$hCo is ignoring ISO's Principle #1:

Principle 1 Customer focus

Organizations depend on their customers and therefore should understand current and future customer needs, should meet customer requirements, and strive to exceed customer expectations.

Think of how the countries which have loaned vast sums of money to the American economy in trade for realization of these 'Key' benefits:

* Increased revenue and market share obtained through flexible and fast responses to market opportunities. * Increased effectiveness in the use of the organization's resources to enhance customer satisfaction. * Improved customer loyalty leading to repeat business.

Whether or not China really means it (remember, being ISO means never having to say ... anything you don't want to!), China says it is a 'firm believer' in ISO Principle #8:

China seeks mutual benefit and common development with other countries while developing its economic and trade relations with them on the basis of equality, mutual benefit and reciprocity, said a white paper released in Beijing ... Since its accession to the WTO in December 2001, China has strictly kept its commitments to create more favorable conditions for international economic and technological cooperation ... China sticks to the principle of mutual benefit and win-win cooperation, tries to find proper settlement of trade conflicts and promotes common development with other countries, said the paper...

You get the idea. Now get this one:

Principle 8 Mutually beneficial supplier relationships

An organization and its suppliers are interdependent and a mutually beneficial relationship enhances the ability of both to create value.

Let's go back to Iraq in lieu of explanation. Iraq is allegedly the 'customer' of United States' Freedom and Libery (R)(TM), yet are they receiving these ISO Principle #8 benefits?

* Establishing relationships that balance short-term gains with long-term considerations. * Pooling of expertise and resources with partners. * Identifying and selecting key suppliers. * Clear and open communication. * Sharing information and future plans. * Establishing joint development and improvement activities. * Inspiring, encouraging and recognizing improvements and achievements by suppliers.

Toss aside Iraq and plug in Halliburton - as Bu$hco already has, and suddenly the equation balances.

According to ISO Action Plan [PDF], this 'process' is supposed to be applied to "110 of the 146 ISO members are from developing countries or economies in transition"


It is important that developing countries have access to International Standards and increase their participation in international standardization and conformity assessment activities and, consequently, benefit from the transfer of technology that standards make possible, in adapting their products and services to global requirements and in demonstrating their compliance with world market needs.

In other words, because we say so - our profits are at risk if you don't play the game our way:

"Taking into account the development dimension, ISO parties shall contribute to actions to help its members from developing countries improve their capacity and their participation in international standardization”. - ISO Code of Ethics, June 2004

WE set the rules - and you will follow them.

That is why they (as represented by Bu$hCo) expect ancient civilizations such as those of Islamia to completely transform themselves into the Western model of modernity, in order to be granted a minority stake in Western commercial activity.

Considering that Western nations are dealing from the bottom of the deck due to a weakness for petroleum products, I wouldn't be in a hurry to conform to rules promulgated by such a disrespectful bunch of addicts and charletains either. I might call their bluff - and then take the entire pot for my own.

Cut the cards - and deal

Copyrighted [©] source material contained in this article is presented under the provisions of Fair Use.


This article contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding of democracy, economic, environmental, human rights, political, scientific, and social justice issues, among others. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material in this article is distributed without profit for research and educational purposes..

pessimist :: 8:35 PM :: Comments (3) :: TrackBack (0) :: Digg It!