Friday, March 21, 2003
Ahem!
Arrived late yesterday evening for what turned out to be a very enjoyable anti-war march. Met lots of new people, got hugs and email addresses from people I've never met before and have generally started networking. Was pointedly ignored by the person who I've had the altercation with. Notice that I was blocked from accessing their LJ, and the rumour mill is that there were nasty and potentially untrue comments made. Of course, because I wasn't able to see them and the rumour mill suggested that these entries have now been deleted, I can't comment on what I was told they said. I'm just left thinking that it's bloody typical of this person. Always been known as an attention seeking backstabber.
Thursday, March 20, 2003
And so It begins...
The deadline has passed and now there is the uneasy calm waiting for the first bombs to start dropping on Baghdad, and the woman giving the weather forecast is prattling on about having nice enough weather to sit out in the garden over the weekend. I am screaming at the screen to shut up and doesn't she know that hundreds, possibly thousands of people will be dead by then. There is a world wide alert of possible terrorist attacks against British citizens. And I feel guilty, that there is something I could have done to stop this. I know it's a stupid sentiment, I've done what I can. I've lobbied my MP and given praise when he voted against the government, I've bunked off work to go on marches, I've been on the candlelit vigil and signed on-line petitions, but it hasn't been enough.
It's depressing.
It's depressing.
Wednesday, March 19, 2003
An interesting and strangely appropriate quotation
I'm on quite a few mailing lists and today from one list (KabbalahConcepts) I received a post as follows:
"Hate to hurt.....
Conquer the will to kill.....
Revenge is wrong.....
Be fearful of being brutal.....
Force ferocity to be subdued.....
Cruelty is something we recognize so easily as a physical activity,
yet find so hard to identify in its finer but no less dangerous forms.
It is essentially a misuse of power by a strong entity toward a weaker
one on the same plane of action.....
Cruelty is only possible as a calculated discharge of destructive
energy directed at feebler creatures unlikely to retaliate
effectively.....
The motivation of cruelty is commonly again the artificial
ego-enlargement resultant from its practice.....
If we can make others frightened of us we seem larger by comparison to
their shrinking. That is the secret of cruelty. A false sense of boost
because of aggressive action which appears to avoid injurious
reprisals. To hurt and kill some helpless and defenseless creature
makes cruel people feel enormously powerful by contrast.....
Nobody hates being hurt more than those who hurt with hate.....
Let those who think they could not be cruel examine what conscience
they have within their own life-frameworks."
- William G. Gray (The Tree of Evil)
I was struck by how much this sums up my feelings. Bush is a bully, his country has been hurt and humiliated and as a bully he cannot accept this. His abhorrence of his country being hurt goes so far as to be hatred. It is this hatred that is in turn turned outward to other counties. 9/11 made him turn to the Taliban in Afghanistan, and so the might of the US military bombed the people a bit further into the stone-age that had been caused by years of conflict with the Soviet Union and subsequent neglect under the Talibs. Having seen the Afghan regime crumble under the weight of US munitions, Bush looked around at who else he could bully, and there was Iraq. I expect in Bush's mind Saddam had humiliated his daddy, and so the hatred grew and with the puffed up chest of a bully who has won one playground battle, he starts his next campaign. And so Iraq will be destroyed.
Which leaves one question.
Who will be next?
It won't be the UK as Tony Blair is following along like the smarmy little kid who held the bully's coat while the schoolyard beatings took place, giving the sly kick now and again to ingratiate himself further with his master. But just like in the playground, when this current war is over everyone will be looking over their shoulders, because to a cruel bully on a winning streak everyone is a target.
Many thanks to Jacobus Swart for allowing me to use his post
"Hate to hurt.....
Conquer the will to kill.....
Revenge is wrong.....
Be fearful of being brutal.....
Force ferocity to be subdued.....
Cruelty is something we recognize so easily as a physical activity,
yet find so hard to identify in its finer but no less dangerous forms.
It is essentially a misuse of power by a strong entity toward a weaker
one on the same plane of action.....
Cruelty is only possible as a calculated discharge of destructive
energy directed at feebler creatures unlikely to retaliate
effectively.....
The motivation of cruelty is commonly again the artificial
ego-enlargement resultant from its practice.....
If we can make others frightened of us we seem larger by comparison to
their shrinking. That is the secret of cruelty. A false sense of boost
because of aggressive action which appears to avoid injurious
reprisals. To hurt and kill some helpless and defenseless creature
makes cruel people feel enormously powerful by contrast.....
Nobody hates being hurt more than those who hurt with hate.....
Let those who think they could not be cruel examine what conscience
they have within their own life-frameworks."
- William G. Gray (The Tree of Evil)
I was struck by how much this sums up my feelings. Bush is a bully, his country has been hurt and humiliated and as a bully he cannot accept this. His abhorrence of his country being hurt goes so far as to be hatred. It is this hatred that is in turn turned outward to other counties. 9/11 made him turn to the Taliban in Afghanistan, and so the might of the US military bombed the people a bit further into the stone-age that had been caused by years of conflict with the Soviet Union and subsequent neglect under the Talibs. Having seen the Afghan regime crumble under the weight of US munitions, Bush looked around at who else he could bully, and there was Iraq. I expect in Bush's mind Saddam had humiliated his daddy, and so the hatred grew and with the puffed up chest of a bully who has won one playground battle, he starts his next campaign. And so Iraq will be destroyed.
Which leaves one question.
Who will be next?
It won't be the UK as Tony Blair is following along like the smarmy little kid who held the bully's coat while the schoolyard beatings took place, giving the sly kick now and again to ingratiate himself further with his master. But just like in the playground, when this current war is over everyone will be looking over their shoulders, because to a cruel bully on a winning streak everyone is a target.
Many thanks to Jacobus Swart for allowing me to use his post
United States of Terrorists
I said some time ago that it was the USA and UK govts that were the real terrorists in this soon to be fought war. So it is with mixed feelings that I point you to this link about the proposed campaign plan from the US military. Why do I feel like this is just a bad dream and if only I could wake up everything would be okay?
139 Labour MP's rebel against the Govt
The full list of MP's who voted against the Govt in the war vote last night are listed on the BBC's website.
It's surprising the number of big names that are on there, like Diane Abbot, Tony Banks and Robin Cook. There are also a couple of names I wouldn't have expected to see. I worked with the Labour Party in Leeds many years ago and some of the MP's from that area I know from when they were City and Met County Councillors (that kind of dates it - Thatcher abolished the Met Counties with the GLC, but I digress). Whilst some like John Battle have disappointed me over the past few years with the way they seemed to have forgotten what Labour principles were about, others have lived up to their past image of being little more that political up-suckers, changing their stance to whatever is likely to get another rung higher on the political ladder.
Well I have been surprised. I have to take back my bad mouthing about John Battle, he showed that he has maintained some integrity after all. Most surprising was Jon "How can I turn this to my advantage" Trickett. This is a man who would made the stereotypical used car salesmen look honest and respectable. I'd never have expected him to rebel against the govt in a million years, cash in on the misfortunes of those who get sidelined by rebelling yes, but to see his name in the list of rebels - well I nearly fell off my chair.
I also noticed that Claire Short's name was conspicuous by it's absence from the list. I think she should have resigned when she threatened to, because now she is a political laughing stock and no one will take her seriously. Damn and I was hoping that she would make a challenge for the party leadership. Shows how wrong I was.
It's surprising the number of big names that are on there, like Diane Abbot, Tony Banks and Robin Cook. There are also a couple of names I wouldn't have expected to see. I worked with the Labour Party in Leeds many years ago and some of the MP's from that area I know from when they were City and Met County Councillors (that kind of dates it - Thatcher abolished the Met Counties with the GLC, but I digress). Whilst some like John Battle have disappointed me over the past few years with the way they seemed to have forgotten what Labour principles were about, others have lived up to their past image of being little more that political up-suckers, changing their stance to whatever is likely to get another rung higher on the political ladder.
Well I have been surprised. I have to take back my bad mouthing about John Battle, he showed that he has maintained some integrity after all. Most surprising was Jon "How can I turn this to my advantage" Trickett. This is a man who would made the stereotypical used car salesmen look honest and respectable. I'd never have expected him to rebel against the govt in a million years, cash in on the misfortunes of those who get sidelined by rebelling yes, but to see his name in the list of rebels - well I nearly fell off my chair.
I also noticed that Claire Short's name was conspicuous by it's absence from the list. I think she should have resigned when she threatened to, because now she is a political laughing stock and no one will take her seriously. Damn and I was hoping that she would make a challenge for the party leadership. Shows how wrong I was.
Tuesday, March 18, 2003
Somebody clearly doesn't like the truth to be told. I'm suddenly barred from their LJ so that they can bitch behind my back. Just that persons style.Whereas if I have a bitch it's in public for all to see. Hey I might just really set the cat amongst the pidgeons and let the whole world know the sordid little secrets.
Okay so it's sinking down to that person's lack of morals, but hey I have nothing to loose, whereas they...
Okay so it's sinking down to that person's lack of morals, but hey I have nothing to loose, whereas they...
Monday, March 17, 2003
Oh Gawd please no!
I appears my feeling grot is nothing to do with the beer. I'm been progressively turning down the brightness of my iMac's screen till it's now as low as it goes yet it is still too bright. I can't deal with noise, and now I'm starting to see blotches of light that are blinding me.
Yikes it looks like it's a migrane
Yikes it looks like it's a migrane
WTF?
Candlelit Vigil was cool, met up with some folks from work, and later with Steve. Went to the pub for food and beer. I only had two pints of Stella yet this morning I have a headache that would imply I'd drunk a hell of a lot more. It seems that suddenly I can't hold my beer. This is not good.
Sunday, March 16, 2003
Apparently, the person that I've fallen out with is unsocialised and a bad liar. Yes, this person took the old tale that lying is bad to the point were they think that even the "diplomatic white lies" are a sign of hypocracy.
Yes?? Then why is it that I have caught this person out in some real whoppers, and a discussion tonight has revealed that other people have caught the person out in equally big porkies too. Including the one where said person was telling everyone that the live in partner knew all about the affaires and didn't mind, when of course the opposite was true. Hell, I even provided alibis at one point and after the partner threw a wobbly over one "fling" I had to have the "lover" staying with me. I could cite more.
But tell me is this the behaviour of someone who is so taken with the idea that lying is bad that they cannot lie at all?
Nah, didn't think so.
Yes?? Then why is it that I have caught this person out in some real whoppers, and a discussion tonight has revealed that other people have caught the person out in equally big porkies too. Including the one where said person was telling everyone that the live in partner knew all about the affaires and didn't mind, when of course the opposite was true. Hell, I even provided alibis at one point and after the partner threw a wobbly over one "fling" I had to have the "lover" staying with me. I could cite more.
But tell me is this the behaviour of someone who is so taken with the idea that lying is bad that they cannot lie at all?
Nah, didn't think so.
Saturday, March 15, 2003
Oh Deity
In the backlash of a home truths saga, I've just hit out at a friend. Not a really good close friend but someone who is getting there (it takes a long time for me to consider anyone trustworthy enough to make the transistion from acquaintance to friend and it's even harder for friend's to make it up to "good" or "best" friend - I suppose that comes from having so called friends doing the dirty too many times in the past.) Anyway, this friend seems to be trying to get me to be friends with another of his friends, whereas my gut instincts are that I don't want this other person knowing I exist much less getting to know them, and it seems to have hit a raw nerve or something. To cut a long (and personal) story short, I ended up bursting into tears and screaching down the phone like some demented banshee about how crap my life is and how I wish I was dead, and other things. And now I think I have totally scared the poor guy off because, lets face it, who in their right mind is going to invest time in showing that they are trustworthy to a hysterical woman, just you can say that she's a mate.
So now I really, really wish I were dead
So now I really, really wish I were dead
French Miltary Victories
I've just been on the phone to my long suffering other half, who has been told of "The Whole Sorry Affair" or at least the bits that concern me. Of course this turned out to be a very long phone call with emails being read to him in their entirety. His opinion is that I have every right to be upset over some of the things that have been said, that the excuses that are being put forward for the other person's behaviour is a load of bullshit, that I am right in thinking that said other person is playing for sympathy and is generally being selfish, arrogant and rude, and that no I am not over-reacting.
Anyway to cheer me up he pointed me to something.
Go to Google and search for french military victories. Click on the button that says I'm feeling lucky and see what comes up.
It made me smile for all of 2 seconds, which is an achievement considering my mood.
Anyway to cheer me up he pointed me to something.
Go to Google and search for french military victories. Click on the button that says I'm feeling lucky and see what comes up.
It made me smile for all of 2 seconds, which is an achievement considering my mood.
Life? Don't talk to me about life
I wish I was anywhere other than where I am today. I wish I was anyone other than who I am. At the moment I really wish I was dead.
Friday, March 14, 2003
Planning for the future
As I sit here in my rabbit hutch of a flat, I have a sudden realisation that I need to start planning things, in relation to work, home, relationship, etc.
Everything is at a funny point. My partner is in Manchester so I don't see him as often as I would like. We have to vacate the Manchester flat by the end of this month (we've got another one close by to move into). My current job finishes on 14th April and at the moment I have nothing to go to and I'm starting to get worried about what I'll do. Of course, I have next to no social life in Edinburgh and based on happenings over the last day or so what little I have is going to tail off into absolutely nothing.
So now I am left thinking of what to do.
There are a couple of options, first of which is that I could go back to Manchester, seeing as the other half is having difficulty getting job in Edinburgh. The other is that I could struggle through unemployment getting myself into debt in the hope that a job will turn up. Whilst I don't want to go back to Manchester, it would remove the expense of running two flats and I would have the support of my partner.
Edinburgh is a nice place to live but somewhat expensive, and as I've basically just decided that I have had enough of my alleged best friend, who seems to think that being abusive is a joke, that anyone who objects has no sense of humour, and when taken to task over her abusiveness goes into a whole victim performance that is worthy of an Oscar in it's depth and scope, my social life is going from virtually non existant to completely non existant. So it might as well be non existant with people who actually treat friends as friends, not as a verbal punch bag as amusement du jour.
Of course, I could do something completely radical
Everything is at a funny point. My partner is in Manchester so I don't see him as often as I would like. We have to vacate the Manchester flat by the end of this month (we've got another one close by to move into). My current job finishes on 14th April and at the moment I have nothing to go to and I'm starting to get worried about what I'll do. Of course, I have next to no social life in Edinburgh and based on happenings over the last day or so what little I have is going to tail off into absolutely nothing.
So now I am left thinking of what to do.
There are a couple of options, first of which is that I could go back to Manchester, seeing as the other half is having difficulty getting job in Edinburgh. The other is that I could struggle through unemployment getting myself into debt in the hope that a job will turn up. Whilst I don't want to go back to Manchester, it would remove the expense of running two flats and I would have the support of my partner.
Edinburgh is a nice place to live but somewhat expensive, and as I've basically just decided that I have had enough of my alleged best friend, who seems to think that being abusive is a joke, that anyone who objects has no sense of humour, and when taken to task over her abusiveness goes into a whole victim performance that is worthy of an Oscar in it's depth and scope, my social life is going from virtually non existant to completely non existant. So it might as well be non existant with people who actually treat friends as friends, not as a verbal punch bag as amusement du jour.
Of course, I could do something completely radical
Candle Light Vigils
It appears that as Bush and Blair move into the final preparations of their plan for total world domination, that there is still much life left in the peace movement.
The latest is for a candle light vigil to be held on the evening of 16th March at 7pm
MoveOn.org and the Win Without War coalition, together with Archbishop Desmond Tutu and many faith-based organizations, are calling this vigil. Beginning in New Zealand, a rolling wave of candlelight gatherings will quickly cross the globe. It's up to you to make this happen. Organizers are hoping that thousands of small groups around the world will be inspired to come together and stand for peace.
Anybody know whether this is going ahead in Edinburgh and if so where it is to be held. Princess Street Gardens would seem a good option.
The latest is for a candle light vigil to be held on the evening of 16th March at 7pm
MoveOn.org and the Win Without War coalition, together with Archbishop Desmond Tutu and many faith-based organizations, are calling this vigil. Beginning in New Zealand, a rolling wave of candlelight gatherings will quickly cross the globe. It's up to you to make this happen. Organizers are hoping that thousands of small groups around the world will be inspired to come together and stand for peace.
Anybody know whether this is going ahead in Edinburgh and if so where it is to be held. Princess Street Gardens would seem a good option.
Oh Joy!
University libraries are very interesting places. For example, yesterday I just checked out the following texts:
The Greek Magical Papyri in Translation and
Papyri Graecae Magicae/Der Griechischen Zauberpapyri (2 vols)
So if you want a spell for "Fever with shivering fits" I can supply it in English, Greek or German.
The Greek Magical Papyri in Translation and
Papyri Graecae Magicae/Der Griechischen Zauberpapyri (2 vols)
So if you want a spell for "Fever with shivering fits" I can supply it in English, Greek or German.
Wednesday, March 12, 2003
I used to have a life...
There are so many things that I wanted to up put in here but I haven't had the time. I think it is something to do with having to work until almost 10 pm most nights and barely getting time for lunch breaks much less a life
Couple of high and low lights are:
Last Wednesday leaving work at 10pm to be confronted by a fox in the hospital grounds. Never knew they could manage such a look of contempt, (they must be related to cats). Got cab to Holyrood Tavern got nowhere near drunk enough but still managed to crush fingers between the door and wall whilst leaving the loos. (Thanks to all who fussed and helped, it wasn't a bad injury, it just felt like it was)
Thursday: Bunked off work early (4pm) to go on the Edinburgh Anti-War demo. Heckled the pro-Palestinian speaker. After all when the Israeli government was adhereing to the peace policy, what happened? Yup, Palestinian suicide bombers attacking pizza palours crowded with teenagers, supermarkets on the main shopping day, school buses etc, etc. Of course, this is acceptable, but just let Israel increase security to try to stop the suicide bombers and they are being aggressive and breaking human rights treaties. Is it any wonder that the Israelis voted for Sharon? The people went along with the peace process because the hoped that everyone would be able to live together and not worry about their children being blow to bits, and all that happened was more of their children were being blown to bits. In all the "evil Israel" messages no-one mentions that rich arab countries actually pay large sums to the families of suicide bombers, that many of these Islamic Palestinian groups probably have stronger connections with Al-Qaeda than Iraq.
Saturday night: Stayed up to watch the motor racing. Coulthard won - poo! - as if his head isn't big enough.
Couple of high and low lights are:
Last Wednesday leaving work at 10pm to be confronted by a fox in the hospital grounds. Never knew they could manage such a look of contempt, (they must be related to cats). Got cab to Holyrood Tavern got nowhere near drunk enough but still managed to crush fingers between the door and wall whilst leaving the loos. (Thanks to all who fussed and helped, it wasn't a bad injury, it just felt like it was)
Thursday: Bunked off work early (4pm) to go on the Edinburgh Anti-War demo. Heckled the pro-Palestinian speaker. After all when the Israeli government was adhereing to the peace policy, what happened? Yup, Palestinian suicide bombers attacking pizza palours crowded with teenagers, supermarkets on the main shopping day, school buses etc, etc. Of course, this is acceptable, but just let Israel increase security to try to stop the suicide bombers and they are being aggressive and breaking human rights treaties. Is it any wonder that the Israelis voted for Sharon? The people went along with the peace process because the hoped that everyone would be able to live together and not worry about their children being blow to bits, and all that happened was more of their children were being blown to bits. In all the "evil Israel" messages no-one mentions that rich arab countries actually pay large sums to the families of suicide bombers, that many of these Islamic Palestinian groups probably have stronger connections with Al-Qaeda than Iraq.
Saturday night: Stayed up to watch the motor racing. Coulthard won - poo! - as if his head isn't big enough.
Friday, February 28, 2003
It's taken a long time for me to get around to doing an update, mainly because there has been something brewing in the back of my mind that I wanted to vent about, but didn't feel comfortable venting. A week after the events I still don't feel that I can put the feeling down without upsetting people. Maybe that is part of the problem. I don't vent over little things until it reaches a point where I have to have a big blow up, and then the battle axes really start flying around, whereas last Saturday I walked out of a pub in a way that people, knowing that there was something wrong put down to my being ill. Well I was in a way as I was as depressed as hell. The whys and wherefores are not important now and the people who asked what was wrong have been given reasons. It still hasn't stopped me feeling depressed or stopped me from feeling that I want to lock myself away from the world, to the point that even the thought of updating the blog, this journal, answering emails and so on has increased my depression. I'm sick of going into work and smiling, of being nice and helpful to people. I'm sick of having to be part of the adoring masses to various people that I know. I'm fed up of being a nobody that isn't even perceived as having a worthwhile opinion about anything. I'm sick of doctors telling me to take these pretty pills that will help me pull myself together and most of all I'm sick of living a life that is increasingly becoming the extension or tool of other peoples egos.
But enough of me lets talk about you...
But enough of me lets talk about you...
Thursday, February 20, 2003
Thoughts about Blogs
The news that Google has bought Pyra Labs hit the Edinburgh crowd like a brick. Of course, there was much talk centred around whether this is a "good" or a "bad" thing. On the plus side it does seem to indicate that blogging is going mainstream. It is re-affirming a phenomenon that the news agencies discovered in the wake of 9/11 that when there is a major event/news story people go on-line to the extent that sites like CNN, Fox and even our own BBC couldn't cope. Much of the information I got that day came from internet sources for example various mailing lists and also from the Usenet bulletin boards. Blogs provide pretty much the same sort of coverage, being information that people have heard from various sources, together with how the event is impacting on their own personal experience. The negative side is how companies, like Google, handle the information within blogs. As a socio-historical record of how people live, work and interact in a world that is becoming increasingly driven by technological advances it is second to none. The main worry I have is that Google, being driven by shareholders and a bottom line are going to use their position as owners to data mine blogs, extracting information and demographics that are a valuable resource to market research companies. Monster have already done this using CVs lodged with various job search websites that it owns, and Yahoo keep resetting options for their users so that they can sell information gleened from user profiles to marketing companies.
The whole discussion about the function of blogs set me thinking along another line. Why do we do it? There are lots of ordinary people like myself who have blogs that are updated infrequently. Yet I would suspect that in many cases only a handful of people ever view our rants, raves and witterings, being restricted to close friends and acquaintences. Having blogs coming up on searches would increase out exposure. Or would it? For example, a friend of mine, Charlie, is a writer. What if he and I are working over a weekend fixing computer, and we both blog in detail the problem, the fix, the problem that the fix caused, the new fix etc. Whose blog will people turn to? I suspect that people would go to Charlie's blog, and the reason is simple, he is a writer, he is a computer journalist, he has a high profile. I on the other hand am an unknown who has jumped the blogging bandwagon. It wouldn't matter that in this little made up scenario my blog may be more indepth. I'm an unknown and Charlie is a name. The vast majority of bloggers are going to fall into this "we don't know you so we won't read you" category and unless we manage to produce twice as much output as the "name" bloggers, whilst consistently matching their quality of writing, the balance will always be uneven.
Will Google buying Pyra, change this state of affairs? Will anything? Does anyone care?
The news that Google has bought Pyra Labs hit the Edinburgh crowd like a brick. Of course, there was much talk centred around whether this is a "good" or a "bad" thing. On the plus side it does seem to indicate that blogging is going mainstream. It is re-affirming a phenomenon that the news agencies discovered in the wake of 9/11 that when there is a major event/news story people go on-line to the extent that sites like CNN, Fox and even our own BBC couldn't cope. Much of the information I got that day came from internet sources for example various mailing lists and also from the Usenet bulletin boards. Blogs provide pretty much the same sort of coverage, being information that people have heard from various sources, together with how the event is impacting on their own personal experience. The negative side is how companies, like Google, handle the information within blogs. As a socio-historical record of how people live, work and interact in a world that is becoming increasingly driven by technological advances it is second to none. The main worry I have is that Google, being driven by shareholders and a bottom line are going to use their position as owners to data mine blogs, extracting information and demographics that are a valuable resource to market research companies. Monster have already done this using CVs lodged with various job search websites that it owns, and Yahoo keep resetting options for their users so that they can sell information gleened from user profiles to marketing companies.
The whole discussion about the function of blogs set me thinking along another line. Why do we do it? There are lots of ordinary people like myself who have blogs that are updated infrequently. Yet I would suspect that in many cases only a handful of people ever view our rants, raves and witterings, being restricted to close friends and acquaintences. Having blogs coming up on searches would increase out exposure. Or would it? For example, a friend of mine, Charlie, is a writer. What if he and I are working over a weekend fixing computer, and we both blog in detail the problem, the fix, the problem that the fix caused, the new fix etc. Whose blog will people turn to? I suspect that people would go to Charlie's blog, and the reason is simple, he is a writer, he is a computer journalist, he has a high profile. I on the other hand am an unknown who has jumped the blogging bandwagon. It wouldn't matter that in this little made up scenario my blog may be more indepth. I'm an unknown and Charlie is a name. The vast majority of bloggers are going to fall into this "we don't know you so we won't read you" category and unless we manage to produce twice as much output as the "name" bloggers, whilst consistently matching their quality of writing, the balance will always be uneven.
Will Google buying Pyra, change this state of affairs? Will anything? Does anyone care?
Tuesday, February 18, 2003
War with Iraq
Whilst I didn't go on the Anti-War demo I am very much against the stance that the British Govt is taking. Despite my own failing to get my arse across to Glasgow I am pleased to see that many others are not as lazy as I am and much respect to those of you who did march.
One of the things that, in my mind, stands out in the govt rhetoric is their insistance that this is part of the "War against terrorism". Now I will grant that Saddam Hussein is a nasty piece of work, but apart from his own people I haven't seen any evidence that he is doing anything in the way of openly terrorizing his neighbours and I think the way he was forcibly evicted from Kuwait put paid to any plans of expansion that he may have once had. (I could be wrong there because I am neither an expert in Middle East politics nor psychology).
However, reading the BMJ (1) I noticed a news article highlighting the release of a report (2) relating to the mental health of Iraqi children. This report is based on the the work of a humanitarian fact finding mission, that interviewed families in Iraq at the beginning of the year. The team included two child psychologists who report that:
"..the children have "a great fear" of a war that they perceive to be "hanging over their heads." Children as young as four described ideas about the horrors of war. They were fearful, anxious, and depressed about the prospects of armed conflict... Many have nightmares, and 40% do not think that life is worth living"
To me these children are being terrorized, and yes I do mean terrorized
The Oxford English Dictionary (3) give the meaning of terrorist as:
1. As a political term: a. Applied to the Jacobins and their agents and partisans in the French Revolution, esp. to those connected with the Revolutionary tribunals during the ‘Reign of Terror’. b. Any one who attempts to further his views by a system of coercive intimidation. In early use also applied spec. to members of one of the extreme revolutionary societies in Russia. The term now usually refers to a member of a clandestine or expatriate organization aiming to coerce an established government by acts of violence against it or its subjects.
2. Dyslogistically: One who entertains, professes, or tries to awaken or spread a feeling of terror or alarm; an alarmist, a scaremonger.
Now correct me if I'm wrong (and I really don't think I am) but looking at the definition at 1b, isn't this what Bush and Blair are doing to the children and people of Iraq? Further isn't the stepping up security at airports and reporting more and more about the perceived threat what Blair is trying to do to us here?
So who are the real terrorists?
REFERENCES
1. Clark. BMJ 2003;326: 356 Link to BMJ News 15th February 2003
2. Our Common Responsibility: The Impact of a New War on Iraqi Children Link to Reports at War Child Canada
3. Oxford English Dictionary On-line. Link to definition
One of the things that, in my mind, stands out in the govt rhetoric is their insistance that this is part of the "War against terrorism". Now I will grant that Saddam Hussein is a nasty piece of work, but apart from his own people I haven't seen any evidence that he is doing anything in the way of openly terrorizing his neighbours and I think the way he was forcibly evicted from Kuwait put paid to any plans of expansion that he may have once had. (I could be wrong there because I am neither an expert in Middle East politics nor psychology).
However, reading the BMJ (1) I noticed a news article highlighting the release of a report (2) relating to the mental health of Iraqi children. This report is based on the the work of a humanitarian fact finding mission, that interviewed families in Iraq at the beginning of the year. The team included two child psychologists who report that:
"..the children have "a great fear" of a war that they perceive to be "hanging over their heads." Children as young as four described ideas about the horrors of war. They were fearful, anxious, and depressed about the prospects of armed conflict... Many have nightmares, and 40% do not think that life is worth living"
To me these children are being terrorized, and yes I do mean terrorized
The Oxford English Dictionary (3) give the meaning of terrorist as:
1. As a political term: a. Applied to the Jacobins and their agents and partisans in the French Revolution, esp. to those connected with the Revolutionary tribunals during the ‘Reign of Terror’. b. Any one who attempts to further his views by a system of coercive intimidation. In early use also applied spec. to members of one of the extreme revolutionary societies in Russia. The term now usually refers to a member of a clandestine or expatriate organization aiming to coerce an established government by acts of violence against it or its subjects.
2. Dyslogistically: One who entertains, professes, or tries to awaken or spread a feeling of terror or alarm; an alarmist, a scaremonger.
Now correct me if I'm wrong (and I really don't think I am) but looking at the definition at 1b, isn't this what Bush and Blair are doing to the children and people of Iraq? Further isn't the stepping up security at airports and reporting more and more about the perceived threat what Blair is trying to do to us here?
So who are the real terrorists?
REFERENCES
1. Clark. BMJ 2003;326: 356 Link to BMJ News 15th February 2003
2. Our Common Responsibility: The Impact of a New War on Iraqi Children Link to Reports at War Child Canada
3. Oxford English Dictionary On-line. Link to definition
Monday, February 17, 2003
Officially Insane?!
Surfing the web I re-found the link to the Insanity Test. Yes I know there are lots of insanity tests around but as one of my major interests is motor racing you will see why I like this one. Despite having seen it before (about 18 months ago) I still started laughing at it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)