For Whom the Bell Tolls

Well, I don't really know what popped this one in my head today, but I feel it needs a bit of investigating!

The other half was reading a Ben Elton* some time ago, and commented on the Executioner character with the tattoo on his head that reads;

"Ask not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee"

Which, apart from being nice and dramatic, got me thinking. And I remarked that the "bell" refers to the bell at Saint Sepulchre's that used to toll on execution day outside London's Newgate prison.
Then I thought, "where the bloody hell did I get that idea from? It's a quote from scripture isn't it?" Swiftly followed by thinking about the Metallica song and forgetting all about it.

Que a bit of actual research!

Well, I was sort of right. It is a bit religious at least. And that is the whole phrase, whereas I figured Ben Elton had made up the last part! It's from a poem written by an English "Metaphysical Poet" in the 1600s.

Here it is in the original context;

No Man is an Island - John Donne

No man is an island entire of itself; every man
is a piece of the continent, a part of the main;
if a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe
is the less, as well as if a promontory** were, as
well as a manor of thy friends or of thine
own were; any man's death diminishes me,
because I am involved in mankind.
And therefore never send to know for whom
the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.

First Published: 1624


The bell in question turns out to be funeral bells. (Church bells tolling to mark a funeral) And the meaning, is in my opinion anyway, a touch morbid. I mean, yes, it's making a striking point about unity, and solidarity etc. Still morbid though; Every time a man dies, a bit of you dies because you are a member of mankind too, just like the deceased. No man is immune, "No man is an island", we're all...continents?

I'll stick to my Edward Lear, thanks all the same mate.


Anyway, there's the origins of the phrase right there. But there is more, of course.

Ernest Hemmingway published a book called "For Whom the Bell Tolls" in 1940 and used Donne's slightly creepy little poem as part of the introduction.
(You know what...it might be creepy, but it's growing on me the more I read it. Bit like that "Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow" bit from Macbeth does. It's equally a bit creepy, but somehow eloquent and beautiful, and memorable. Probably because it's creepy.)
Anyhow, I digress. Hemmingway's book is about war, and according to Wikipedia;

"The novel graphically describes the brutality of civil war [...] There is camaraderie in the face of death throughout the novel, with the need for surrender of one's self for the common good repeated."

I presume that is the relevance of using the poem right there, and Hemmingway's seems to be the most famous use of the phrase. That is until Metallica came along of course...





-

* The book was Blind Faith. If you haven't read it, go and buy it now!! It really should have been called 2084 if you ask me. It's pure genius, and bloody hilarious.

**Incase you're wondering, I didn't have a clue what the heck a promontory was either, (And no, it's not a Tory who is Pro-Money) so I looked it up; "A promontory is a prominent mass of land that overlooks lower lying land or a body of water (where it may be called a peninsula or headland)"

Gaddaffi's Dead

As I'm sure everyone in the world now knows. I don't know, I guess it's a important event, a step in the right direction towards world peace etc etc... I just thought it would be appropriate to give it a little mention.

But anyway, that over and done with, in much more interesting news, they've kicked the pikeys off Dale Farm!

Pikeys that think building on greenbelt land is acceptable - 0
The rest of the bloody country - 1

Ha!

No no no no no! That is never going to work!

...and I quote;

"MPs and justice campaigners say some of the sentences given to those involved in the riots in England are too harsh.
On Tuesday two men were jailed for four years for using Facebook to incite riots and another was given 18 months for having a stolen TV in his car.
Liberal Democrat MP Tom Brake said sentences "should be about restorative justice" not retribution. [...] Andrew Neilson, of the Howard League for Penal Reform, said: "A four-year sentence would normally be associated with offences such as holding someone up at knife point, grievous bodily harm, sexual assault, and I'm not sure that the offence in question was really related to those types of offences."*

No!
No no no!

Ugh.


For goodness sake! Let's get back to basics here. Let me explain something about the human psyche. And this is not complex psychology, t'aint even remotely Freudian my friends. It's a little something I like to call Common Sense. Now, this may be an unfamiliar term, this Common Sense thing. These days it is almost non-existent, and has been utterly and totally obliterated by a little something called Health and Safety, or as I like to call it, Bullshit.
All humans are born with some modicum of Common Sense. Sometimes, people like www.Hadatriporfallatwork.Iknow!Suetheboss.com are able to eradicate Common Sense in some individuals through the power of Free Money. But for most people, Common Sense remains, lurking in the deep dark recesses of their brains.

Now, let me explain how this works;

1. Child puts finger into candle flame because it is pretty.
2. Candle flame might be pretty, but it's also bloody hot.
3. Child burns their finger on candle flame
4. It hurts. A lot.
5. Child does not do that again, because it hurts.

or;

1. Rioter steals telly, because it is pretty.
2. Old bill arrest rioter because stealing is illegal.
3. Rioter goes to prison. Prison is horrible.
4. Rioter finally gets out of prison and doesn't steal any more tellys.
5. Rioter doesn't fancy ending up in prison again. Prison is horrible.


It's called Common Sense people!!

Ugh.


-

*Quote taken from the BBC website here.

Riots, Race Relations and Coalminers and things

Well, ever since these riots began, I have been telling anyone and everyone who will listen that the BNP are going to have a field day with this one once it's all over. And that those idiots who started the riots have just strengthened the perception that all black people are evil telly-stealing thieves tenfold. Well done guys! Have a gold star. You've done wonders for race-relations and just fuelled the BNPs campaigns for the next ten years!

Cretins.

Anyhow, I've always had a soft spot for the BNP, firstly because they're silly policies are always good for a laugh. And secondly, because I can see potential there. I know this is a controversial view, and the BNP are essentially a bunch of flag-waving racists. But they are a bunch of flag-waving racists who don't half give a good speech on Patriotism. And Patriotism is something this country could do with a bit more of in my opinion. Less of the "it's all going to the dogs!" and more of the "well, isn't the NHS a bloody good idea." Sadly however, burning all the jews ain't the way to go about it. So for the time being, the BNP are relegated to the silly camp. (More on this here and here for anyone who is interested)

Anyway, back to the Field Day. I found this article on their website:

"In this multicultural ‘utopia’ – why does one community demand to be treated differently to the others?"

And I had a good old giggle over this quote:

"While the Lib/Lab/Con-supporting mainstream media has already sought to change the truth by printing many pictures of white-skinned rioters and looters with only the occasional black face shown"

No, actually, they haven't. Hate to break it to you guys, there are plenty of pictures of both. I know this, I spent last tuesday glued to both the BBC and Sky's live riot news. The whole 1984 attitude that the government control the media and use it for a good old bit of brainwashing really does irritate me a lot. 2 + 2 will never equal 5, no matter what the conspiracy theorists would have you believe. And no, Big Brother is not watching you! He has better things to do.

But I rather liked this quote:

"People who do not work when they can, who continually produce and raise children with no father around, who do not ensure that their children at least learn to read, write and speak recognisable English, and who allow their children to grow up with no ambitions and to feel that the world owes them something and has let them down are people who take no responsibility for their own lives and simply rely on others to provide for them and take the blame when their lives don’t match up to what they seem to think they should."

Goodness gracious me! Did the BNP just agree with David Cameron on something...?
Well, almost. The only difference is that the BNP, predictably, blame the whole thing on immigration. And Cameron, well, he's been very careful about blaming anyone. He's merely been stating the fact that there are a "group of people within our society that...feel the world owes them something" I have to say, I prefer how the BNP said it. But then they're not really real politicians, so they can say what they like.
I do wish the Conservatives were able to stop trying to be nice and just come out with it. The benefit system is a good idea badly executed, and certain bits of it just need to go. I'd love to help write their posters!

"Enough is Enough. We've cut the deficit, and now we're going to cut the freeloaders. Cut their benefits and then cut them up into little teeny tiny pieces!! Ooh yeah, we're back in business baby! And this time there ain't no coalminers to strike over things!"


I hope no one ever allows me to take up politics in earnest y'know...

RIOTS - Ruddy Idiots On Tottenham's Streets!

What a bunch of plonkers Rodney!

Yes, well, the "Tottenham Riots", which seem to now be the "Any city there's good shops to rob Riots".

So, lets get the facts out of the way first:

1. Man with gun got shot by police.
2. People had a protest about it.
3. More people arrived and started smashing windows and stealing things.
4. Everyone loves a bit of free shit, so half the bloody country joined in.

Firstly, I have to say I actually feel for this guys poor family. First they find out their son is a drug dealer who carried a gun. Then they find out the Old Bill have shot him, because he had a gun. And now a load of kids are stealing trainers from JJB Sports in his name. That is not going to help with the grieving process!

The lad who got shot is, of course, just an excuse now. I really do think Cameron hit the nail on the head when he spoke about "a group of people who...feel the world owes them something" being the root cause of the problem.
Oh bugger it, I'm gonna jump right in here...it's all Labour's bloody fault!! There's no such thing as a free lunch. No matter how much they'd have liked people to think otherwise, there really isn't. It was all going to go tits up one day, and now it has begun. People are angry because the current government are making cuts. Funnily enough, if the previous government hadn't been spending money that wasn't there, the current government wouldn't be making those cuts. When I was younger, my Mum warned me about credit cards. She warned me that it is very easy to balls it all up and end up owing money you can't afford to pay. I don't have any credit cards pretty much as a direct result of those warnings. I firmly believe credit cards are the Devil's Plaything and you won't catch me anywhere near one!! Someone really ought to have stepped in and pointed this out to the previous government. If it ever happens again, (Labour getting elected that is) I volunteer my Mum. She'd give 'em what for, and there would be no arguing the point!

Thing is, the benefit system is rubbish.* It encourages bone idleness. Too many people are able to claim free money for all sorts of ridiculous reasons. I have a 20-something friend whose working days I could probably count on one hand. She lives in a rather nice one bed flat with all expenses paid. For no apparent reason whatsoever other than sheer laziness. I believe "I'm allergic to work" is a viable thing to stick on a benefit claim form these days!
The sickening thing is that if you take away the free houses from the scroungers, as by rights ought to be done, the scroungers will only be out looting JJB again to "protest". What's needed is a change of mentality. A change away from the assumption that the way to become independent and get your first place is not to work hard, and save up a deposit. It's to stick your name on the council list as early as humanely possible and sit tight at your mums until the council hand you a house on a plate.
How can we change that mentality? I honestly don't know. Well, if I was Prime Minister I would personally boot the whole bloody lot of 'em out to fend for themselves for a change whilst yelling "get a job you flamin' parasites!" as loud as I could. Problem Solved.

I do hope the current government sort it all out, and I do believe they're well on the way. Sadly, I also believe that more than good politics, a good PR agent is going to be the solution. Otherwise we're only going to end up with Labour again next time round and the whole bloody cycle will start all over. Failing that, everyone might be so thoroughly sick of the "Big Three" that we end up with the BNP, or worse, the bloody Green Party. And then, God help us all my friends, God help us all!!


-

* I'd just like to add one little piece of pretty conclusive evidence that the current benefit system is, well, buggered. I'm not rich by any stretch of the imagination, but I do run a business and I survive. But I am actually technically entitled to £400 a month of benefits. Yep. Me. Benefits. Oh do piss off! What on earth for? I have half a mind to claim it, demand it's paid in one pound coins, and then spend an afternoon throwing those coins at the council offices!!

The Bailey Report - "Sexualisation"

God this irritates me!

Have a little looky here if you'd like a bit of background: Belle de Jour "Sexonomics"

Basically, it's a report given to the government by a bloke with a clear agenda to get a few column inches and shock a few people. It's all about how the government should "clamp down" on Sexualisation. As mentioned in Belle de Jour's blog, nowhere is "Sexualisation" actually defined. But I think we can safely take it to mean children wearing ridiculous crop top-type clothes and talking like a nigga from the ghetto, innit. Or other similar things, anyway.
I can tell you now that it irritates me a lot. An awful lot! Let me tell you why. But first, if you'd like to, you can check out the full review here.


So, the first problem I came across was in one of the first quotes from a parent;

Silly parent quote #1

"There is a need for such a huge cultural shift away from consumerism that I feel powerless as an individual to act"

Bollocks. If you don't buy it, they won't sell it. That's how it works. And even if there is a market out there for whatever particular product you don't want your child to have, just don't buy it yourself. I always wanted a cat when I was a child, not particularly sexual I know (unless you are slightly creepy, actually, very creepy) but you know what? My mum wouldn't let me have one. She didn't require all cats everywhere to be slaughtered and never sold again in case other children wanted one too.

Silly parent quote #2

"Advertising for perfumes is almost always of a sexual nature"

You ready for this? No. It's not. And here's why;

Reason 1 - A strapless dress.
Reason 2 - A strange lady with a moustache.
Reason 3 - A fairy. Clearly. It's hot where fairies come from, hence the silly gold top.
Reason 4 - A man and woman having a cuddle.

It's only as sexual as you make it guys.

Silly Parent quote # 3

"It is unfortunate that the lazy, uninventive ‘sex sells’ attitude of the media which plasters sexual images and articles everywhere, causes parents to have to address the topic with their children a lot sooner than many would like, before they are at an age where they are emotionally equipped to understand it."

Bollocks. If your child asks you "what that man is doing on top of that woman", lie. Lie through your teeth! Wrestling, fighting, cuddling, practicing press-ups, whatever you can think of. There's no reason to have the birds and bees talk any time before you want to. If the child is too young, they will accept any ridiculous made up answer you give. If the child is old enough, you're likely to get a response like "looks like they're shagging to me, mum" anyway, making the whole birds and bees exercise slightly pointless.

Silly Parent quote #4

"There is too much sexual (and violent) content before the watershed, particularly in soaps... The other problem is often programmes are repeated on digital channels at different hours of the day."

Simples. Stop watching soaps with the kids around. (Let's face it, for the most part, they're godawful anyway) And for goodness sake, don't put a bloody telly in a kids bedroom!


Silly Parent quote #5

"Whenever I have seen music videos lately I have been completely disheartened by the relentless portrayal of women as sex objects. More often than not they show young women in hardly any clothes … basically simulating sex... For a lot of acts that are popular with young people, the music video has become a way of pushing boundaries to see how much they can get away with."

Buy your child an Iron Maiden album. Then buy them a copy of the Rime of the Ancient Mariner. If, anywhere, there is a video of Eddie "in hardly any clothes … basically simulating sex", I should very much like to see it!

Silly Parent quote #6

"The music videos that children can watch are extremely explicit – from the clothes they wear to the words and actions. Some songs my 13 year old sings back are shocking."

I refer to my previous statement;

"Day after day, day after day,
We stuck, nor breath nor motion;
As idle as a painted ship
Upon a painted ocean.
Water, water, every where,
And all the boards did shrink;
Water, water, every where,
Nor any drop to drink."

I suppose it is shocking, but not in the same way. And a child that understands the way in which it is shocking doesn't exactly strike me as a bad thing...

Silly Parent quote #7

"The internet and on-demand TV is my main concern, with children watching in their bedrooms. What is needed is a default setting for pornography, so that parents cannot leave it accessible by mistake."

Solution 1 - No TV in the bedroom.
Solution 2 - Don't watch porn on the PC your kids use!! Common sense people!

Silly parent quote #8

"My biggest concern is the internet which is also invading young people’s mobile phones."

I can fully understand giving a child a phone, the benefits are obvious. I cannot understand giving a child an iPhone. Tesco do still sell these you know.


Silly Parent quote #9

"The problem is that when you are ‘out and about’ with kids, things aren’t neatly compartmentalised – so clothes shops, music shops, games shops etc sell things aimed at say 9-12 year olds alongside adult products."

I'm going to be perfectly and completely honest here. I have never, not once in my life ever, seen a Dildo for sale in a supermarket next to a Barbie Doll.

Seriously though, if there happens to be a copy of Debbie Does Dallas next to Bambi, don't buy it for your child! How hard is that?*

*Just a little side note here. I once had a woman in my shop with her toddler. Said toddler was running around all over the place, grabbing things, picking things up and throwing things and generally just being a brat. I did my usual "honey please don't do that" which normally does the trick if you glare at the child and smile at the mum, and it didn't work. So I asked the mother to please stop her son running around in case he hurts himself. She snapped back at me and said "you try telling a two year old not to run around" When I offered to do so properly with a good solid clip round the ear, strangely, she declined! But it did make me think. If you cannot control your child, should you necessarily take them shopping? Or should you even be a parent?

Silly Parent Quote #10

"The problem is that parents sometimes feel the peer pressure too and often feel almost forced to buy certain products because other parents are. They feel like bad parents if they don’t."

You are not a bad parent if you refuse to buy your child P. Diddy-Dickhead's latest album and instead buy them a more suitable album. Or better still, a bloody good book. You are a good parent, who is setting your child a foundation for a better future by giving them a good education. They will be the ones laughing all the way to the bank when their company hires one of their former schoolfriends as a cleaner, and informs her that she can't listen to P. Diddy-Dickhead on her iPod whilst working.



And finally, the only sensible thing I found in the entire review!

"You have a choice as a parent, as an adult. If you don’t like it, don’t let them (have it)."

No shit, Sherlock.


I think that one just about sums up my entire point y'know.

New Gadget! Reviews

I gots me a new bloggy gadget!

What do you think of this blog? Why don't you write me a review? There's now a reviews page for anyone to submit what they think of the whole site. You can write whatever you like, just be nice okay folks!

Have a click here:

http://christiekawasaki.blogspot.com/p/reviews.html

And tell me what you think. Go on, it'll only take a minute!

Oh, and you can do it anonymously if you like. You can also link your own site too. Infact you can do anything at all. All reviewers will be rewarded with a free Air Guitar. And some Fairy Dust.

Football Players - Seriously, what's the problem?

I have seen one too many places of late quoting football players salaries. Personally, I couldn't really give a toss what football players are paid. When the world cup is on, I have a large sign on my shop door advertising it as a football free zone - and I will throw people out if they happen to mention football! However, whether or not I happen to like football is by the by. (For the record, I don't. In case you hadn't guessed.) Let me now quote you something which is once again doing the rounds on Facebook;

"footballers give 90 mins of their time kicking a ball around for vast sums of money..... soldiers fight to defend this country and those who live here.....they deserve the footballer's wage"

There are plenty of similar ones which crop up from time to time, with "repost if you believe this...honor our troops" etc etc. It's all much for a muchness. I'm sure you may even have encountered one or two.

It's also all utter, utter nonsense.

It's basic business when you get right down to it. Straightforward stuff. The Army isn't really a business. There's no incentive there to maximise profits, whether or not there are even any profits in the first place is a subject I'm not exactly qualified to comment on. Business on the other hand, I have a bit of a grasp of. Mister [insert random *ahem* "overpaid footballer" here] is doing a job with a great degree of profit potential. Initially he's kicking a ball around for 90 minutes and getting paid a fair few bob for doing it. He can command said fair few bob because the organisers know what they're doing when it comes to making money. Sponsorships, Advertising, Merchandising, and of course Ticket Sales. And that's not an exhaustive list. They're bringing in the money, so Mister Footballer can command his share of it. If they won't pay him the share he wants, well, him and his Image can bugger off to someone else who will. Then of course there's his Image itself. His Image sells, as they say. If either Mister Footballer or his Agent have an ounce of business sense (which of course they do, in abundance it seems!) they'll use his Image in a ton of ways. Again, Sponsorships, Advertising, Merchandising and anything else which will earn a few pennies! It just so happens that the industry which Mister Footballer works in is worth millions, and isn't exactly all reliant on playing football games either. There's nothing to stop him donning a pair of designer trainers for the afternoon to kick a ball around in front of a few cameras in a London studio somewhere. By doing which, he can make a small fortune in an afternoons work, simply for allowing said designer trainers to grace his worshipful feet.

If you had a job like that, wouldn't you milk it for all it's worth too?
So, back to the Army. Where is that opportunity for merchandising? Sponsorships? Advertising? Will military uniforms suddenly start sporting silly slogans? Could certain companies be allowed to advertise on the side of our aircraft carriers? Sounds a bit daft, doesn't it. I'm sure they could, but that's not the point of the Army. They're not there to make money. They're there to blow up Ze Germans if Hitler suddenly rises from the grave and gets up his horrible Jew-Burning habit again. (Not likely, I grant you. But I'm told Jesus managed it, well, not the Jew-Burning part...)
I'm sure you see my point. It's comparing a business and a service. Granted, a service can also be a business, but the Army is not such. Therefore the whole comparison is just downright silly.

So, what started all this? I was reading an interview with Belle de Jour (That's Brooke Magnanti nowadays) and noticed a comment down the bottom along the same vein of Soldiers Wages vs Footballers Wages, only it was actually Research Scientists Wages vs Footballers Wages. I shan't go into it other than that. But it got me thinking, Mister Godwin really needs to do a study into this one too. According to Godwin's Law;

"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."^[3][2] In other words, Godwin put forth the hyperbolic observation that, given enough time, in any online discussion—regardless of topic or scope—someone inevitably criticizes some point made in the discussion by comparing it to beliefs held by Hitler and the Nazis." *

So, to finish, I should like to propose Christie's Law;

"As an online discussion involving the subject of low wages, with regards to groups deemed to be a form of public service [such as military, academic, charitable etc] grows longer, it is only a matter of time before someone gets all righteous about Wayne Rooney's income"



* and yes, I know I'm one of the worst perpetrators of Godwins Law, it just so happens that Hitler is a favourite subject of mine. Don't get me wrong, nothing to do with burning Jews whatsoever, he's just so recognisable as the iconic "bad guy", and therefore makes for such very good satire...

Are you sick of the Royal Wedding yet?

I'm not.
Well, not yet anyway.

But there's a very simple reason for that. I don't have a telly. Well, at least I don't have one that works, I have one that plays playstation games and the occasional video, but not TV. Sometimes I even push the boat out a bit and watch a DVD! But no actual live broadcasting of any sort generally.
My mum does have a telly however, and I nipped round hers the other day for something and made the insane decision to switch it on for a bit.

THE COUNTRY'S GONE MAD! STARK RAVING BONKERS!!

Well, if you believe the telly anyway, it has. Honest. Wills and Kate, Kate and WillsandKateandweddingsandunionflagsandand... (And I'm sure last time I looked, the name was William, but that's by the by.)
Gosh. Stuff that. I am never getting a proper telly!

But that said, I'm still going to hang a Saint George's Flag out of the window this weekend. Just Because. I do like a good excuse to hang a flag up.
I wish them all the best, marriages are lovely an' all that, but I was also planning on ignoring the whole thing and going out shopping for the day, but something tells me that might be a little optimistic.

The AV, or in English, The Alternative Vote

I had a leaflet through my door the other day encouraging me to "say NO to AV". Allow me if you will, dear reader, to talk you through my thoughts upon reading this...

"Oh, that's a good idea. The AV button on Mums telly never worked properly, and mine doesn't work at all....Hang on a minute, why would people be protesting about dodgy tellys? Oh it must be something to do with the airport again, AV, Aviance..." Break for coffee and look at leaflet again once actually awake "...oh! The Alternative Vote! Why didn't they bloody say so?"

So, broken tellys aside, what are my thoughts on the matter?
Well, I can't really see the point it bothering to fiddle with it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. And is it necessarily broke? I can't say I'm convinced, unless of course you voted Labour, in which case perhaps the current system could be a blessing in disguise...

The Old Bill ain't half daft sometimes...

Well, a lot of the time actually, if you ask me!

My garage was broken into yesterday. This is nothing more than a downright nuisance as all it contains is a load of old junk. So unless the thief has a fetish for empty bottles of engine oil and broken fridges, there wasn't a lot that would be of any interest to him in there!
The reaction of the Old Bill to this little dilemma was enlightening, to say the least. Now let me just put this into perspective. My motorcycle was stolen last year. Value? 8 1/2 grand. A friend's Ninja was stolen the following day, value? 6-7 grand. Then another friends went the following day, value? 8 grand. Then someone else's Ninja went, then another, and the list goes on. Over the space of a month, the same group of thieves collected a good quarter mill's worth of bikes. All Ninjas. All matching descriptions of the same van. (It was a fairly distinctive van) When I rang the old bill, with half a ton of evidence, including CCTV, they "filed a report". Over the phone.
Compare that, if you will, to my garage full of junk. They sent round an officer, who took a good 3 hours taking a statement. They sent round someone to "forensically secure" the garage. (Who didn't have anything to do it with, borrowed a bit of wood from me, then put his hands all over the doors anyway) And today they have promised to send round a forensic team. (Who, as yet, haven't shown!) Bear in mind here that nothing is missing from the garage. Including the empty bottles of oil. And the broken fridge is actually still there. And it's still broken. If anything, it's a little rustier than it was last time I looked.

Work that one out!

My suggestion? Well, if you're ever unlucky enough to have a motorcycle stolen, tell the police your garden shed has been broken into and you're awfully frightened that your 20 year old lawnmower that doesn't work is missing! Oh, and your broom with no handle is definitely gone.
You never know, that way they make actually turn up...

The Lib-Dems are "Too Male and Too Pale", apparently!

...And they're too liberal as well if you ask me, but that's utterly beside the point!

So anyway, I discovered an old copy of The Times at work and I thought I'd have a good old read of it over lunch. And I came across this slightly silly-sounding headline...

The Lib-Dems are "Too Male and Too Pale"

So ladies and gentlemen, we are being told most Liberals are white and male. Wowee what a shock! Quick Mister N, better hire some token women/blacks/asians/oompa-loompas/cabbages (delete as applicable!)
I jest. But honestly, that's exactly what the party say they plan on doing! Well maybe not oompa-loompas, cabbages potentially, but not oompa-loompas.
Honestly guys, who cares if you're all white blokes? You're politicians, not a girl-band! Could you kindly start acting like politicians and cease caring about gender, or the colour of peoples skin? It stopped being a problem many years ago, and there is no reason for it to become one again.

I'll be honest, personally, I really wouldn't give a toss if the lib-dems were all orange-skinned transvestites called Barbara, with a penchant for wearing bananas as earrings...as long as they do the job we're paying them to do!

"Positive Discrimination" indeed! Now I'm sure there's an Old English word for positive discrimination, ah yes, I remember it, "bullshit".

What does "ghoti" spell?

Fish, obviously.

Think about it;
GH - as in "That's enough", F
O - as in "Three women", I
TI - as in "Train Station", SH

GHOTI = FISH

Ah, the wonders of the English Language, nothing is as it seems!

Ka, Ba and Akh - The Ancient Egyptian Soul

The Egyptians had quite a few interesting ideas with regards to the human soul, and some which are quite hard for us modern types to conceive of. However, some are pretty good food for thought.
So, something "quite interesting" for you now;

Firstly, the Egyptians did not have a simple idea of a soul. There was not "living humans with a single spiritual essence" and then "dead humans who's spiritual essence buggers off to Heaven" (or Hades, or Valhalla or wherever.) There were essentially three "spiritual" parts to a human, and these needed different things. Initially, without the body being preserved, these parts would have nowhere to reside when they weren't living it up in the afterlife, or hanging around irritating their relatives and would therefore quite simply die off. Hence the fantastically complicated burial rituals and the inevitable mummification.

We'll do the easy ones first;

Ka - This is the life force. The living energy of a person. It enters the body when born and leaves it when dead. It is basically the "spirit", not conscious or thinking as such, purely a force.

Ba - This is the thinking one, it's basically the soul. What's different about it is that it needs sustenance. Offerings of food must be left in the tomb, and the Ba will consume the "essence" of these offerings. (The priests of course then get to consume the physical offerings which are no use to the dead, pretty clever huh?)

Akh - This one is the combination of Ka and Ba. And it only comes into being if the proper rituals are performed at the funeral, drawing the Ka and Ba out of the body and getting them to come together. The Akh then basically becomes the Ghost. Able to come and go in the afterlife. And able to wind up the relatives if it so chooses!


Now, what interests me in all of this is the idea that this Akh of the dead person (made up of Ba and Ka) needs sustenance to go on existing. Not only in the form of food and drink, but in the form of attention from the living. There is a lovely little phrase which is often found in tombs which reads "Oh you, who live on earth and pass by this stele, if you love life and hate death, say: may he receive a thousand loaves of bread and a thousand jugs of beer!" So a living person can give this sustenance to the Akh of a dead person simply by willing it.

Now, back to modern times, stick all of that together with one of the theories I previously proposed with regards to the soul, Theory 2. The soul is a concept. It's an idea. Can an idea exist if no one is there to think it? Probably it can't. But it definitely can exist if it is shared and there are many people to think it. Can a person go on simply because there are still people to speak their name and remember them?

Maybe the Egyptians and their nutty priests were onto something here? Maybe they weren't. But it's quite a nice thought either way.



The "opening of the mouth ceremony" The priests are drawing out the Ka and Ba to get them to combine into the Akh. Without this ceremony, it was believed a person could not have life after death.

The Human Soul

What's it made of? And does it even exist?

I'm going to put forward a few theories here, and I'd welcome people's comments on this one. I can't say I have a definite opinion myself, more of a rough idea which is open to change. I'd say yes, it does exist and as for what it's made of, strawberry milkshake maybe? Take that to mean I haven't the foggiest! But I do reckon science may well answer that question one day. Take oxygen for example. It's completely invisible to the naked eye, yet we know it's all around us, and we know what it is. But years ago, we didn't even know it existed.

Theory 1
Maybe the soul is made up of something which we don't have the equipment to detect at the moment? If this is the case, I would like to put forward the suggestion that these new particles (or whatever they turned out to be) are named Soulite Kawasakiums. Scientists, please take note!

Theory 2
The soul is a concept. It is the end result of a series of chemical reactions in the brain which make up a persons individuality. I think therefore I am and all that. Maybe "soul" is quite simply another word for "intelligent consciousness".

Theory 3
As Dr Franknfurter so eloquently puts it, maybe the soul is "that elusive spark of life!" Maybe without one, we could not live. Maybe the soul is quite simply life itself. And maybe life itself is a part of those chemical reactions in the brain which allow us to feel emotion, maybe residing in that huge chunk of the brain which we still don't fully understand

Theory 4
Maybe the soul just isn't? It doesn't exist. But then again, if it is a concept, it can exist without needing to exist physically. An idea can exist without being drawn on a bit of paper. But can that idea live on alone once there is no one to think it?


Now hows that for some weighty questions at silly o' clock in the morning? Enjoy!

Why Insurance Companies Should Be Shot

...and then fed to the lions at London Zoo!!

Well, why?

Because I am still Ninjaless. And I am still Ninjaless because the lastest letter I sent my insurance company answering and reanswering all the questions they've already asked me ten times anyway was typed. Yes, you read that right. Typed. And they want it handwritten.

I have half a mind to handwrite it in classical latin in the most indecipherable calligraphy I can manage...


And to add insult to injury, they are of course still convinced that my Ninja hasn't been stolen at all and is currently locked up in my garage being party to a nice little bit of insurance fraud. Would that that were the case my friends! Why don't you pop round and check? And if you can somehow miraculously magic my stolen Ninja back into my garage I'll tell you what I'll do, I'll bloody pay out to you, what you should be paying me! And I'll pay it in gold bullion and bloody well gift wrap it an' all!!

Cretins.

The NHS

Somewhere, in the vast mists of time, I once heard the NHS described as a 'vast money sucking beast we can scarce afford'. Which is so very true. But would we want to be without it?

No.

Obviously.

I really have heard the phrase "the NHS are useless" far too many times recently...
I think the thing a lot of people are forgetting is that private healthcare is readily available. However if you want a better service, (shock horror!) you have to pay for it. And pay a lot more than you do for the NHS, for it. Yes, the NHS is slightly flawed, but the bottom line here is that it exists. Once you get so completely used to something you begin to take it for granted, and to see flaws in it. America is a classic example here, their healthcare system is based on insurance. And as we all know, all insurance companies the world over are frauds!! No insurance means no treatment. Okay, maybe that's a slightly exaggerated viewpoint! But not being an American, I've not experienced healthcare (or lack thereof) over there, so I'm not 100% au fait with how it works. But I can say it doesn't sound good to me. That's beside the point anyway. The point is, what would we do without our NHS? Can you imagine it? Can you imagine there being no help at all available if you need life saving treatment? What about the elderly? What if insurance was available, but the insurance companies turned OAPs down? What if an elderly lady has a stroke, and has no one to call? It's not a nice thought. Not a nice thought at all.
Now I'm not saying the NHS is perfect, far from it actually. There is still a LOT of room for improvement. But I'm confident that improvement is slowly happening, and will continue to do so. It's trial and error really, try a new scheme, scrap it if it doesn't work, try again. What bothers me is the needless complaining. Now I know complaining is the British way of life, but come on! It's really not that bad. I've heard people complaining about all sorts of things, the main one being waiting times. Long waiting times are pretty much a given unless we can magic up some more money from somewhere. Getting bounced around Doctors and departments is another favourite. And then of course there are the things that go wrong. Patients being "forgotten", things being lost, people not being told what to do next. And then of course there's the dreadful food!! But these are all things which can, and I'm sure eventually will, change. Maybe not the dreadful food, I doubt that will ever change! But everything else should.
At least the NHS exists. And although we do still technically pay for it, we don't pay at the point of treatment, we won't ever be turned away due to money.

So please people, look on the bright side of life. Next time a Nurse manages to lose a report, or a Hospital takes 3 hours to finally get round to seeing you, take a step back and think. What if there were no Doctors and there were no Hospitals? Yes the NHS isn't perfect, and people are only human after all, but it exists! And here's hoping those flaws are worked out eventually. It'll never be perfect, that's just impossible. But as long as it goes on saving lives, regardless of age, race, sex, money, or anything else, surely it's pretty damn good and we should be glad we've got it. And we should be striving to keep it, and to improve it, not bitching about it!