[ye are gods] why does my head ache then

Have to steal a winter photo from somewhere so why not from Oestrebunny?

It's been a lovely day and the scene out there is so atmospheric - a fine haze of white, blending into the landscape, with landmarks appearing through it in part. Much warmer today - minus 18 - and a delight to wander about.

Changed my country today. Geographically I haven't but I work directly for the mother country now, which doesn't alter anything for me personally except that things are a bit more exciting. There's something I'd like to write about this evening but for once I'm not sure how to do it.

Two of the most difficult statements ever written were:

1. Psalm 82:6 - I have said, Ye are gods;

2. Ephesians 6:12 - For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

Why so fascinating? Because the closer one gets to the action, the truer these two appear to be.

The Psalm was written by a man - look at the style and tone and yet it was quoted by Jesus [if you can accept this for one moment] but what the hell does it mean? As a Psalm - perhaps not a lot but as something selected for comment by the Deity, quite something indeed:

Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

Uh-huh.

That would have to get you reflecting on the true power of man and would explain why humanism is not only convinced of but knows implicitly that each man has it inside to be a god. But who would have the temerity to try it? Many people - look, for example at the Chinese intention to hold back the heavens so that it won't rain during the Beijing Olympics. Look at Babel. Look at HAARP.

But this attempt, historically, has always comes to naught. Now I wonder why that would be? It seems to suggest someone who can't take no for an answer and will try again and again forever. Someone clinically insane, in other words.

The second quote has been mistranslated in the revisionist RSV and I feel that that's no accident whatsoever. These days it is being taught that it is a sort of earthly wickedness in PMs and Presidents and so on - that man's dark side comes to the fore.

I humbly suggest that that is not what the KJV intended - that the KJV meant precisely what it said. We struggle not against flesh and blood; ipso facto, we struggle against principalities. So, research principalities and there's no ambiguity here, as the term is applied scripturally.

But this is heady stuff.

If you take it through to its logical conclusion, then the enemy in high places is not human. I didn't say it - don't shoot the messenger. But it's definitely written in there. Now this is where those whose interest it is to scorn this notion need only invoke the spectre of Icke's lizards and the logical path stops.

So let's rewind a bit. Read the text yourself. It was written by a fairly austere person according to his other history. So did he suddenly become a nutter for one verse and then go back to being rational once more or was he rational all along?

Let's accept, for the sake of argument, that he was rational the whole time - then what was he saying? What does he know that we don't? Was he referring to high places in Heaven or on earth? Tell you the truth - I'm not sure. Rulers of darkness of this world. But not flesh and blood. So who the hell are they then?

How about the progeny of the Nephalim? That's pretty ancient history. You say it's rubbish? Fair enough - simply show me which ancient documents conclusively disprove the notion? While you're about it, explain to me the Shardana. How about the Egyptian Sobek? The Book of Jasher perhaps? The Book of Enoch? Bonwick's Irish Druids, 1894? The Kundalini?

I'm not saying it is so - how on earth could I know something which happened so long ago? How could you know it didn't?

And what of the other quote - ye are gods? It's clear how JC was using it in John's gospel but what of the quote itself? If you say it was just a throwaway line, then why was it, specifically, resurrected all those centuries later and by this particular Individual?

I see one explanation. Every head of an organization or section becomes, in a way, a little god but is always subject to a higher god, in a bigger pool. John Buchan, mid WW1, said:

Take any big Teutonic business concern. If you have dealings with it, the first man you meet is Prince von und zu Something, an elegant young man who talks Eton-and-Harrow English. But he cuts no ice.

If your business is big, you get behind him and find a prognathous Westphalian with a retreating brow and the manners of a hog. He is the German business man that gives your English papers the shakes.

But if you're on the biggest kind of job and are bound to get to the real boss, ten to one you are brought up against a little white-faced Jew in a bath-chair with an eye like a rattlesnake. Yes, sir, he is the man who is ruling the world just now.

I can't comment because I have absolutely no clue. But my own experience certainly bears out that even the highest are subject to someone higher. In the end, on earth, the highest of highs is the one who finances your plans. Where did they get the money?

Been in the family for generations. Fair enough. Where did it originally come from? Why did those particular families get it? Why not mine, for example? With such dangerous thoughts as these, I'm going to suddenly stop.

[fragmentation] organization's major weapon

One simple statistic is that the blogosphere has grown 100 times in three years and it is fragmented, especially in the political sphere.

While that is good in some respects, it also fragments opposition to highly organized forces which can be viewed at many levels. Everyone focuses on what they see as the whole issue but more often it is a numer of fragments of the whole. I see people writing what they think are very witty reposts on other people's posts, invoking catchphrases they've learnt off by heart and yet, when you examine it, the two parties are not so far apart, except on some interpretations.

Fragmentation, splintering. Each with his own slant, each looking from one angle but decrying another.

My anonymii focus on the EU monster and rightly so, the Americans increasingly look at the SPPNA, a man I know is working to get Christians out of Masonry, Gates of Vienna focuses on Islamic Sharia, in Britain, Lionheart and others do likewise, Cassandra illustrates the evils of PoMo, most UK pundits attack Brown and his neo-fascist state but don't you see that all these right thinking people are fragmented? They doubtless consider all issues but promote one or two.

I just commented at Gates of Vienna about Political Correctness and the Baron quite rightly stated:

The celebration of oxymora is central to the politico-linguistic discipline commonly known as “political correctness”.

To disable rational opposition to the prevailing orthodoxy, the first step is to take control of the language, forbidding certain words, promoting others, and changing the meanings of words within the permissible vocabulary to align with an all-pervading political ideology.

The second step is to erode the logical framework of thought itself, eating away at the deep structure of language until the underlying mental processes are deranged, leaving the mind vulnerable to re-programming.

Under the new PC template, time-hallowed distinctions — between good and evil, moral and immoral, true and false — are discarded. The only remaining distinction allowed is between what is and is not politically acceptable. PC has but a single commandment: “Thou shalt have no other words before mine.”

Good stuff but meanwhile the nature of a more complex battle remains obscure.

Assisting in the general confusion are catch cries which do so much damage that it's debilitating - try these words - Zionist, cabals, PoMo, globalism, Political Correctness, Neocon, White Supremacist, Truther, Illuminati, conspiracy theorist, relativist, multi-culturalism, inclusionism, Christian [aaaagh!], Atheist, Right and Left, climate porn and so on and so on.

Ruthie made mention of internet idiocies:

[I]t’s particularly prominent in Internet message boards, comment threads on news articles, partisan mainstream political blogs and various other quick and anonymous fora for political “debate.” YouTube comment threads, for example, are one of the worst places for this.

I know I shouldn't even read this stuff, I shouldn't indulge my perverse fascination, but it's like watching a car accident— there's something captivating about the wreckage. The reasoning is often shallow and faulty, ad hominem attacks are plentiful, and common sense is in short supply.

It is dire. Each has his own standpoint and in his "ramblings", argues from his own perspective, pronouncing "self-evident truths" in emotive language. Millions and millions of blogs are doing this. Everyone's pushing something and trying to have it seen as the major perspective.

Christian sites resort to capitalized fonts to convince or endlessly quote scripture. Illuminati sites use garish colour and emotive adjectives incessantly, making logical jumps when they should make the single point they're safe on and leave it at that.

The conflict between people divided by labels is staggering.

Even if I beg that people look at the global implications of all policies currently being pursued and therefore all agendas, the very word "global" will turn off half the people reading this. This is madness - turning off because of a label. It's moronic to label someone a "Truther" and thereby dismiss all arguments out of hand. Where is the logic in that?

And what the hell is a truther anyway? Someone looking for the truth of what's happening? Is that a bad thing, to look for truth? What are we meant to do - follow jingoistic catch cries and wrap ourselves in a flag? And which flag? The EU's? The Union Flag?

One section of society points to Christianity v Islam, another at Christianity v Jewish Cabals, another at the West v Islam, another at Statists v Libertarians. All deny something in their focuses.

Surely local self interest is the overwhelming governing factor at the base level, followed by the national interest which derailed Doha, then we splinter into all the other divisions mentioned above. In all of this, one theme I see running throughout is people's freedom to self determine their own direction in life but even here, supposed free enterprisers call for bans on this, regulation of that.

And total deregulation is anarchy and anarchy is just the separation of the sheep so they can be picked off, one by one, by the real evil [seen through my Christian eyes], the evil which says: "It's OK to indulge whatever passion springs to mind with no cessation and with no fear of consequence." Anakin Skywalker's anger - go for it, breathes Palpatine - kill, kill, kill. Yes, it feels good, doesn't it, Anakin? Indulge youself to your heart's content.

And in the process he loses his soul, his ability to resist his base desires. Little people get in his way - he swats them. You tire of one woman - get another - there are millions out there to be exploited. The road to yahooism is broad and easy. ASBOs, Clockwork Orange - great landscape for the hedonist, isn't it?

All right, my tuppence worth. Islam of the virulent kind is making huge inroads, the western leaderships are riddled with tentacles of the well acknowledged monster called the Finance, people are fragmented and pursuing their own agendas, congratulating likeminded people and gently shunning other points of view, the destruction of values once associated with Christianity is almost complete, the move to Continental Governments proceeds apace but is running into Nationalism, local, national and regional interest rules all and allows monsters utilizing the flag to rise in Africa, Iran, Malaysia and anywhere you care to name. The Old Money sits in its sanctuary and funds the mayhem all over the globe.

Then we look at China, which gave rise to this blog's name. Oh my goodness - once we start on China!

What's the net effect? Unrest, unhappiness, a new ignorant generation of alienated ASBOs and homies, breakdown of all societal codes which served before and rampant greed of a kind never so nakedly obvious as we are seeing today, not just at the top but permeating all strata of society. The great gods Credit Debt and Never-Be-Satisfied are blighting families worldwide and now into Russia.

Hope? Is blinkering one's eyes and pretending all is well true hope? We need armour, not blind faith. I know where you can get it from but I equally know why you won't seek it. I therefore beg two other things:

1 Do one kind act for someone outside your circle each day;

2 Look at what the other says and see how far it can be reconciled with your own, even on minor points.

[quick quiz] special bag edition

Bag was not so impressed with the last one so I'll try again. :)

1. What is the most times a car has rolled over in an accident and been filmed doing it?

2. What is the highest grossing western film of all time, according to Wiki and adjusted to 2007 values?

3. Who was Alexander VI's famous daughter?

4. Who holds the world land speed record with Thrust SSC and where is he from?

5. What's the name of China's superhighway linking through to Israel?

7 - in Casino Royale, Titanic, Lucretia Borgia, Andy Green - England, Karakoram

[casino royale] could this be the best bond yet

A year behind everyone else, as is my wont, I watched, last night, an American DVD of Casino Royale and it's damned good.

I well remember the furore when Pierce Brosnan was stood down, along with Moneypenny and Q and at the time, even thought of boycotting the next Bond film too. As it turns out, they did it all really well, were wise to wait and rethink it all and the whole package not only stands up but is right up there as a contender for the best Bond ever.

It unfortunately puts some of the Moore vehicles like Live and Let Die and View to a Kill, which had great moments, ultimately to shame though Moore himself always had a certain something about him. Many say that the Dalton era was sub-standard but some disagree - he brought a sort of realism back to the role which, in the era when computer graphics were just taking off big time, consigned Dalton to the scrapheap of Bondiana.

Bond flicks must always have that blend of big budget exotic locations, suspended disbelief, action and those eternal Bond girls and yet the last of the Brosnan era, even with Halle Berry, was overrated IMHO, along with Halle Berry herself. Just how much of the wham bam, incessant action does it take to rob the plot of dimensions beyond two?

Brosnan opened well in Goldeneye and possibly did best in the next. Sophie Marceau lifted TWINE out of all proportion to the quality of the film and overall, Brosnan certainly didn't disgrace the role one bit.

So what of Daniel Craig?

Well, everything's subjective but given the raw brashness he was meant to display, he was great. Truly. I think he's a magnificent Bond and you can really feel his emotions or non-emotions if you like, along with him. The betrayal near the end was predictable, of course - Bonds don't have wives - but it was handled well. Boston dot com describes Craig thus:

The new James Bond is quick and muscular, and there is nothing remotely camp about him. He doesn’t wink; in fact, I’m not sure he even blinks. Where other men might athletically sail through a narrow window opening during a chase scene, he prefers to plow through the wall. He’s a strapping brute — young, untested, rough around the edges — and he is magnificent. Let the purists squawk: In Daniel Craig, the Bond franchise has finally found a 007 whose cruel charisma rivals that of Sean Connery.

Time dot com disagrees:

The Craig Bond might know no French at all; he's not the suave, Oxbridgian 007 of legend but the strong, silent type, almost a thug for hire, and no smoother with a sardonic quip than John Kerry. Still, he fits one description Fleming gave of his hero: "[His face was] a taciturn mask, ironical, brutal and cold." ... [This] is a Bond with great body but no soul.

The locations were often stunning and one can picture Mr. White [interesting how in real life the cabal nasties are colour coded too] in his real setting - a chateau by Lake Geneva is the perfect place for true evil to reside. This is gritty, it's raw and it's great.

The only annoying suspension of disbelief, for me, is during the torture scene. As males, we can assure the female half of the population that Bond wouldn't be making wisecracks to his tormenter in that cheeky-face way, with his testicles in that condition. By the way, Craig's body would have to be the best of any Bond, Connery included and his level of menace was right up in the Connery class.

My favourite part was in the opening sequence when the sleek black terrorist is leaping from one derrick up in the sky to another with Craig in dogged pursuit - James almost falls off a few times but hauls himself back and continues the chase. His body's obviously not cut out for ths type of highwire gymnastics but he manages. That was a nice touch.

Naturally, even after one picture, the comparisons have been made and yes, it's too early.

Craig is a fine actor, there's absolutely no doubt of that and Eva Green is surprising. Did they dub the English voice? Her kissing gives her away - it's so French and her body movements are too - the French have that artless sluttishness down pat. She's not a beautiful woman but scrubs up well - although maybe she'd have been better off as a true villain, if the Fleming novel had only allowed.

As a fan of the grittier type of Bond, where does Casino Royale rate? Right up there. Where does Craig rate? Surely up with Connery and with Connery's reputed orneriness as well - hell, what do you want from a hero after all? He's fun and he's dangerous but for sheer menace, perhaps early Connery edges him out.

Bond 22 is going to have a lot of people eagerly waiting, methinks. I loved 21 and might watch it again now - work is a bit slow today.

081387: Les [transgressions] obligatoires sont une règle d'art

CLICK PIC!

[blogger quiz] because we just gotta

Which blogger uses this banner?

Haven't had a quiz for some time. The idea is to pick the blogger.

1] Which blogger calls her orchid Eric?

a. Oestrebunny
b. Wife in the North
c. JMB

2] Which blogger is currently running a "guess the object competition"?

a. Reactionary Snob
b. Mutterings and Meanderings
c. Mopsa

3] Which blogger has finally come out with his/her real name?

a. Mr. Eugenides
b. Mary Mary Quite Contrary
c. Welshcakes Limoncello

4] Which blogger is running a "spot the Lib Dem competition"?

a. Jams O'Donnell
b. The Norfolk Blogger
c. Bob Piper

5] Which blogger is posting on the Scottish weather?

a. MacNumpty
b. Richard Havers
c. Longrider

Hint - use link hover.

[figs] properties of paradise

The real thing, courtesy of Mopsa

Most entertaining article about the humble fig. Some of the main points:

* The most common impression of the ficus carica or common fig for the traveler in Turkey is the slightly suggestive sight of a dried fig sliced and stuffed to bursting (with walnuts) and the sign Turkish Viagra floating enticingly above it.

* This week, though, figs made the news for something more than their alleged libido-enhancing properties. Archeologists excavating ruins in the ancient city of Assos found 2,400-year-old figs that were still edible in a tomb. They believe the figs were put there to be part of the last meal of the departing spirit.

* Turkish fig producers face another enemy as dangerous as global warming, the fruit themselves can spoil and turn toxic. Notoriously difficult to dry, figs often develop mold when produced in warm humid conditions. These mold contains aflatoxins which have been known to cause cancer in animals and aflatoxin B1, the most toxic, can cause cancer in humans.

* The fig tree has a bad reputation with farmers as a destroyer of men, the adage among rural folk is that he who falls from a fig tree never escapes unscathed and rarely recovers. A report from Trabzon's 2002 fig picking season listed 223 injured people in 20 days. Most suffered from broken arms, legs and ribs but there were also two fatalities.

* The fig tree does however have a good reputation in Islam where a hadith (oral traditions relating to the words and deeds of the Prophet Mohammad) from Bukhari says that the prophet mentioned figs and said, "If I had to mention a fruit that descended from paradise I would say this is it because the paradisiacal fruits do not have pits ... eat from these fruits for they prevent hemorrhoids and help gout."

* Traditionalists believe that if you see fresh ripe figs in your dreams they always indicate unexpected levels of good fortune but if the fig is dried then the good luck they bring will be marred by jealousy and gossip.

Get thee out there and start planting.

That controversial "non-fig" pic

[blair] when the bilderberger and cfr meet

This is classic:

Tony Blair has taken a part-time post with US investment bank JP Morgan.

The Bilderberger has joined the CFR* and I'm sure everyone is agreed that Tony is well qualified for the job. It's not unlike when Oracle met Delphi in Bavaria.

That's truly wonderful. Birds of a feather. Love to be a fly on the wall.

* Founder of the CFR was John W. Davis, J.P. Morgan’s personal attorney, while the vice-president was Paul Cravath.

[checkers] perfect solution found

Most important issue of the day:

According to US journal Science, the perfect solution to how to play checkers (draughts) without losing is one of the ten most interesting discoveries of 2007. Dr. Yngvi Björnsson at Reykjavík University is one of its discoverers.

“It is very pleasing, but this recognition may not have much impact,” Björnsson, who discovered the checkers-solution with a team of Canadian scientists, told Fréttabladid. “It is, in fact, a greater recognition that the article about the discovery was published in the journal last summer […]; one of the most respected scientific journals in the world.”

Now, in this holiday season, that's the best news yet for the kids wiling away the hours. Trouble is, they didn't provide the solution for me to post. You'll have to buy the journal.

[blogpower] the sorry mess in summary

This post will not be reappearing.

There was considerable misunderstanding over Ian's and JMB's roles and only now are we getting it all together.

Both are excellent bloggers, neither has horns and good things prevail.

James

[to hell with it] bed or oblivion

There are times, after months of fighting alone that a man needs to just go to bed and have a sleep. That's what I'm going to do now on this minus 26 degree night.

It wasn't so much Matt's little debate with me here that drained the energy but Calum Carr's cheap insults earlier in lieu of reasoned argument certainly exacerbated the process.

There is so much arguing from false premises, people writing to you professing friendship but then acting against you, so much failure to stand up and uphold agreed principles, so much misrepresentation via a mailing list of the true state of affairs, so much falsehood.

And friends who remain silent.

I'm going to bed.

[exercise and a little drink] and don't forget diet and love

Yes

A European Heart Journal study suggests the combination can cut the risk of heart disease. A Danish team found people who led an active lifestyle were less prone to heart disease - but the risk was cut still further if they drank moderately.

The researchers followed nearly 12,000 men and women for nearly 20 years, during which 1,242 died from ischaemic heart disease (IHD). Overall, they found people who did not drink or take any exercise had the highest risk of heart disease - 49% higher than people who either drank, exercised or did both.

When comparing people who took similar levels of exercise, they found that those who drank moderately - one to 14 units of alcohol a week - were around 30% less likely to develop heart disease than non-drinkers.

That stands to reason but for well-being, surely you'd have to add:

1. spiritual welfare - being at ease in one's head, happy in he job and generally easy about things;

2. diet - eating properly is so vitally important it was a surprise this was not factored into the study;

3. good relationship with a loved one. I mean, how important is this?

Alternatively, it is also logical that people who are spiritually not at one, who over-eat fatty or excessively carbo foods, are sedentary, drink nothing perhaps due to wowserism and are alone are at the greatest risk.

There's a message there, methinks.

No

[martin scriblerus] was there ever one such as this

It is perverse that the leaders of a modern nation feel they must honour the memory of the great men to whom that nation owes what it possesses in high culture and civility, and yet, were those great men alive today, they would be reviled for holding opinions that those leaders profess to find uncultured and uncivilised and unfit for the standing of a modern nation.

Amen to that, Deogolwulf.

[new hampshire] america mourns

Oh my goodness. She cried the crocodile tears, tugged at the heartstrings and got in. I join the rest of America in mourning this tragic event. May this serve as a reminder of the danger the Lizard Queen still represents. I'm no wiser than the pundits and yet I did write, after Iowa:

Before anyone writes off the Lizard Queen, it's also worth noting that a caucus is not a primary - a primary is more direct. Plus she's east coast.

G-d help America [plus a few million relatively sane voters].

[sarkozy and bruni] why not, for goodness sake?

If I were the French President and my wife refused to support her husband and then we were divorced, I'd imagine I'd be pretty down about it. It would sort of hurt deep down, even though I never showed it publicly.

Then, if a woman came into my life and she had a bit of a history people latched onto but I loved her, then that would be unfortunate but what could I do? We'd have to marry if she also loved me and who's to say she doesn't?

Now, if I were France, above all nations except maybe Italy, I'd understand implicitly that lasting relationships can't be politically packaged into time frames favoured by the press, even though I'd be well aware of the time constraints.

I'd also be well aware that if I'd just forced a political issue - in his case the strikes and in mine - well, the least said the better - then there'd be fallout, wouldn't there? It's pretty lonely doing that and if a loving woman came into my life, I'd make pretty sure to treat her right because, in the things I must do next for France, I'd need her softness like never before.

So what the hell are the press saying?

Sarkozy denied that he was using the ups and downs of his love life to draw attention from France's problems. He said he was astonished by some news reports that suggested his October divorce was timed to overshadow coverage of a nationwide strike that paralyzed the country. "I told myself that people who wrote such articles must never have been divorced," Sarkozy said, adding that he wasn't angry at them. "I was simply ashamed for them, for being so far removed from life's realities."

I'd go on to impress upon them:

«Vous l'avez compris, c'est du sérieux». Dès la deuxième question, le chef de l'Etat était interrogé sur sa relation avec l'ex-mannequin Carla Bruni, lors de sa conférence de presse de rentrée mardi. «Mais, ce n'est pas le JDD qui fixera la date», s'est empressé d'ajouter le chef de l'Etat devant un auditoire souriant.

All the same, he needs to be just a bit careful because even Le Figaro was not 100% enamoured of this stage of Sarko's presidency. Yet its photo of the happy couple seems to indicate some sort of rearguard action.

Personally, unless the leopard's changed her spots, I think he could be heading for the same problems as before. The woman is a known "easy girl" so one hopes he's not looking for marital fidelity from her but maybe he needs her perverse outlook in his position.

The French are in an interesting position themselves - the prospect of a Hungarian descendant and an Italian as 1st and 2nd persons in their republic.

[mediocrity enlarged] oh great, that's all we need

Seriously, who wants it? Who needs it?

A 150-inch high-definiton plasma TV unveiled by Panasonic is the world's largest to date, the Japanese consumer electronics company claimed Monday at the International Consumer Electronics Show.

The plasma panel features an 8.84 million pixel image resolution. Its screen is the equivalent of nine 50-inch sets, with an effective viewing area of 11 feet, the company said. It's a step up from Panasonic's 103-inch version, which cost $70,000 when it launched. The company did not say in a news release how much the 150-inch panel will cost.

When will people wake up to the mad scramble for spurious technological "advance" for what it is? It's simply symptomatic of a wider malaise you can yawn at, if you like - the inability of people to be satisfied.

And as for television itself being developed - why? The shows are dire and the noise - just pollution. Yet the MTV field raises the need for higher-fi then something else, then something else and so on.

"Progress, you stick-in-the-mud," I hear you mutter.

"Really?" I reply.

[economics 101] the looming economic reset

I like this so much by Karl Denninger. At last a fr----ng economist who doesn't try to pull rank with his jargon and who explains things to us plebs in language we can understand:

Let's say that today you wish to buy a car. You go into a bank and get them to agree to issue you a loan to buy that car. Let's say the loan is for $20,000. You sign a contract promising to pay back the $20,000 plus a rate of interest, which is charged so that the bank is covered for the risk that you won't pay them, and the value of the car at that time might not be as much as you owe. The car is the "security" for the loan - if you fail to pay, they will come and repossess it.

You now have $20,000 in your pocket, and you purchase the car. (We'll get back to how the $20,000 came to be in a minute.)

If these were the only two transactions in the world, you would soon recognize a serious problem - there is only $20,000 in money in the world, but you owe more than $20,000! The interest you must pay means that you somehow must acquire more money than exists in the world over the life of that loan in order to pay it back.

There is only one solution to this problem - the amount of money in the world must increase.

So the government will just print some more, right? After all, the can do anything they want.

Uh, no. If the government were to do that then the value of all the money currently in existence would go down by the exact amount that they printed. You could pay your debt but the bank would be in serious trouble because the money they got paid back with would not be worth as much as the money they gave you!

Further down:

WE ARE NOW FACING A "RESET" IN THE SYSTEM!

What happens in a "reset"?

1. The rate of credit creation slows precipitously as the list of assets that can be pledged dwindles down.

2. The interest and principal payments due on existing debt get close to and ultimately exceed the amount of money in the system, as the rate of credit (money) creation slows.

3. Those who detect this while they still have money pay off their debts, (correctly) deducing that a "reset" is about to take place - and that cash (assets) will have value, while debt will be a millstone that will drag you underwater.

4. Those who are unable to pay off their debts will find that a contracting credit (money) supply leaves them with insufficient funds to pay their debts. Debt defaults at a rapidly increasing rate.

5. The creditors (who granted the credit) will repossess the assets pledged for the debt in lieu of payment, while the debtors are financially destroyed.

6. The destruction of outstanding credit via default shrinks the money supply further, and we go back to #1.

This continues until equilibrium is reestablished, and the cycle begins anew.

Do read the whole thing at Market Ticker: The Money/Credit Cycle..... You might disagree but at least you can understand it.

[australia arrogant] the aussies say so

Note the empty seats behind

Now you don't see this sort of thing often from the Australian press:

If Cricket Australia cares a fig for the tattered reputation of our national team in our national sport, it will not for a moment longer tolerate the sort of arrogant and abrasive conduct seen from the captain and his senior players over the past few days.

Beyond comparison it was the ugliest performance put up by an Australian side for 20 years. The only surprising part of it is that the Indians have not packed their bags and gone home. There is no justice for them in this country, nor any manners.

An Age poll on the matter of whether Ponting should be sacked:

Yes - 58% No - 28% Let's all cool down! It's only a game - 14%

What's going on downunder? Neosportsmanship?

[tory plan] the need to think it through

Hain, predictably, is against the Tory plan which is basically:

People who claim Jobseekers' Allowance for more than two years would have to take part in a 12-month community work scheme, under Tory plans.

The party says those who refused to participate in their "welfare to work" programme would lose their benefits.

The 2006 stats were:

North East - 7.6% (worst in Middlesbrough - 12.4% - 8,000)

London - 6.8% (Hackney - 16.4% - 14,000)

West Midlands - 5.6% (worst in Birmingham - 10.5% - 46,000)

North West - 5.1% (Liverpool - 11.1% - 21,000)

Yorkshire & Humberside - 5% (worst in Bradford - 8.2% - 19,000)

East Midlands - 4.7% (worst in Leicester - 8.5% - 11,000)

Eastern England - 3.8% (worst in Norwich - 9.1% - 6,000)

South West - 3.5% (worst in Torbay - 5.6% - 3,000)

South East - 3.3% (worst in Thanet - 9.8% - 6,000)

If one excludes disability allowances and other payments for the genuinely incapable and if it were possible to isolate the malingerers as a group, what can one say about them? I mean, they're never going to hold any job for long, even if they could get it.

I sometimes wonder what would happen to them if NO money was coming in. Would they cease to exist or would the result be an added cycle of crime?

Incidentally, interesting regionalization in those stats above. Fait accompli, yes?

[sex predator] another female at it

I'm really getting sick to death of this sort of thing:

A high school gym teacher was charged with sending nude pictures of herself and sexually suggestive cell phone text messages to a 14-year-old freshman at the school.

Beth Ann Chester, a 26-year-old health and physical education teacher at Moon Area High School in suburban Pittsburgh, was arrested Friday and charged with child sexual abuse, statutory sexual assault and related counts, authorities said.

Police said Chester, who is married, had sent a boy three pictures of herself, two of them naked, by cell phone on Dec. 22, and the boy replied with a naked picture of himself.

Why on earth couldn't we have had some of these teachers when we were 14? I'm insanely jealous. By the way, would a photo of a 14 year old boy be exciting to anyone? Can't recall I was any great catch at that age for a 26 year old although I did sleep on the back seat of a long distance bus with two 19 year olds when I was 14. Couldn't hear anything but their thighs were warm.

And anyway, what with Debra et al, there must be something in it for the young woman of today.

[martin scriblerus] first trickles become a babbling brook

The second logo is up and many thanks to Richard Madeley. Keep those logos coming in, people.

jameshigham@mail.com

This one [left] has much to commend it in the light of the comments section here. So the 'kick ass' notion has some merit after all. And as for the donkey motif, what a wonderful historicity - we could look at "lions led by donkeys" from WW1 or the self-deprecating [no, it's not a typo - there's no F in there] Rats of Tobruk.

Mind boggles.

By the way, Sackerson had a suggestion too. Might have known it would be on a gold site. Sackers is a bit obsessed by gold, methinks. :)

[martin scriblerus] here's an example for you

The joke is on Madeley because that is precisely the type we're looking for - the unclubbable free spirit. That's why it's not a club, Richard. You're entangled now, my boy. :)

By the way, do you like the right aligned text? No?

[christmas] yo! it's our holiday today

It's Christmas today and I say to you all - Merry Christmas!!!!

Hope the day brings you everything you deserve and/or hope for. Hope that from this moment on we can put all stress and pressures behind us and go into 2008 with an upward looking mood.

How's this for coincidence?

You know what I've been doing the whole weekend since 03:00 Saturday morning with the departure form Blogpower - I've been answering e-mails, keeping up the blog, trying to do my RL work on Saturday and so on. You know, I never even noticed that Christmas had arrived today.

Phone call just came from my mate with Christmas wishes. What???!!! Oh my goodness, I'd completely forgotten. He was not impressed. So I explained the events of the last 60 hours.

"Well, have you phoned ****** [my girlfriend] ?" he aked. "She can't get you."

'Oh, b---er." I knew I had to phone not only her but her mother and grandmother and I'd been invited for family lunch. Oh woe is me! So, first cab off the rank was the most beautiful girl in the world. Lot's of words, I love you, darling and so on. Then I said I had to phone her mother and grandmother.

She handed the phone across and it was her grandmother. Then the phone was handed to her mother. Though they weren't impressed with my memory lapse and I didn't even try to explain the blogosphere, at least I'd phoned. Well, I know it doesn't look good.

Her grandmother promptly invited me over and let me tell you - this lady can cook and how!

They are at this moment driving back through the forest from a resort town and she was [GF] describing the leaves and the snow and the atmosphere and I can feel it right now.

So, with a cup of coffee here now in my flat, with you out there reading, with matters having been set straight in the last post and in RL, dreaming of the forest and with one last day before going back to work, I'm now touching wood [or knocking on wood, as they say over here].

Merry Christmas, dear readers!

[disputes] it's the silly season

Earlier in the match

Have you noticed how many disputes there have been recently? I don't mean the international State v State type but the smaller type of niggling dispute. Tiberius Gracchus puts it this way:

The 90s and 00s have been the years of vitriol. Whether its Anne Coulter accusing Democrats of 'treason' or its Michael Moore accusing George Bush of being a Saudi puppet, whether its the mad bloggers of the right rounding on appeasers or its the mad bloggers of the left rounding on chickenhawks, its open season on the internet and in the newspapers.

The Croydonian writes:

Abstracted from an article about a spat twixt the Netherlands and Aruba, involving debt, sovereignty and a hotel: "A Freedom Party MP recently called Aruba and the Netherlands Antilles "a den of thieves" and suggested putting the six islands up for sale on the internet".

Then what about the India v Australia furore?

India's tour of Australia last night erupted when touring captain Anil Kumble attacked Australia's sportsmanship, Indian team management demanded the umpires be stood down for their incompetence, and Ricky Ponting reacted with fury when his integrity was questioned.

With tensions already high as Harbhajan Singh's racism hearing began at the SCG, Kumble was unable to contain his anger at his post-match press conference.

Kumble simmered as he delivered a line reminiscent of Bill Woodfull's famous Bodyline statement. "I think only one team was playing within the spirit of the game," Kumble said, causing the Indian media contingent to break into applause.

The bad blood between the two sides spilled over after the Australians snatched a 122-run victory with eight minutes left in the Test.

Something in the air or in the water, do you think?

Later in the match

[nice guys] sunday evening thought

Nice guy, no? Actually, this photo was taken minutes after he was found guilty of the mass murder of women with two other men.

The nice guys only seem to finish last, but really that is because they are the last ones standing. They last the distance, bad boys don't. And besides I like nice guys, that's not the issue. Nice guys with Bob Geldof syndrome who cry at Grey's Anatomy? They don't quite float my boat. [Oestrebunny]

This research here suggests that opinion is split, with 56% of women agreeing nice guys finish last but that women might see the nice guy as a "keeper" and the bad boy for the fling.

My thinking, therefore, is that if she does take a "keeper", then unless her moral principles are strong or she loves him, the nice guy will usually end up being cheated on. If she does love him, the question folows: "For how long?"

So either way, the nice guy is living on borrowed time, unless he can convince her he's a bad boy. :)

Bad boy, yes? He's a policeman called out to assist a battered woman. Here he holds a torch while the lady policeman attends to the woman.

[late for the sky] still we continue on

Jackson Browne had his detractors. Some thought his songs a little twee, the pathos overdone. Some thought much of his material music to slit your wrists by, a little like Leonard Cohen [different genre of course]. Some thought he became too much the journeyman muso. Some thought he was wonderful.

I met the man, with his girlfriend of the time, Daryl Hannah [Splash], sometime after the suicide of his wife. He seemed a nice guy.

This song I particularly liked - Late for the Sky:

Now the words had all been spoken
And somehow the feeling still wasn't right
And still we continued on through the night

Tracing our steps from the beginning
Until they vanished into the air
Trying to understand how our lives has led us there

Looking hard into your eyes
There was nobody I'd ever known
Such an empty surprise to feel so alone

Now for me some words come easy
But I know that they don't mean that much
Compared with the things that are said in a lover's touch

You never knew what I loved in you
I dont know what you loved in me
Maybe the picture of somebody you were hoping I might be

Awake again I can't pretend and I know I'm alone
And close to the end of the feeling we've known

How long have I been sleeping
How long have I been drifting alone through the night
How long have I been dreaming I could make it right
If I closed my eyes and tried with all my might
To be the one you need.

[martin scriblerus] first scribblings

The Logo

This is but a rough and everything can change. I'd like to see a parchment edge but don't have the tools. Copyright is not an issue with this logo but it was with the previous one.

Which do you like better - the pale or the bold version? Maybe you like neither.

Running this logo in your sidebar indicates you are one of the Martin Scriblerus Alliance [the name can be changed later].

The idea

The logo, such as it finally becomes when we can get a designer onto it, is to symbolize top blogging in no specific area. To sport the logo is a comment on quality. As there are no rules and it is not a club, then there are no prescribed limits to numbers. There is no specific home site but rather the discussion is shared round. This can alter as members see fit.

Criteria for invitation

Invitation is through the joint opinion of all members who care to comment. Anyone can put up a blog for inclusion, often repeatedly but this is subject to scrutiny by the alliance and to acceptance of the logo by the blogger.

You would have an established blog which is a main blog, you write excellently and enjoy fairly universal admiration for your blog in a cross-section of most corners of the blogosphere, you are also admired and respected as the person behind the blog.

On top of this, you have a point of view and a purpose to your blog of an elevated nature but not for recruiting of any nature - you persuade through your arguments. You're for the freedom of the blogosphere and committed to improving your blog all the while.

Your primary purpose on the blog is to write rather than to use any method possible to up your traffic. The writing is consistent and a broad cross section of readers come to your blog more or less regularly.

You haven't been subject to continued criticism from various quarters as to the ethical conduct of your blog - quite the opposite in fact.

You're known for caring for fellow bloggers. Apart from that, you can be as cantankerous, anti-social, individualistic and "unclubbable" as your heart desires.

Current state of affairs

We're up an running and gathering the first 10 members who'll form a "steering alliance" [there are 5 already], after which others will be invited jointly. Very small beginnings and steady and careful as she goes. Absolutely no hurry.

[obama] assassinated?

Why not?

[lionheart] your thoughts on this

Please give this five minutes of your time and tell me what you think. Read nothing into my attitude - it's neutral.

[rise of the yahoo] the new bestiality

Ruthie wrote this over in Minnesota:

She's eighteen. She has a slim little body, dark, wavy hair and brown eyes that positively glow with smug self-awareness and nascent sexuality. She drinks too much. She wants to be a model. She's slept with several of her co-workers.

She alternates dizzily between childish giddiness and a sort of stoic, pursed-lips silence (her interpretation of the model "pout" she sees on TV). She doesn't yet know if she wants to be outgoing and fun or aloof and superior.

If you ask her what she likes to do, she'll say "shop," or "drink." If you ask her what she wants to study, she'll look at you blankly. Then she'll giggle. "Fashion design!" she'll say. "If I don't make it as a model first."

K is really a very ugly girl. She's rude and self-absorbed, she drinks while she works, and she turns on a horrible false friendliness for customers that makes my teeth hurt. She comes to work hungover and complains bitterly about the unfairness of her life (even after her father bought her a brand-new car), the cold outside, and her customers— just before switching on a painted-on smile as she walks out the kitchen door.

... which was, interestingly, almost a carbon copy of a conversation we were having over here in Russia. Now is that coincidence or what? Our context was different but the issues are identical.

A young Muslim lady who visits me was talking about her youngish [25] sister who incidentally, also visits me and did so later yesterday. The issue was the dumbing down of education and the surgical extraction of any sort of moral code. Interesting that a Muslim and a Christian could discuss this together.

There is a generation now in whom many of the elements of previous generations are all still there - making the same errors, thinking and doing the same things, kicking against authority and so on but with some added elements - really gross ignorance, vacuousness if you like.

The education system has begun to break down here as it has in the west and whereas before even the street sweeper could quote you Pushkin, today they seriously know nothing. I quantified that with general knowledge tests. Now for me to make such a statement detracts from it because of my own age but when Ruthie wrote what she did above and when my 35 year old friend also said it, then I felt it might have something to it.

There's one key indicator over here - a girl's tummy. No girl - and I really mean that - ten years back would have been seen dead on the street with a flabby tummy. Now, with fifteen year olds, it's common to see flab hanging over the ripped hipster jeans and packaged in with it all are multiple piercing, tattoos everywhere, cheap costume jewellery and a vacuous, defiant expression. Many are pregnant.

Out of all this, I extract three points - the vacuously gross ignorance, the soul bereft of any moral framework or goal in life and the sordid lifestyle. You only have to get into the lifestyle of the blogger I left Blogpower over and it's dire and bestial, that world [which he stays above at blog level].

The language is coarse, the concerns are limited to external things of no real consequence, even to them in the long run, they're so easily bored and there is not a parent to be seen - no family context. They are resisting any kind of education and educating themselves in their own neo-bestiality, fuelled by advertising, dance lyrics and dark computer games.

Against that are the girls and guys at university. When I made a comment actually praising young people - most of these uni folk are go-getters, speaking four languages and with goals for the future, one group stopped me, said I was wrong and began a tirade about young people generally today, saying largely what is written above. That's why Ruthie's post meant so much. These girls are a bit younger than Ruthie - 20 and yet they were saying roughly the same thing and it has to make a person feel encouraged.

Over here there is a well known reaction to any disaster - кто виноват и что делять? Who is to blame and what to do? So who is to blame for the children's current sorry state?

Well look at it logically. The children for a start who are resisting education and continuously opting for the soft variant. So who allows it? Parents who throw up their hands and ask what they can do - it's just society. Schools which are not teaching properly. Example - I know a teacher who is so ignorant of any general world knowledge and yet she can quote every feminist author on how oppressed women are.

Now in the case of the schools, which are hierarchical in nature, the heads of departments must bear the blame but they themselves are so brainwashed in the new ignorance that they allow this guff to go on. I know this is so because my second cousin dragged me round to a few of these things when he was 19 and they really were dire.

Nothing wrong with a bit of mindless drinking but this was sex in church grounds, urinating anywhere and no concept of certain decencies. I'm desperately trying to steer clear of prudishness here and just say there are some things the people I know, who can be pretty wild, would still draw the line at. Some of you know the song: "I knew she was a lady 'cause she moved the dishes first."

So no, I don't mean a bit of excess in your own sphere but a sort of cultural ignorance, an ignorance of what people have achieved before you. It really is the ignorance which gets to me. How did these people get so ignorant in the first place?

My Muslim woman friend had her own view yesterday. She said it was no accident, that it was very much an organized thing, all of it - from the dumbing down through to the drugs, porn and so on. Regulars know that's one of my themes but I was shocked to hear it come from a person so divergent from my background.

I then asked her who then was behind it, who was this organization? She said, "Money. Just that, money." Asked to explain, she said that with no moral framework in the kids' heads, they are swayed this way and that and fall for anything bright and interesting, like babies do. Her own 12 year old is into Russian computer games and she said she looked at some of the crass names of characters and blanched.

I never asked her why she allowed these games but if I had, she might have answered that if he didn't play them at home he'd play them at a friend's. True but what if all parents acted in the same way and restricted things just a bit, added the concept to the children's minds of delayed gratification and having to work for what you get? What if the children were given a moral framework which society had largely agreed on? We used to have one.

I don't mean high church or sharia law but something emanating from parents, educators, everyone? Doesn't anyone see that these mindless kids are groping around in the dark, looking for meaning in life and finding readily available pap in its place and in the palaces of glitz where they spend their days? I asked the 25 year old sister where she was going after me. She said to the Riviera.

This is a shopping complex and I asked her why there and not at, say, Koltso? She said that this one looked out over the river and you had nature while you shopped whereas the other was just a shopping orgy. So nature does intrude into the mindset after all. She's only a little afflicted with the disease then.

I just think the whole thing is so sad out there now.

And anyone, anyone at all, who tries to pull the plug on this inexorable, zombie-like procession towards the low-life is turned on, marginalized and vilified. This process has its fail safes as well.

So I ask my lady friend who's behind the money and that's where her Muslimness and my Christianity diverge. Because in our faith, there is very much an answer, a quite simple answer to that question I asked her.

We can blog about the political machine, we can blog about the new feudalism, we can blog about the follies of pollies but this blogger thinks we have a greater danger to confront - the rise of the yahoo.

[trapped in a lift] what would you do if

Two cleaning women were trapped inside a broken lift for two days with only two cough drops and six aspirin to sustain them. After the doors closed, the women discovered they were stuck on the first floor of the two-storey building.

There was no response from an emergency call alarm and the women could not pry open the doors, said Ms Bartoszewicz, 25. Neither had a mobile phone and the building was not due to open until after Christmas.

The women tried to sleep on their coats and used a corner of the lift as a bathroom. On Christmas Eve, an employee went to work. Ms Borowski said she heard him talking on his mobile phone. The women yelled and he heard them. Fire crews freed the women an hour later.

Russian domestic lifts are pretty safe and undergo periodic maintenance and with not a lot of money about, still residents of housing blocks pay, every few years, for a new lift . However, the electrics can and do stop and you're suddenly trapped.

Picture this - a man has just nipped down to the shop downstairs for milk and bread. He returns, uses the electronic button to get into the foyer of the house and pushes the lift button, stands back and observes the light above the door - 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 ... ping.

The door slowly slides open [and why do they always do this so slowly - is it an exaggerated attempt to portray gravitas and solidity?] and at that moment there is the buzz from the outer door and some girl comes through, clattering towards the lift. The man pushes Hold Lift Open and she skittles into the four person lift, also clutching packets.

Nods to him, he asks which floor and presses it, then steps back and they pretend to ignore each other as the hushpower door closes. Suddenly he pulls out his bloodred axe - no, that's a different tale ...

A little desultory conversation ensues [love both those words] and he glances over again and compliments her on her new jacket. Then the lift dies. Just dies. Her shoulders sag because:

1. she's been through this before, as she eventually explains, many times;

2. she's in there with a middle-aged man.

He calls the emergency woman below and there's no luck. She's obviously gone shopping. He glances up and around the lift for the first time, noting the elegant decor of brown wooden panels and a rickety roof which has possibilities. At least it is allowing in a finger of light producing a dull glow in the lift.

She's withdrawn into herself so he starts to cheerfully tell her about his last lift entrapment in all its gruesome detail, just to cheer her up, like. It doesn't appear to cheer her up and she reaches into a packet and pulls out a snickers bar. He, on the other hand, has done his three day shopping and has a smorgasbord in those packets. He pulls out a meat and veg pasty and starts munching and she glances over enviously.

He reaches in and pulls out the little packet with the three pasties and offers her one - urges her now. She takes one and offers the end of her snickers bar in return. He gracefully declines then tries the Emergency Woman again - still no luck.

They begin to discuss possibilities of escape and he reflects on his attire - he's in tie and good trousers for work and she's in the latest fashion jeans and snazzy jacket but at least her jeans are already ripped and the unworthy thought crosses his mind that he'll send her up through a panel in the roof.

He's damned if he's going to sacrifice those trousers for an idea and she, surprisingly, has chimed in with this thought and agrees - one's wardrobe is more important in this situation. So ... time to think this one out. There's sufficient food until tomorrow for both of them but the problem is going to be the bathroom [American sensitivities here].

And now she has to go to that particular room and actuals murmurs so. He reflects on his packets - if he repacked his food - well.

"How long?" he asks her and she understands what he's referring to - the time she has left before she really has to "go"? Some time, it seems. Now it occurs to both to use her mobile phone but no luck. He tries the Emergency Woman again but no luck. It's becoming apparent she's waiting for him to play the superhero but if he does, it will have to be sans trousers and jacket.

Still, that's an option because they must be near his floor now and he can nip back there and put some old clothes on. Problem will be leaving her in there alone. Actually, to be honest, he's worrying about leaving her in there alone with his packets of food. He discusses the plan with her and she's relieved but just before he disrobes, he tries the Emergency Woman one more time.

Eureka! She'll send an engineer. Where from? They'll have to phone him. Twenty minutes. The girl looks at him and he surmises, "An hour." She nods and indicates she has to "go". He starts to rearrange the packets and puts three plastic packets inside each other and hands them to her, then turns to the corner like a naughty schoolboy.

He tries not to listen but begins to hear sounds below on the first floor but it's people deciding the lift is not working and they'll go round the back to the stairs. Now if one of them at least were to get out at either of the floors they're between, well - it has possibilities.

She's now done and highly embarrassed and he has a strange sort of feeling inside but one thing for sure - they now must get out of there with the presence of ... that ... in the corner. The vigil begins with both squatting down, backs to the wall until the sound of the Emergency Woman and two men above.

Conversation ensues and all is well. Eventually the door above the lift is prized open, someone drops onto the roof and this now opens. Superhero now offers his hands and shoulder for her to climb onto and as she's young, she makes the lst athletic little climb up, assisted by the guy above. Packets are now passed up as well.

Now it's his turn and this is going to take some strength on both their parts. There go the trousers. He scrambles through the gap finally and the trousers are still OK but marked. She's disappeared by now. He dusts himself off, picks up the remaining packets and goes home.

Next day they find themselves in the lift again together and that's a special little moment.