Saturday, October 11, 2008

[iceland] lesson in how to live frugally

Ever since the beginning of this blog, I've been running posts on Iceland and so the recent crisis can be seen from the Icelandic perspective.

Iceland is not Russia but there are some traits common to both. In a situation of total collapse, certain nations are going to survive and others are going to struggle greatly. Taking, say, Britain, the U.S., Australia, France, Iceland and Russia, I'd say the countries who have long enjoyed the high life are going to feel the change most.

Countries like Russia and Iceland will simply shrug and go back to what they know - living frugally, eking out an existence, keeping money in a box high in the cupboard. There is a primary produce market system. You go out and kill that cow and cut it up for the winter, you bottle vegetables, such as they are, in early autumn and you make jams and kompote, bottle them and put them in the larder.

Iceland review gives some added tips this way:

Being an Icelandic person in England right now is not what it used to be, and by used to be I mean the way it was a week ago before the virtual collapse of Iceland’s economy. It’s the people who have made it into what it is [though] and the people are stubborn.

Another reason Iceland will be fine is that we are geared for survival. At school we are taught how to sew, we are taught how to build things and use power tools, we are taught how to cook and when we are teenagers we are forced to work for about two to three months during summer doing completely basic labor jobs like working at fish factories, or as farm hands, cashiers at the supermarket… you name it! A job is a job in Iceland and no one is above any work so long as it pays the bills.

I think this attitude will be our saving grace and the cornerstone of rebuilding ourselves from the bottom up.

In the name of sensibility I have devised a list of five things that I think will help anyone navigating through the fiscal credit crunch storm.

1. Buy in bulk and don’t be afraid to go straight to the source. When I was growing up we went to the dock to buy fish and lots of it. Building up an acquaintance with a fisherman or perhaps even a number of them is easy enough.

2. Learn how to gut a fish, otherwise suggestion number one is a little pointless.

3. Buy a freezer chest. The freezer chest is an incredible invention.

4. Save money on gas, take the bus.

5. Get relatives who are living abroad to send you the good stuff.

The extended family network also helps, as all generations and branches of the family chip in to ensure survival.

I see Britain as being in a halfway position on this continuum of nations. Not having forgotten the deprivations of the past, perhaps the adjustment would not be as severe for certain sectors of society who are on the breadline even now.

There might be a certain savagery to Russian and Icelandic society at base level but they are going to survive under great duress and there's an underlying toughness there. People of this ilk in Britain might also survive.

[labour deaths] the stress of the job perhaps

The list had reached Fiona Jones, Piara Khabra [old age], John MacDougall, Ron Brown [age], Gwynneth Dunwoody, Rachel Squire, Terry Fields, Roger Stott, Bernie Grant and Tony Banks before I realized I'd have to leave off those who "legitimately" died of old age and its complications.

Not quite dead but assaulted include Anne Moffat so far but it seems that Harriet Harman [see last post] is a candidate for this too.

The premise I was exploring was whether there seem to have been an inordinate number of Labour MPs in seats coming up for bielection in the past few years and if so, why?

Is it hazardous to be a Labour MP?

[harriet harman] let's bully the private sector again


Please - I do urge you to go over to Flipchart Fairytales and look at the latest government coercion on the drawing board. To shamelessly lift a section of Rick's article:

The Government Equalities Office has launched its Post Your Pay Gap initiative. The idea is that companies use the online system to calculate the gap in pay between men and women then post it on the web-site. It’s a bit like a corporate confessional - “We know we’re doing wrong but we will try better.”

But just in case there isn’t a mad rush from private sector organisations to post their pay gaps, the equalities secretary, Harriet Harman, has said that she might consider compelling them to do so.

This is the Harriet Harman who is supposed to be the most able, intelligent operator the government has. Here is her level of intelligence and sense of fair play:

Equality minister Harriet Harman has set out plans to allow firms to discriminate in favour of female and ethnic minority job candidates. She said firms should be able to choose a woman over a man of equal ability if they wanted to - or vice versa.


I have gone for a number of jobs recently and every time they have been forced to ask me to give details of my:

1 gender
2 age
3 ethnicity

No other details, such as experience or ability were required at this point of the interviews. If Ms Harman is equal and fair, then why should she be interested in these? Does she plan to discriminate towards me? Does she heck as like:

Allowing "positive action" would help organisations such as the police better reflect the communities they serve by recruiting more female and ethnic minority officers, said Ms Harman.

Positive discrimination? Positive? How is it positive to the ordinary members of the public? In the private sector they employ people they feel they need for the reasons they feel they need. I'm happy enough to stand on my own two feet this way but not with Numbers 1 and 3 officially working against me, even if Number 2 is working for me.

Let's look at Number 2.

The moment you send your CV, the employer sees your decades of experience and concludes your age. It needs no legislation. They can then make up any excuse they like as to why your application did not proceed. In the end they need only conclude they prefer the other person. End of story.

You can't legislate to make people do things which are their own legitimate concern to administer as they see fit. Age is a sad thing but it is inevitable and we just have to lump it. If we are still up to speed and look like we could be for some time yet then we must work hard to sell our skills, always remembering that there is a lot of competition out there.

[nobel prize] and the grumblings of discontent

The Americans seem a trifle miffed about the winner of the Nobel prize for Literature, Jean-Marie Gustave Le Clezio:

Last week, Engdahl, the Swedish Academy's permanent secretary, called American literary culture "too isolated, too insular. They don't translate enough and don't really participate in the big dialogue of literature" -- comments widely seen in the United States as evidence of the insularity of the Nobel itself and proof that American writers would be shut out again.

This is a storm in a teacup in one way but it is also a harbinger of troubles ahead where everyone and his dog seem a little testy at this time. The expression "trigger finger" springs to mind and a lot of shooting from the hip may well ensue, causing Europeans to call for action on the U.S. and vice versa.

Why do the U.S. and Europe need to be reminded that they are both socio-religiously from the same stock, the same economic structure and the same grey suited leadership? Conflict is stupidity between these blocs when there are other far more real enemies to contend with.

Friday, October 10, 2008

[crashes] and the marketing of faulty parts

One wouldn't think this could be so with Star Alliance


Regarding that Spanair flight 5022, which crashed on takeoff in August:

It is unclear why the wing flaps failed to deploy, but the error was compounded by the failure of the cockpit alert system, which should have sounded a warning to the pilots.

I hope it is not mischievous or misleading to suggest this as a possible cause:

From 2002
Yesterday it emerged that the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has issued a warning to 167 countries over the potential danger caused by the scam ... The Rome daily Il Messaggero yesterday published a list of five air accidents that it said investigators suspected could have been caused by faulty spare parts. They included the crash of an ATI ATR 42 near Milan in October 1987, a Dornier 328 operated by Minerva Airlines which overshot the runway in Genoa in February 1999, and the crash of a Valujet DC 9 in southern Florida in May 1996.

The parts were found in Sicilia:

"[They] were in an appalling state," said Aniello Albano, of the Sardinian finance police. "The workshops carried out cosmetic operations on them in order to defraud the airlines."

Some other parts, the result of the cannibalisation of six Alitalia Airbus A300s by the Panaviation company, were about to be sent to the US where they were to be offered for sale by Danbee Aerospace, an aircraft parts broker based in Greensboro, North Carolina.


Nobody seems to suggest that this is a problem with the larger airlines but if you go budget, well ... everything is proportionally budget, isn't it? Star Alliance have a good record though and so it seems unlikely that it was a shoddy parts scam.

Interestingly, one common factor in many crashes seems to be the McDonnell Douglas MD-82. Just something to bear in mind, I suppose.

[the condemned] when genius is not

We watched an allegorical film last night, "The Condemned", in which a charismatic but evil genius manipulates those about him to help satisfy his perversions, in this case, putting some people on an island and watching them rape and murder each other until one is left standing, all lovingly captured for internet streaming.

He's suave and debonair, the so-called genius, with a pleasing exterior which conceals the sick individual beneath and it's enough to satisfy his "friends" and cohorts that he is a man with a mission, a man of ideas and the gift of the gab ... plus he has a lot of money.

However, one by one, those cohorts, starting with his girlfriend [in a manner of speaking] are sickened, not only by his antics but by the relish with which he watches the gore - this relish is what brings him down in the end.

It is a tale of how ordinary people can be hoodwinked and even bribed into assisting evil and that evil comes out in other ways too, for example, the two who get the most brutal treatment are the husband and wife who are first separated and then endure much, not unlike martyrs.

How dare they even think of the power of love at a time like that.

In the end, love does win out when the most flawed fulfils his ambition to get back to his love interest, killing off all the baddies along the way. For me, it pointed out quite starkly that those people considered genius, when they turn to evil, are already on the way out and are no geniuses at all - just clever and well spoken fools.

There is also the question of where they are going to end up, these people. The "hero" himself is so flawed that it is line ball where he'll be but what's fairly certain is the warm welcome the sicko is going to receive in the nether regions when he pops his clogs. He had his chances - he could have stopped the spectacle on a number of occasions but like a true fool, he either didn't or couldn't.

When you mistreat people, it all comes back on you one day.

Thursday, October 09, 2008

[just when you thought it was safe] be afraid ... be very afraid

Report

Aaaagh! The mouth is back! Is anyone safe in his or her bed? That scourge of the blogwaves, Ubermouth, is up and running again and kicking butt.

Anyone have anything to hide out there? She's gonna find it.

So to today's report - well it wasn't the greatest idea trying to find a customer's billing information and credit rating and I was a bit slow, truth be told. You try typing in 345938471922304 while dealing with two other calls but I got up to speed near the end and might make not a bad receptionist - pity the bod's not up to scratch, in keeping with the role.

Now it's raining here but it's quite soothing really. The weather had better clear up for the trip to Southhampton on the weekend - think I'll give this interview away tomorrow too in Droitwich Spa.

Friends

Just received an email and it simply reiterates something said by my mate earlier. Now I'm going out on a limb and printing a fragment of it against my own rules but it's too good not to quote:

What's important are friends who are tried in the fire. They are the gold in the dross.

Aren't they ever and slowly, one day at a time, I'm discovering who they are. They might disagree on some things but there is something indefinable in their manner in a letter which says everything. This is such a rewarding time just now and it's going to get better.

[afghanistan] why did no one read history


UPDATE: You might like to look at this excellent post on the issue as well.

A little plug for the Asia Times. In understanding things going on in the Arab/Asian world, this is always a good first step. Admittedly, many of the correspondents are not pro-US but if you weigh what they say against the US line, then the truth lies somewhere inbetween.

On the inevitable failure of the Afghan war, these have been some reasons given:

One, the seven-year war is in a stalemate and time favors the Taliban.

Two, the US is increasingly focused on the bailout of its economy, which leaves little scope both in terms of time and resources for Washington to indulge in the extravaganza of undertaking on its own open-ended wars in faraway badlands.

Three, the US is having a hard time persuading its allies to provide troops for the war effort and even faithful allies like Britain seem fatigued and appear uneasy about the US's war strategy.

Four, whatever little popular support the puppet regime in Kabul headed by Karzai enjoyed so far is fast declining, which makes the current setup unsustainable.


Five, the Taliban have gained habitation and name on the Afghan landscape and no amount of allegations regarding Pakistan's dubious role can hide the reality that the Taliban's support base is rapidly widening.


Six, the regional climate - growing instability in Pakistan, tensions in US-Russia relations, NATO's role, Iran's new assertiveness, including possible future support of the Afghan resistance - is steadily worsening and the need arises for the US to recalibrate the prevailing geopolitical alignments and shore up its political and strategic assets created during the 2001-2008 period from being eroded.

Add to this another article from 2006 and the picture is clearer:

General Boris Gromov, the charismatic Soviet commander who supervised the withdrawal in 1989, warned, "The Afghan resistance is, in my opinion, growing. Such behavior on the part of the intractable Afghans is to my mind understandable. It is conditioned by centuries of tradition, geography, climate and religion.

We saw over a period of many years how the country was torn apart by civil war ... But in the face of outside aggressions, Afghans have always put aside their differences and united. Evidently, the [US-led] coalition forces are also being seen as a threat to the nation."

The inability to earn respect and command authority plus the heavy visible dependence on day-to-day US support have rendered the Kabul setup ineffective. Alongside this, the Afghan malaise of nepotism, tribal affiliations and corruption has also led to bad governance. It is in this combination of circumstances that the Taliban have succeeded in staging a comeback.

Washington had its chance in 2001 of setting up alliances in such a way that the Taliban need never have captured people's hearts but they opted instead for a NATO intervention which did not understand local factors and thought it could bulldoze its way through.

That the Taliban's guerilla warfare is succeeding once again is surely testimony to how the locals view foreigners on their soil and Karzai in Kabul. It's a case of " first get rid of the foreigners in a war of attrition and then we can restart the traditional bloodletting amongst ourselves."

[Earlier article on the Taliban and NATO.]

There is a feeling in some quarters that Afghanistan II was both an answer to the American people following 911 and a training run for what is coming up 2012-18. The strategy should have been thought out far better, in order to maximize its chances. Hell, they actually had the Taliban down and then lost the window of opportunity in a series of gung ho moves, to which the opposition by anyone back home was fiercely attacked as unpatriotic.

How unpatriotic is it to wish for a clever strategy in order to attain one's objectives? This one has not been clever at all.


[women] this blog's opinon of them


Woman and man as one
Together hear us roar
In numbers too big to ignore
And we know too much to go back an' pretend
'cause we've heard it all before
And we've both been down there on the floor
No one's ever gonna keep us down again
With their divide and rule and all
Divided we will fall
But if we merge one with the other
Then you'll see us soar

[humanizing Helen Reddy, returning her to some sanity]



The often unspoken artificial conflict between men and women would have to be the most boring time waster ever devised. Why does the youth/age, gay/normal, black/white, anglo/non-anglo or blonde/brown-haired divide not dominate political discussion instead?

Why must battle lines be drawn along gender lines? Who hijacked the political agenda and created serious rifts where there needed be no serious rifts? Who stuffed kids’ heads full of this rubbish over two generations and have now achieved their result of mutual mistrust and intolerance?

A woman can multitask, she has an approach of onwards and upwards for the most part, each step needing to be an improvement on the last, she has a certain perspective in business but so does a man. Men can, for the most part, find lateral solutions, they bring a sort of blunt realism at the same time that they bring out the softness in a woman.

There is no doubt they can bring out the best in each other, once they are secure in themselves, in their own sexuality, in their roles in the relationship, in the desire to build up, rather than break down, the other partner. Only a good man can get a woman purring like a kitten; a good woman can really ensure a man’s happiness better than anyone.

There are those sad people who would constantly emphasize and carp about the gender divide and how woman is a thousand times better than a man. Bollocks. There is a range of aptitude with both sexes – poor quality men and poor quality women plus the opposite.

I say blur the differences, look for the common ground, embrace the power of man and woman as one team of two. Today was a case in point. There were a dozen of us in a room, mainly men but some women. I got talking to some of the men, we found common ground and it was good. Before that, I’d been walking along the road, a car had stopped and the chap asked if I knew where the centre was. He offered me a lift.

Pleasant. Rewarding.

After it was all over, a lady and I started conversing and swiftly it went to stage two. Smiles abounded on both sides, we covered many topics and there was also that X factor that I’ve never been able to pin down. There is most certainly a male-female chemistry and those who would play that down puzzle me. It’s equal, it is compl-e-mentary, coml-i-mentary at the same time and it’s biological. It is good vibes.

Contrast that with a different conversation between two people. They chat and within the first few sentences he gets an earful of how much better women are than men, how women are oppressed and so on. What chance is there, given this level of bitterness, that any sort of meaningful relationship could build up? Seriously – what chance?

So that’s my opinion of women – I feel at ease around them whilst they see themselves as human rather than as female warriors, which allows me to be human rather than scathingly anti-feminist and there’s always a je ne sais quoi in relations with the majority I’ve known, even before we start to get into the … ahem … other aspects of the equation.

[long distance voyager] on through the starry night


Age humbles and makes you contract your world. Where once you travelled to your network and counted yourself lucky that it spanned the globe, where once you were free and vibrant, now you’re content to run on rails, still vibrant but for shorter periods of time and you do need the toilet at hand just that little bit more.

Some people are strange and that strangeness comes from their interlinked banal experiences. You can go into Canada, America or Russia and have a banal life, going to work each day, coming home, then someone phones you and offers you more banal part time work and so it goes, layer by layer.

Friends in Britain and Australia think you have an exciting, alluring life and it is certainly varied but ultimately, it is routine, each part of it in its own way. You are a very routine person, even a little dull, once the standard dinner conversation has reached a pregnant pause and your circumspect nature threatens to silence you.

Your CV looks good until you look behind it and see that you have not surrounded yourself with the trappings of one career area – you don’t have the CELTA or CLAIT or whatever you need, you can’t speak the jargon of one career or social group. Your accent is a blend and it contains elements which annoy the person you’re with, no matter where you are.

You’re the eternal alien – everyone is a different age, both older and younger. People like you and wish you well but you’re not one of them in the end. So you settle somewhere and put roots down but ultimately it is artificial. People you know all have immediate families [your own is either deceased or dispersed] and though they accept you, [the young implicitly and quickly and the more mature with a certain friendly reservation], it always has a shelf life, as they themselves change their circumstances.

There’s no niche, there are no roots. There are all these question marks, far more mysterious and exotic in appearance than in reality. In reality, you’ve just gone from one thing to another – in your younger days a healthy thing but now a little eyebrow raising. You’ve filled out physically and you’re cast in the role of the interesting itinerant returned. Where is your wife, your family? In which box do you naturally fit?

Though possessing a keen sense of manners and even etiquette, you lack the local jargon, the local manner and some of the things you come out with, some of the expressions, for example, are from another place, maybe from Russia and Australia. People politely say nothing but inside them, they’ve concluded that you’re a bit less than respectable. You’re not ordinary in their eyes but in yours, you are. You yearn to be.

You’re turned in on yourself, no matter how expansive your real nature because you’ve been reliant on yourself so long. It’s difficult for anyone to really penetrate your persona, you’re too closed, which precludes a regular partner who wants to know every last detail and then some. You don’t want to be like this and something inside you screams, “Ask me, just ask me and I’l tell you all,” but they shy away and are too reticent to do that. Do they fear something there, some dark secret which will alter their opinion? There is nothing in there – you are just an ordinary citizen translocated.

You don’t talk much about yourself, what’s the point? This makes people all the more suspicious and by lacking some of the social lubricant which demands you fill in that space with small talk, you say nothing instead. People with egos don’t like you, deep down because you tend to speak in “I” and “me” even though you try not to. Again, you’ve been in your own world for so long that there is no choice but to speak that way.

“When I was in Thailand,” you say or even, if you were lucky at that time, “When we were in Thailand.” but no one is really interested, except to relate when they “did” Thailand, which is actually interesting to you, just as everything out there is interesting to you but in the end, you return to silence.

People eventually feel let down because the promise which was in your eyes and the pleasure you feel in their company has not produced the results they had in mind when you arrived. You say to yourself that you have little promise in you and you’ve never claimed differently but the weight of expectation from others bears down on you and they feel cheated by you and want you to just move on.

The bureaucrats and officials have a field day with you, blocking you here, stymying you there, demanding some document you don’t have in an evermore constricted state where you need to have a statistical history in one country alone to be a person – so much for the jetset. People are jealous of your travels and “exotic lifestyle” and resent your moaning about how difficult it is.

The worst of it is that the mates you’d dearly like to accept you don’t do that because theirs is a closed shop – army buddies or engineers or businessmen and though you can converse with them and share many of the same values as them, though you are almost one of them, still you fall short.

Where does it end? Hopefully by taking another woman who likes to be with you and you try to make a life, even at this late stage. It’s never too late, you anxiously hope, as your receding hair and shortness of breath tell a different tale. Anyway, you’ve probably atrophied down there by now so it would be embarrassing that your technique has got so rusty from infrequent use. What was once par for the course you now shy away from and pretend you’re not interested any more.

It becomes apparent that you need a goal. You have thoughts of joining a company and immersing yourself in their corporate structure but they take one look at you and are amazed you even thought of such a thing at this age. Someone gives you a chance and you take it.

You start a blog and think that a cool purpose in life would be to spread goodwill. Douglas Adams’ spaceman travelled from planet to planet, insulting people in alphabetical order and that’s a good purpose but spreading goodwill is ultimately more fun. You go to a shop and make an observation to the shopgirl – she likes it but the mate you’re with says, “Creep,” only half jokingly. Hell, it was true what you said. Oh well.

Your blog becomes a bit more and takes on a life of its own and the folly of humanity proves too much not to comment on, to the point people see you as so cynical. You have a penchant for losing friends but in the end, the real ones remain.

Tomorrow is another busy day, so you finish the extended rant you were writing at 01:22 because you couldn’t sleep but you need to sleep because you have another job interview.

Wednesday, October 08, 2008

[zevon] last interview with letterman

This one is best done from a pov angle. When I was in Youtube looking for another artist, the two names Letterman and Zevon popped up in the sidebar and I thought why not?

Expecting it to open with a song of Warren Zevon's and then the interview, he didn't seem to be around but the band leader and Letterman were eulogizing. Then I noticed that the whole show was about Zevon and a sinking feeling came over that this was an obituary.

Close. He died a few months later of lung cancer and this was his last appearance. Then the next surprise came when he actually shuffled across the floor and joined Letterman for the interview, a physical shell of what he'd once been and yet still sharp of mind in answer to the questions.

I was about to click out, as these things are not too nice but couldn't click out - his answers were loaded with humour and Letterman himself asked Zevon how he could joke in this situation. Letterman didn't feel he would and Zevon immediately answered, "Oh yes, I know you would." [6:25]

The first half of this long video is eulogy so you might like to let it load and come back to click halfway through - I think this interview is well worth the time and trouble.

It certainly affected me.



Zevon when relatively healthy and a lot younger:



Probably only for the afficianados:

Part 2
Part 3
Part 4

[ignobel awards] and the dignity of plants


Video via Instapundit

Here is the 2008 list:

The "18th First Annual Ig Nobel Prize Ceremony" was held on 2 October 2008 at Harvard University's Sanders Theatre.

  • Archaeology: Astolfo Gomes de Mello Araujo and Jose Carlos Marcelino, for showing that armadillos can mix up the contents of an archaeological site.
  • Biology: Marie-Christine Cadiergues, Christel Joubert, and Michel Franc, for discovering that fleas that live on dogs jump higher than fleas that live on cats.
  • Chemistry: Sheree Umpierre, Joseph Hill, and Deborah Anderson, for discovering that Coca-Cola is an effective spermicide, and C.Y. Hong, C.C. Shieh, P. Wu, and B.N. Chiang for proving it is not.
  • Cognitive science: Toshiyuki Nakagaki, Hiroyasu Yamada, Ryo Kobayashi, Atsushi Tero, Akio Ishiguro, and Ágota Tóth, for discovering that slime molds can solve puzzles.
  • Economics: Geoffrey Miller, Joshua Tyber, and Brent Jordan, for discovering that exotic dancers earn more when at peak fertility.
  • Literature: David Sims, for his study "You Bastard: A Narrative Exploration of the Experience of Indignation within Organizations".
  • Medicine: Dan Ariely for demonstrating that expensive placebos are more effective than inexpensive placebos.
  • Nutrition: Massimiliano Zampini and Charles Spence, for demonstrating that food tastes better when it sounds more appealing.
  • Peace: The Swiss Federal Ethics Committee on Non-Human Biotechnology and the citizens of Switzerland, for adopting the legal principle that plants have dignity.
  • Physics: Dorian Raymer and Douglas Smith, for proving that heaps of string or hair will inevitably tangle.
Let's look at the peace award a moment longer. Yep, it appears to be genuine:

The ECNH has also published a report on the consequences the constitutional definition of the dignity of living beings will have for our treatment of plants.

Practical Ethics addresses this thorny question:

This respect for plant dignity does not extend much outside science (or rather, the ethics committee). While most rules about handling animals apply regardless on whether they are in a lab or are someone's pet, it seems that Swiss gardeners are allowed to do whatever they want to their plants.

They can treat plants as instruments, create new ecological relationships or arbitrarily harm or destroy them (for example when weeding) with no legal repercussions. It is also hard to come up with a less dignified treatment than being cooked and eaten, yet this is the fate of many vegetables.

Maggie's Farm raises the question of how far this thing can be taken. This now effectively criminalizes Vegans who are clearly obsessed with non-animal food sources and are therefore dangerously psychotic. Cleve Baxter, father of the polygraph, maintained, in the 60s, that plants did indeed have feelings:

He also discovered that plants were aware of each other, mourned the death of anything (even the bacteria killed when boiling water is poured down the drain), strongly disliked people who killed plants carelessly or even during scientific research, and fondly remembered and extended their energy out to the people who had grown and tended them, even when their "friends" were far away in both time and space.

Gosh, you only need go as far as the Ents in Lord of the Rings to know they don't appreciate being mistreated by Orcs and the like. Do you mistreat plants? Do you maliciously chop a cabbage or gouge the stalk out of a tomato?

Leaving all that aside, it is not a greeny issue nor a party political one that most people I know adore the country stroll and the leafy nature of roadsides - property values are often higher where there is copious foliage too. Yet they'll still sit down to a dish with three veg and not feel any qualms.

I eat meat and veg in equal proportions, at least when I'm not being a pauper.

[duff equipment] the bane of the poor soldier

Pinnacle Dragon Skin


To bring us up to speed on this body-armour business, BAE has paid out to the U.S. over zylon, a defective component of body-armour which degrades over time. What made me smile was:

Gregory Katsas, the assistant attorney general for the Civil Division, said: "The Justice department will not tolerate its first responders wearing defective bullet-proof vests."

Hmmm. You might like to read this and this, by James Cleverley, which refer to substandard equipment and shortages for UK troops. It includes a video which should make your heart run cold. [Update - it would if they hadn't taken it down.]

I cobbled together an article a long time back on the vests themselves - here. This was linked to a site called Defense Tech, which runs a few articles on the issue. This article castigated the U.S., not the UK for a piece of nicely-awarded defence contracting which did not take into account the ultimate safety of troops, in this specific case, body armour again.

Essentially, Defense Tech asked:

Why the negative statements about Pinnacle Armor to Margaret Warner on News Hour with Jim Lehrer Armor for U.S. Troops In Iraq (Jan. 11, 2006) and why Major General Jeffrey A. Sorenson's, Col. John Norwood's, Col. Thomas Spoehr's negative statements about Dragon Skin in their recent news briefings?

These denials either show ignorance of the facts, a lack of knowledge of the available ballistic data, outright lies or are deliberately deceptive.Well, this is due to the fact that the military has (for years) outsourced these types of positions at Natick and PEO to [certain] civilians, instead of maintaining them within the military.

Unlike military personnel these civilians do not have the same level of oversight or controls on them to maintain the typical checks and balances necessary to ensure true and unbiased evaluation of performance-based products (like SOV/Dragon Skin, for instance) for the protection of the America's soldiers.

So you see, it is really rich for the U.S. to single out the UK for approbation, bad though the UK provision is.

Tuesday, October 07, 2008

[labyrinth 2] publish and be damned

There are different types of anger - annoyance, earthquake anger and then there is the type where there is little outward sign but inside there is a very deep, silent anger over some injustice or other.

This is the type I feel this evening and yet it is at odds with the mood in RL. Actually I've had two successes in the past two days and am right chuffed about that, as the pieces start to fall into place. So in terms of general mood, everything is hunky dory.

The problem is that I have seen three emails in that same time which show what can only be called the treachery of friends. The last post on the matter mentioned this. My friend said tonight and he's not one to mince words, that I am a "guppie being slowly encircled by sharks who are moving in for the kill".

Now I don't know if that is so but I know I am incensed by one particular email tonight which spoke of my "imagined version" of events at Blogpower. Sorry - I think you mean the chronological order of events as they occurred, don't you, which has nothing whatsoever to do with "interpretation"?

It goes on to ask why I, as admin, who called for someone's expulsion at BP for publishing a private email not his own, should now be publishing private emails myself. So let's look at this email from the previous post:

"In fact James carried on as if nothing had happened in one way, visiting us and commenting, as we did too ... it was all just so bizarre."

Now perhaps I'm completely wrong but it seems to me that posting this fragment, related directly to me, is a teensy weensy bit different from publishing a whole damned email of someone else's in a group mailing list. I was then accused of being dictatorial for insisting on his expulsion. Then I was accused of being wishy-washy. Now which one was it?

The best one of all was the question of why am I stirring all this up now. That's a real corker, that question. Let me answer it please. Have you seen, in the past two months or even earlier, any reference to this sort of subject matter on this blog? Has any reader on this blog seen a post like this current one from me, in this mood and using this strength of language? Does any reader think that my usual blog persona is that of an "angry-blogger" like, say, DK?

Of course not.

So why then would I suddenly burst out with all this, out of the blue so to speak? Wouldn't it be more intelligent to conclude that there might be the tiniest little bit of provocation behind it? Actually, what there was was a litany of untruths and distortions about events and the reasons behind them. Worse though were assumptions of guilt on my part and assumptions of innocence on the part of the one who was accused. It is the assumptions by "friends" which is the most galling.

As someone else emailed me this evening, a true friend: "People who do these things are not your friends."

So we come to the statement that I tried to ride into Blogpower as a great king [see that motif again] and take it over again. Makes a good story but it actually happened like this: I was approached about coming back to BP. After all, I'd made peace with everyone and we seemed to be back on an even keel. Yes, I replied, just as soon as that person who should have been thrown out is thrown out. The reply came back to me that that would be a very long time. Next there was a post on their mailing list that I had tried to dictate to them from outside BP who could and couldn't be a member.

[UPDATE October 11th: Blogpower have taken issue with the last sentence in the last paragraph here in particular. The "post" was a message put up by Matt Wardman at the time and others concurred. It gave the impression as I've just stated and Matt further commented along the lines of,"It's just James sh-- stirring again." I saw this message but not being in BP now, I can't say what would have happened to it. Of course it may have been removed by now.]

Sorry, there was just the one. Just one.

Someone else wrote to me about an hour ago [this thing's like an iceberg] that "you shouldn't worry about them as you have support you don't even realize in the blogosphere." To that, my friend has just answered: "You do at the moment but they're clearly doing their level best to undermine that."

"Should I have posted nothing?" I asked.

"You're damned if you do, you're dead if you don't."

Better to be damned. I'm guilty all right - of sweeping the injustice done on me under the carpet. Bizarre, eh? Well, I'm now sick to death of the assumptions, the distortions and the lies. It may be the end of nourishing obscurity as we know it, it may not. But one thing runs through the mind:

"Publish and be damned."

[tube quiz 1] did you know these


1 There is only one tube station name which does not have any letters of the word "mackerel" in it - which? SJW

2 There are only two tube stations which have all five vowels in them - which? MH, SE

3 ___________ has the shortest escalator on the system - 50 steps. CL

4 The shortest distance between tube stations is ____ to _____ on the Piccadilly line - 0.16 miles. LS, CG

5 The most popular route for tourists is _____ to _____ on the Piccadilly line. It is quicker to walk this distance than travel on the tube. LS, CG

6 The phrase "Mind the Gap" originated on the ________ line. N

7 The Jubilee line was originally going to be called the ________ line. F

8 ________ station on the Piccadilly line was the first to use kestrels and hawks to kill pigeons and stop them setting up homes in stations. N

9 The line covers the longest route - from West Ruislip to Epping you will travel 34 miles without changing. C

10 For non Brits - what is the name commonly given to the London Underground? T


Rsswean

St John's Wood, Mansion House and South Ealing, Chancery Lane, Leicester Square to Covent Garden, Leicester Square to Covent Garden, Northern, Fleet, Northfields, Central, the Tube

[odd one out] it'll make you cry




Who is the odd one out? None of them - they've all cried in public.

How do you feel about public figures crying in public? Women are always saying men should emote more but when they do, they are vilified. Should they cry? Should they not cry?

Another question - you might know who they are [above] and well done but where and when did they cry? Here is Roy crying:



If that was a little too much for you, here's a video to redress the balance:


Famous Cry Babies - The funniest videos clips are here

[the crisis] hang in there


The overwhelming lesson of history is that when the credit system collapses around a nation's ears, fear and gloom are the only things people can see. No one believes economists, as they disagree on how best to tackle the problem and the result is a run on the credit institutions.

Roosevelt gave his "the only thing we have to fear is fear" speech at such a time and the finance loves him for it in getting America off gold. What he did do though was inspire with confidence and in the end, that's all he had to do. Confidence that the government would not fall thereby backed the [now] fiat dollars and the people got through it but not until the leaders' luvverly war had devastated the world.

It's simple logic - either you maintain confidence in the government or the fiat system collapses completely and the results of that don't bear thinking about. Very difficult in our country to be confident in Gordo and yet Gordo himself doesn't back the fiat pound. If you have goods at home, if your home is yours and if you work on spending within your means, a near impossible thing today, then you will live a frugal lifestyle but survive.

It would help to have some spare cash, of course, to buy up some depressed assets whilst you were there.

[sydney substandard] well what's new

Melbourne skyline

So Paul Keating has attacked Sydney eateries? Well, what's new in that? If you want decent food, go to Melbourne, the restaurant capital of Australia.

Monday, October 06, 2008

[labyrinth] twists and turns of the unstraight


There are such bizarre things going on behind the scenes right now that it is like a bad B movie - you know, the one where someone comes out and says something is happening and most people say, "There, there, take your tablets, Jamesie," until he is eventually smothered in mire.

Just now, I had the misfortune to see an email, from July, which had been doctored. I know this because in the original, it was mainly about a particular blogger and a little over one paragraph about me but in the doctored version it is one paragraph about him and a diatribe about me.

[THIS FRAGMENT HAS NOW BEEN REMOVED BY REQUEST ON OCTOBER 10TH]

Right, I have to say there are a few of us on this case at the moment, some quite extraordinary things have come to light and it points very strongly to our emails being hacked, doctored and distributed as if they were original. Let alone the gross disloyalty of supposed friends, of which one we are fairly certain has the technical expertise to bring this off.

And this author calls my actions bizarre?

Certain people have felt complete freedom to slander me behind the scenes in the past months, whilst smiling on my blog but more particularly in the last week and one name keeps popping up, the common link, a non-visitor, always close to the action and a total innocent. Now that's no surprise but what on earth has come over the others?

The answer is partly in the word "appeasement".

Why would I continue to hobnob with someone who has poured dirt on me and put about the diametric opposite of the truth in most cases? Why would I hobnob with someone who chooses to select certain incidents and present them in such a way that he/she is a babe in arms but I look like a dangerously edgy character?

I think the motivation is fairly clear, wouldn't you say? Either that or they clearly don't have the antennae to see that I usually go back to friendly relations because:

1. I don't hold grudges, don't like feuds and prefer to forget something, once it is over;
2. I prefer to just blog and create things rather than spend my life on dirty slanging matches;
3. I ultimately have faith in human nature, to my detriment;
4. I see it as their problem, not mine.

I wonder if the appeasement theorists have ever heard the expression "olive branch"? No? The down side of this - and it has been commented on this blog by some friends I do consider loyal - is that by putting up with things and letting them continue, true friends depart, perplexed and a bit upset.

I know how true friends act, I know how true friends very much do not act. Trouble is, when a friend receives an email from another blogger whom he has always thought is a pukkha sahib and that sender has misinformed him by passing on some tidbit, he then goes back to my blog with new eyes, sees some perplexing comments by me out of context and starts to come to conclusions.

This is how character assassination works - a little bit here, a few skewed comments there, damning with faint praise and so on. It is never a frontal assault, such as I have been known to do. It's always behind the scenes , heavy with innuendo and half-completed sentences and the one who is the target carries on, oblivious to his every word being scrutinized for juicy morsels.

What's the purpose? Well, in most cases, perhaps they don't think that far along - everyone likes to ooh and ah and tut tut, after all. In one or two cases though, it is much more to an agenda. Watch what happens to me in Bloghounds in the next few days and you'll see what I mean. There are interesting things going down there.

That reminds me of the accusation doing the rounds that I really love - that my megalomaniacal reason for helping start Blogpower and then Bloghounds was to lord it over a group as a god. Does that sound like my rhetoric, by the way? And if it were so, why would I be forever stepping down, urging devolution, asking others to be admins? Seems strange behaviour for a megalomaniac.

In the end, one has two choices:

1. Seek out, identify and answer every allegation and misconstruction one by one, wasting time, wasting nerves and playing to someone else's agenda, hanging on to something already lost;
2. Identify areas of one's life which are giving grief and excise them, keeping the eyes focused on the main issues - true friendships, job and personal blog.

Last volley - everything I have written at Blogpower, Bloghounds and on this blog is true. Look over, scrutinize my better posts where I get my teeth into some issue, link by link by link and at the end I ask that if I have made any factual error, please correct me. Why should I be capable of that in posts and yet not in real life?

When I say I have evidence, then I do. When I have a reason for not using it, there is a reason., a sound reason. When I'm on a case, then there is a case. When I don't have enough for a final conclusion, I present it as an open-ended question. I'm my own worst enemy in later backtracking in the interests of peace and harmony. That is a stupid thing I do because it detracts from what had gone before. Someone once said I was a cow who gave good milk and then kicked the bucket over. Perhaps.

This blog will continue because even though this post concentrates on negatives, there are many, many other positives which are a bit unsung and there are so many issues to blog on. I wouldn't die for my blog, no way but it is certainly a nice outlet and point of communication.

So to hell with the detractors and let's see what tomorrow brings.

[inhumanity] to the defenceless

Liz's photo

I simply can't run the photo from Eurodog's site as it is so upsetting so I'll run a nice shot instead. One truly wonders what the term "human" signifies in the case of those "people" - it's truly sick. Please sign the petition there.

[bailout] explanation for the unitiated

Looking at the U.S., which is not a bad analogy for other parts of the world in terms of bailouts, where is the money coming from? One answer:

The IndyMac debacle is taking a large bite out of FDIC reserves, and if scores of other banks fail in the year ahead, the fund will be depleted. Taxpayers will have to step in.

... and:

To help pay for these bailouts, the government sells securities. And right now, there's plenty of demand because those securities are considered safe in the midst of all the turmoil.

... and:

Lest you think the Fed has run out of ammunition, the central bank, the WSJ reports, has roughly $400 billion left at its disposal and it has a few aces up its sleeves, including lowering interest rates.

... and:

The government hopes to someday sell the toxic securities it buys from the banks.

A certain amount is debt to other countries and though China looms large in this, it is not 50% of total debt, it's far less. China does not seem likely to refuse to fund more debt even though they might not be keen to:

If foreigners like the Chinese go on a buyers’ strike then - it was suggested - the US might resort to printing more money, and that would cause inflation - and a fall in the dollar and in the value of all those treasury bills held by China.

The key might be in the last quote - printing money. Here is a good guide for beginners, despite the look of it. It says that the government can either print money or change the balance sheet, selling securities to the private sector. It goes on:

The true structural cause of persistent high inflation is a fiscal deficit that is not eliminated with cuts in spending and/or increases in (non-seignorage) taxes.

Standard advice to overcome inflation includes selling shorter, which is what we are seeing - short term buybacks. Even at 0%, it is a safe haven for investors as long as the government guarantee of its fiat money is believed by the people.

In the end, this is the critical point. The government is owned by the Fed in real terms, which is owned by groups like Morgan who make a killing in times such as these, who then decide who is bailed out and who is not.

The moment you mention groups like Morgan, you are talking the world money houses and the real government and so we are back, legally as it turns out, dependent on their agenda. In other words, the people, in the end, are owned by the old money and subject to its whims for unrest, war and any other turmoil they care to finance.

This is the S and C syndrome [short and curlies]. It's a simple enough rule. If there is an almighty conflagration in the offing, it clearly needs funding and the old money needs to top up its coffers in order to finance it. Crash-depression-unrest-war ... the old formula every time.

Sunday, October 05, 2008

[overcrowding] chinese show the way

And we thought the Tube and the Met were bad. Here are the Chinese returning after their National Day weekend:






[debt problems] a novel solution


Mortgage finance company Fannie Mae says it's forgiving the mortgage debt of a 90-year-old Ohio woman, Addie Polk who shot herself in the chest as sheriff's deputies attempted to evict her. Polk has refinanced several times since taking out the loan in 1997. She remains hospitalized, but is expected to recover from chest wounds suffered last week.

Everything is wrong with this, isn't it? Her own refinancing, her age, the ease with which it happened, the pushing of society into this position by the banks, the reaction of Fannie Mae which would not write off her debt until, as they put it:

... the incident "certainly made our radar screen ...

Made our radar screen ... yes.

[ten commandments] of blogging


Clive Davis today on Blogging's Ten Commandments:
No 2. You shall not make an idol of your blog.

No 10. You shall not covet your neighbour's blog ranking.

[Chuckle]

[lazy town] having fun is what it's all about



Leaving aside the financial angst of the moment, leaving aside issues of last night, leaving aside any number of matters, I'd like to ask a question.

Do you see an element of madness creeping into not only public life but in the way people are interacting with each other of late?

There is an example on my mind right now. Indirectly, there is a connection I have with a family and there's a little kid who is into something called Lazy Town, a kid's show made in Iceland. It's a bit saccharine sweet for me but I quite like a character called Robbie Rotten who seems to get the best lines and sub plots.

I googled Julianna Rose Mauriello [the main character] and Magnús Scheving [producer and another main character] - it is an interesting tale in itself. What I was horrified by was that in google there were so many references to her being a lesbian and I wondered WTF? This is a kid's show and OK, the lead character has some special long term friendship off set, as every person I know has had and sickos on the web are turning it into something dirty with all sorts of innuendo.

The expression "get a life" goes through the brain over and over. What the hell is going on in society if that is the sort of thing which titillates people? It's b-o-r-i-n-g, you know. It's t-e-d-i-o-u-s. Can't we have anything good without someone trying to twist it round and place some bizarre interpretation on it? I don't know.

What I see in this show is an attempt by someone [Scheving] with an ideal of setting kids on a straight path of being kind [and eating sports candy]. Admittedly he is making a killing in the meantime and why not? Someone using his talents and his connections to put something about which is actually ... er ... clean and good.

Now watch the vipers come in and try to dirty it. Sorry, there is not one dirty thing I can see in any of this and the best of luck to them for what they are actually achieving. May there be more of it.

Having said all that, why is it that the The Bad seem to have all the best lines and be the most interesting characters [as well as having the best spaceships]? Why is it that The Good, apart from being handy to have around in a crisis, is ultimately seen as duller and less interesting to be with?

Similarly, why is it that people are far more afraid of the Dark Side in their stunning, shiny black costumes when the White Side is vastly more dangerous. Ultimately the former are losers. I tell you, I don't think it is the best plan to get on the worng side of G-d, mild-mannered and altrusitic though he may be. It's not unlike a papa who loves you. You're so into him being close to you that you can be forgiven for forgetting the awesome destructive capability.

Maybe some sanity needs to return to a world where it seems to be in short supply of late.