SHOCKING AS USUAL, BUT NOT SURPRISING

14 05 2008

I know that it is strange to say that something can be shocking if it is usual but keeping that capacity for anger at the sheer callousness of it all is very important.

The Real News (who need your donations if you can afford) have put out this interview with one of the authors of the report ‘Making a Killing From the Food Crisis’.

That someone is making a fat profit while others starve is not a new scenario but the report and the interview are definitely worth a look.

Here is the full report.

Here is GRAINs homepage.




I DON’T SUPPORT ENGLAND

3 05 2008

The next major football tournament, Euro 2008, starts next month and given that neither Scotland nor England has qualified it is a chance to talk about something a bit more rationally than it is usually discussed.

England qualified for the last tournament (World cup 2006) and Scotland didn’t. When it started and Andy Murray the Scottish tennis player said he wouldn’t be supporting England there was a massive fuss in the English tabloids - and he reportedly received hate mail about the Dunblane massacre (that is where he is from). Murray had previously been reported as walking on the court when being introduced as ‘Andy Murray from England’ whereupon he corrected the umpire and walked off again and returned when reintroduced as ‘Andy Murray from Scotland’.

Murray eventually made a joke about his statement about not supporting England but I suspect this may have something to do with where he gets some of his funding.

When it happens that England qualify and Scotland don’t, the BBC in particular tend to start publishing opinion polls saying that X% of Scots are supporting England. Where they find these people I have no idea. I challenge anyone reading this to go into a pub full of Scottish people when there is an England game on the TV (doesn’t really matter what sport) and see who people are supporting.

You will find that the vast majority, like myself, would not only not be supporting England but will be actively supporting Englands opponents, probably going as far as to sing the national anthem of the other team (in a ‘da da da da’ style obviously).

The BBC, ably assisted by the tabloids, tend to paint the people doing this as ungrateful degenerates hellbent on causing unnecessary discord.

There is an obvious response to it all, which is simply..

It’s my support and I shall apportion it however I see fit.

But here are the things they usually say…

1) We’re all British.

2) The English support Scotland when they play.

3) Scotland don’t have a hope of ever winning the entire tournament.

4) If you don’t support England it means you are a racist.

Replies…

1. Geographically yes, but culturally we are not and politically we don’t all want to be…a large percentage of Scots want out.

2. We didn’t ask them to.

3. That is not the point and it is just the sort of arrogant attitude that makes me want them to lose - badly.

4. Behave.

With regard to point 2, this is often said but I have been in pubs in England and watched England and Scotland games (though not a Scotland V England game) and what I found was extremely far from universal support for Scotland.

With regard to point 4, are Dutch racist for not supporting the Germans? Are the Belgians racist for not supporting the French? Are the Koreans racist for not supporting the Japanese? Are the Ukrainians racist for not supporting the Russians? And so on and so on and so on. Can you find many examples of countries that actively support their neighbours?

There are some interesting other little stories I heard about all of this.

There was an English-owned sports store in Inverness that was told to play the England world cup CD in the run-up to the tournament. Due to the staff receiving verbal abuse daily from customers who didn’t want to listen to it the manager stopped playing it. She was then sacked for doing this.

A journalist put on an England strip when the tournament was on and walked around town in Scotland to see what would happen to him. Aside from a few shouts of ‘english bastard’ from some people going by in cars the funny part was a 70-odd year old man shuffled by him and said the same thing!

To finish, I just want to say it is obvious what the people are thinking. If Argentina beat England you suddenly see loads of Argentina shirts around the streets, if Portugal beat them then you see Portugal everywhere. I read a fantastic thing that sales of Argentinian wine in Scotland briefly doubled when Argentina beat England.

Scotland has been greatly oppressed by England through history - does one ask a slave to support his ‘owner’?




COMBINATION

1 05 2008

A combination of work, a dodgy shoulder and a virus has kept me from posting this week.

Normal service should be back by Monday.

In the meantime, another Monty Python sketch you may not have seen…

Did you ever hear about the Penultimate Supper of Jesus Christ?




FOR ANYONE WHO EVER MISSED HOME

17 04 2008

At various times I have spent months in a stretch or even a year away from home. Travelling is a wonderful thing - seeing how people do things in various places is endlessly interesting, but sometimes you feel it burn.

In the course of a year it won’t happen that often but it can be almost anything that starts the feeling. Maybe added up you feel it for a couple of weeks in a year. It usually goes away but it bites hard when it bites.

Something good could happen at home and you want to be sharing the experience because you know what it means to people at home and you want to be part of it, but you can’t.

Alternatively, something bad could happen at home and you want to be there to help if you can and you feel terrible because you know you can do almost nothing from where you are.

It can be something utterly random - there could be an incident in the street  and you wish one or other person you know is there with you because you know they would have loved it or you want to hear what they would say about it.

Sometimes it really does hurt.

I remember when ‘Letter from America’ by the proclaimers came out. It is a song Irish people love as well (you can see it being sung at the wedding in the film ‘The Commitments’)  because even though it mentions only Scottish place names it is a song about emigrating, and that is something the two countries know a lot about.

I also remember how much the thing the thing was ridiculed. I can’t find video evidence for this but I seem to remember Paula Yates being apoplectic about how such a thing could be at the top end of the charts and being incredibly snidey about it.

The reason a lot of people bought the song is that they know what it is about… she obviously didn’t…lyrics below..

When you go will you send back
A letter from America?
Take a look up the railtrack
From Miami to Canada
Broke off from my work the other day
I spent the evening thinking about
All the blood that flowed away
Across the ocean to the second chance
I wonder how it got on when it reached the promised land?

When you go will you send back
A letter from America?
Take a look up the railtrack
From Miami to Canada
I’ve looked at the ocean
Tried hard to imagine
The way you felt the day you sailed
From Wester Ross to Nova Scotia
We should have held you
We should have told you
But you know our sense of timing
We always wait too long

When you go will you send back
A letter from America?
Take a look up the railtrack
From Miami to Canada
Lochaber no more
Sutherland no more
Lewis no more
Skye no more
(3x)

I wonder my blood
Will you ever return
To help us kick the life back
To a dying mutual friend
Do we not love her?
Do we not say we love her?
Do we have to roam the world
To prove how much it hurts?
When you go will you send back
A letter from America?
Take a look up the railtrack
From Miami to Canada
Bathgate no more
Linwood no more
Methil no more
Irvine no more.
(3x)
Bathgate no more
Linwood no more
Methil no more
Lochaber no more.

Read the rest of this entry »




SPORTSMEN - GUTLESS, GREEDY OR STUPID

11 04 2008

This is a repost but I think it is topical… A few days ago I posted about actors who uncritically appear in blatant propaganda pieces but don’t say anything. Another group that are involved in this sort of thing are sportsmen. I remember Michael Jordan getting asked about sweatshops in Indonesia where people were making shoes for ridiculously poor wages. Jordan himself was rumoured to be getting paid more than all the people making the shoes put together and he didn’t have a lot to say about it. He was quoted in the NYT as saying…

“I don’t know the complete situation. Why should I? I’m trying to do my job. Hopefully, Nike will do the right thing.”

Nothing much has changed since then of course. Individual factories have seen some improvements and glossy codes of ethics have been made but the sweatshop syste remains intact. Democracy Now did a good section on it yesterday… Unfortunately the team I support also have a deal with Nike, which I am none too happy about. I have not bought a single product of theirs for a long long time for 2 reasons. The first is ethics and the second is that their products are shite anyway. The question is though, are the sportsmen who get these huge marketing deals to gutless to say anything, too greedy to care, or too stupid to realise what is going on? I don’t see that there are any other options. Whatever happened to this sort of thing…

or this..

“Wars of nations are fought to change maps. But wars of poverty are fought to map change.”

Muhammad Ali




NO CHILD OF MINE

12 03 2008

“How can I be guilty of treason when England is foreign to me?”

The shocking thing is that I could believe this when I saw it but nevertheless it is still infuriating.

Pupils ‘to take allegiance oath’

School-leavers should be encouraged to swear an oath of allegiance to Queen and country, says a report commissioned by Gordon Brown on British citizenship.

Report author, ex-attorney general Lord Goldsmith, says it would give teenagers a sense of belonging.

Council tax and student fee rebates are suggested for people who volunteer - as well as a “Britishness” public holiday.

So, not only on oath to an outdated autocrat, whom in history some of the operatives of brought untold misery around the world and these days her puppet masters are busy doing the same thing but people will actually be given a financial reward for helping them celebrate it.

At least we got this much…

A Scottish Government spokesman said it did not support the plan and did not believe it would find favour with parents or school pupils.

When I was about 10 I was kicked out of the cubs (the scouts for younger kids) before I even joined it because I refused to salute the Union Jack and say an oath of allegiance. This wasn’t due to any particular political awareness on my part and more to do with the fact that the football team I support is antithetical to that sort of thing.

If it wasn’t enraging it might be funny. The author of the report stated …

He also stressed that he could not see why Republicans would not want to swear an oath, even though they may not believe in the present system of government.

He probably can’t see why vegetarians don’t just eat hamburgers, lesbians don’t just sleep with men and Noel Edmonds doesn’t just get a 24 hour channel to himself.

Apparently it is all to help remind us of our ‘responsibilities’ and to remind us that we live in a tolerant and free society, ask you average asylum seeker how true that is.

I also wonder if those responsibilities include trivial things like, I don’t know, say getting legal authority to wage war or abiding by the European Convention on Human Rights?

The verses of the God Save the Queen that aren’t often sung are also possibly going to be changed. I think this is meant to be some sort of sop to the Scots in that they probably want to remove the fourth verse…

Lord, grant that Marshal Wade,
May by thy mighty aid,
Victory bring.
May he sedition hush and like a torrent rush,
Rebellious Scots to crush,
God save the King/Queen.

I think it should have been changed long ago but I don’t see it as my national anthem anyway and do they really expect people to say that thats fine then. Forget Scotland getting the shitty end of the financial stick and all the invasions. Forget Scotland being used as a nuclear dumping ground. Forget Scotland being used as a guinea pig whenever it suits London, forget Scottish history, forget Scottish culture and get involved in the all-new London-centric, cash at all costs, warmongering clusterfuck of a country that is the modern United Kingdom.

And make sure you rejoice while you do it. They have cameras to make sure you do.

newlabourfascism.jpg



BORDER DISPUTE

18 02 2008

Well sort of.

Now without going into it too much the Scots in some ways robbed blind by the Union with England but get higher spending on public services because the Scottish parliament chose to do that.

Some of this is a misrepresenation of that. It is from the BBC…

TV poll backs Berwick border move

Residents in the Northumberland town of Berwick-upon-Tweed have “voted” in favour of becoming part of Scotland.

According to a poll by a TV company, 60% of those who responded wanted the town to be administered by Scotland.

Better financed public services, including free personal health care for the elderly, were the main reasons.

The referendum, for Monday’s ITV1 Tonight programme, saw 1,182 voters in favour of becoming part of Scotland and 775 in favour of staying in England.

Earlier this month politicians in the town vowed to block any move to take Berwick back into Scotland.

I’m not saying that the Scots should not get what they get, but that we should get the same
Pro-England supporter Barbara Herdman

The hard-line stance came after Scottish National Party MSP Christine Grahame lodged a motion in the Scottish Parliament calling for the town to “return to the fold”.

But the town’s Lib Dem MP and council leader warned it would be too complicated and cause major upheaval.

Organisers of the TV programme said the poll turnout of 1,957 votes compared to some 3,800 in the last local elections.

Former policeman Michael Ross, from Berwick, who headed the pro-Scotland campaign for votes, said: “Berwick is a very special place and I think it is largely forgotten within England.

“I believe we would be the jewel in the crown of Scotland, I believe our economy would be better understood and better looked after by the Edinburgh government than it is by Westminster.”

‘Grass is greener’

Former school teacher Barbara Herdman campaigned in the town for a pro-English vote and for a change in how public spending is allocated across the UK.

She said: “I think that Berwick should stay part of England because it’s so unfair what is happening at the moment.

“The Scots are getting more money than we are. I’m not saying that the Scots should not get what they get, but that we should get the same.”

Last week Isabel Hunter, leader of the borough council, said residents would like to enjoy the same benefits as people in Scotland, but added: “You can always say the grass is greener but I think it would just be too difficult.”

A similar poll carried out by the local newspaper revealed 79% of people in the area backed reunification with Scotland.

The town has changed hands between the two nations at least 13 times.

This is from the Herald

Myth 1: Scots get more public cash than anyone else.
The Truth: Public spending in Scotland is just £9631 per head, lower than the £10,271 for Northern Ireland and London’s average of £9748.

Myth 2: English taxes pay for Scotland’s high spending.
The Truth: Scotland brings in £9593 per head in tax - more than anywhere in the UK outside of London.  Latest estimates show the tax take from Scotland is £49bn compared with total spending of £49.2bn …[1]

Myth 3: Scots milk the welfare state
The Truth: Latest figures show people living in North-East England claim on average £3284 per head.  Northern Ireland £3256 and £3136 in Wales in state benefits.  Scotland’s pension and benefit cost is £3086 per head.

Myth 4: Scots enjoy better public services than the rest of the UK
The Truth: The Welsh, not the Scots, get free prescriptions, while NHS waiting times in Scotland are broadly in line with England …

Myth 5: State subsidy pays for Scots “big ticket” projects
The Truth: London’s Crossrail project is to cost £16bn - seven and a half times the annual Scottish transport budget.  The 2012 London Olympics means a loss of £9.3bn lottery funding for the rest of the UK.

There are some better social provisions as I said, but as you can see from the relative tax revenues that is done with Scottish money.




DON’T MENTION THE NON-WAR

14 02 2008

Something nice for Valentine’s day I think…

It is so often said that war is natural part of human behaviour that many people just accept it. Conflict or disagreement certainly might be, but full-on war is a different matter.

Most people know about the 1914 Christmas Truce in WW1 when the British and German soldiers played football and exchanged gifts (note for some American readers - WW1 started in 1914, not 1917 and WW2 started in 1939, not 1941).

This is usually presented as a one-off - a freak occurrence, but that simply isn’t true. It also happened in 1915 with the Germans and the French and in 1916 there was a truce on the Eastern front.

When I was at school and computers were in their 64k stage we were given a programme to play around with in one history lesson. Extremely basic though it was, the idea was that you were the British General deciding what tactics you could use to defeat the Germans in World War 1 given the tactics and equipment of the time.

The trick was that although it was possible to win the game, it wasn’t possible to do it without a bloodbath on both sides. I think it in its own way, it was meant to be a little anti-war statement.

However, the game didn’t give you the option of simply not attacking and not attacking was the way that many people survived in World War One.

In the earlier stages of the war informal truces sprung up all over the place. Both sides would aim artillery far and wide, this was understood as an offering of peace and reciprocated. In many places it then became a kind of game. Snipers would aim to miss but in a showing-off ‘look what I can hit’ way. This was partly to pass the time and partly to warn that if the truce was broken then there was a capability of reprisal. Contrary to popular belief the conflict was very low-intensity in many places at different times. There are many eyewitness accounts of the soldiers apologising to each other for firing too near.

1214.jpg

This changed of course when the officers - the ones far removed from the front line that is - heard about it. They were appalled by this sort of behaviour and devised new tactics like surprise raids and so on which destroyed the fragile trust that opposing soldiers had built up.

After the war of course it was the generals that had insisted on the continuation of mass random slaughter that were awarded medals and had statues of each other erected. Of the officers in the field who insisted on pressing on, well, many of them were shot in the back by their own side as they advanced toward the opposing army.

In many societies around the world in pre-industrial times the object of war was not the genocide of the opposing group but rather the humiliation. From some of the Native Americans to societies in Africa, actual fatalities were very unusual. Some sources even describe what is essentially a high-intensity game of tag (involving a smack with a stick). In other places a tit-for-tat, one of yours for one of ours kind of conflict often persisted over a long time but without an eruption into absolute warfare.

It may be that there is a part of our genetics that leads us toward conflict but it is certainly not the cause of the mass slaughters that have happened through history. Rome wanted to conquer, other groups wanted to live and let live. Genghis Khan would wipe out thousands, other groups at the time didn’t.

It is demonstrably untrue that the Romans and other groups throughout history that have and are conducting mass slaughter and conquest on the genocidal scale are genetically diverse enough from those living next to them to have a different set of genetic imperatives, so it must be societal conditions that lead to this kind of behaviour. And as we all know, societal conditions can change.

Why mention all this today?

Today is an anniversary. Not valentines day, but the anniversary of an atrocity carried out by British and American forces in World War 2 - the bombing of Dresden which occurred on the night of the 13th/14th February 1945 when the war was nearing its end. Dresden was not regarded as a strategically important city, which is why it hadn’t been bombed up until then. Russian troops were also closing in on the city.

The BBC, in their ‘On This Day‘ section are showing the report from 1945 and there is a little section which says..

The Dresden raid caused a public outcry. Even Winston Churchill, who had urged Bomber Command to attack east German cities, tried to dissociate himself from it.

However, they miss an important part out. They say that explosives and ‘incendiary bombs’ were dropped, which is true. What they don’t say is phosphorus was dropped - a chemical weapon. Eyewitnesses reported that the temperature was so hot in some places that in the wreckage of homes were found puddles of metal that had once been pots and pans.

Kurt Vonnegut wrote brilliantly about this in his book Slaughterhouse 5. He was a prisoner of war in Germany at the time.

Oh, and the BBC neglected to mention for a long time that white phosphorus was used recently in Fallujah. This was despite the fact many people were giving them evidence and urging them to. Even when they did mention it it was very brief.




MOOOOO

13 02 2008

I was taken aback by this story on BBC news yesterday…

Campaigners are calling for a ban on a device that emits a high-pitched sound to disperse groups of teenagers, saying it is not a fair way to treat them.

I was partly stunned because I had no idea this was happening in the first place. Shops and businesses are using the things to make children move away from outside their shops. Read on a bit…

There are estimated to be 3,500 of the devices, known as the Mosquito, in use in England, many at shopping centres.

Their sound causes discomfort to young ears - but their frequency is above the normal hearing range of people over 25.

England’s children’s commissioner backs a ban but stores say the devices can be useful against anti-social youths.

The devices, which exploit the fact that a person’s ability to hear high frequencies generally declines once they reach their 20s, have proved popular with councils and police who aim to tackle anti-social behaviour by using them to disperse groups of youths.

So it seems English adults are so terrified of their own children that they employ electronic devices to move them along and effectively bar them from an area.

Not only that, but these devices are pre-emptive in the sense of any actual crime being committed and are indiscriminate. It is also a form of collective punishment.

This is a disgusting use of technology and one of the leaders of the campaign against these things, Sir Al Aynsley-Green put it correctly…

“These devices are indiscriminate and target all children and young people, including babies, regardless of whether they are behaving or misbehaving.

“The use of measures such as these are simply demonising children and young people, creating a dangerous and widening divide between the young and the old.”

Shami Chakrabarti from the campaign group Liberty said..

“What type of society uses a low-level sonic weapon on its children? Imagine the outcry if a device was introduced that caused blanket discomfort to people of one race or gender, rather than to our kids?”

No wonder the kids are angry. If you treat people like cattle you have to expect them to shit in the field that you have herded them into.

Song for the day..

Animals in the Zoo - The Kinks…

You’re just an animal in the zoo
Sittin’ round feeling persecuted and abused
You’re locked up and I’m on the loose
But I can’t quite tell who’s looking at who
’cause I’m an animal, too
But you’re locked up in a zoo
And you look at me and I look at you

God made the heaven and the deep blue sea
But man picked the flowers and he pulled up the trees
God mad the moon and the rain and the sun
But man made the money and the bombs and the guns

So we’re all animals, too
But you’re locked up in a zoo
And you look at me and I look at you

I’m a prisoner but I got no cage
I’m locked up but I got no chain
But the good guys lose and the bad guys win
That’s why you’re looking out and I’m looking in
But we’re all animals, too
But you’re locked up in a zoo
’cause you look at me and I look at you




ADULTS OUT OF CONTROL

6 02 2008

When I see kids in the street setting off fireworks or spraypainting something I really don’t think it is unusual at all, despite the handwringing and exortations that kids are ‘out of control’ that we see in the media.

If I was growing up now and looking at the world around I would see a world where violence is glorified and/or excused, not by children but by adults. I would also see a world where those older than me are and/or have been trashing the place and doing their best to forget about it or, for want of a better phrase ’sweep it under the carpet’.

All I would need to do to see that is turn on the TV and given that my parents would be out working longer hours for less money than before I would probably be doing a lot of TV watching, which in turn has been linked to many behavioural disorders.

Take this example from the Independent, which shows what we get from the neglect and willingness to trash the place of the older people in the community…

The world’s rubbish dump: a garbage tip that stretches from Hawaii to Japan

By Kathy Marks, Asia-Pacific Correspondent, and Daniel Howden

A “plastic soup” of waste floating in the Pacific Ocean is growing at an alarming rate and now covers an area twice the size of the continental United States, scientists have said.

The vast expanse of debris – in effect the world’s largest rubbish dump – is held in place by swirling underwater currents. This drifting “soup” stretches from about 500 nautical miles off the Californian coast, across the northern Pacific, past Hawaii and almost as far as Japan.

Charles Moore, an American oceanographer who discovered the “Great Pacific Garbage Patch” or “trash vortex”, believes that about 100 million tons of flotsam are circulating in the region. Marcus Eriksen, a research director of the US-based Algalita Marine Research Foundation, which Mr Moore founded, said yesterday: “The original idea that people had was that it was an island of plastic garbage that you could almost walk on. It is not quite like that. It is almost like a plastic soup. It is endless for an area that is maybe twice the size as continental United States.”

Curtis Ebbesmeyer, an oceanographer and leading authority on flotsam, has tracked the build-up of plastics in the seas for more than 15 years and compares the trash vortex to a living entity: “It moves around like a big animal without a leash.” When that animal comes close to land, as it does at the Hawaiian archipelago, the results are dramatic. “The garbage patch barfs, and you get a beach covered with this confetti of plastic,” he added.

The “soup” is actually two linked areas, either side of the islands of Hawaii, known as the Western and Eastern Pacific Garbage Patches. About one-fifth of the junk – which includes everything from footballs and kayaks to Lego blocks and carrier bags – is thrown off ships or oil platforms. The rest comes from land.

Mr Moore, a former sailor, came across the sea of waste by chance in 1997, while taking a short cut home from a Los Angeles to Hawaii yacht race. He had steered his craft into the “North Pacific gyre” – a vortex where the ocean circulates slowly because of little wind and extreme high pressure systems. Usually sailors avoid it.

He was astonished to find himself surrounded by rubbish, day after day, thousands of miles from land. “Every time I came on deck, there was trash floating by,” he said in an interview. “How could we have fouled such a huge area? How could this go on for a week?”

Mr Moore, the heir to a family fortune from the oil industry, subsequently sold his business interests and became an environmental activist. He warned yesterday that unless consumers cut back on their use of disposable plastics, the plastic stew would double in size over the next decade.

Professor David Karl, an oceanographer at the University of Hawaii, said more research was needed to establish the size and nature of the plastic soup but that there was “no reason to doubt” Algalita’s findings.

“After all, the plastic trash is going somewhere and it is about time we get a full accounting of the distribution of plastic in the marine ecosystem and especially its fate and impact on marine ecosystems.”

Professor Karl is co-ordinating an expedition with Algalita in search of the garbage patch later this year and believes the expanse of junk actually represents a new habitat. Historically, rubbish that ends up in oceanic gyres has biodegraded. But modern plastics are so durable that objects half-a-century old have been found in the north Pacific dump. “Every little piece of plastic manufactured in the past 50 years that made it into the ocean is still out there somewhere,” said Tony Andrady, a chemist with the US-based Research Triangle Institute.

Mr Moore said that because the sea of rubbish is translucent and lies just below the water’s surface, it is not detectable in satellite photographs. “You only see it from the bows of ships,” he said.

According to the UN Environment Programme, plastic debris causes the deaths of more than a million seabirds every year, as well as more than 100,000 marine mammals. Syringes, cigarette lighters and toothbrushes have been found inside the stomachs of dead seabirds, which mistake them for food.

Plastic is believed to constitute 90 per cent of all rubbish floating in the oceans. The UN Environment Programme estimated in 2006 that every square mile of ocean contains 46,000 pieces of floating plastic,

Dr Eriksen said the slowly rotating mass of rubbish-laden water poses a risk to human health, too. Hundreds of millions of tiny plastic pellets, or nurdles – the raw materials for the plastic industry – are lost or spilled every year, working their way into the sea. These pollutants act as chemical sponges attracting man-made chemicals such as hydrocarbons and the pesticide DDT. They then enter the food chain. “What goes into the ocean goes into these animals and onto your dinner plate. It’s that simple,” said Dr Eriksen.