Thursday, December 21, 2006
Tuesday, December 19, 2006
IS ALL THIS REALLY NECESSARY?
I heard curry-muncher on the radio tonight. It refers to people of the sub-continent (Indian, Pakistani etc.) and who also, as it happens, eat curry, hence the nomenclature
It’s an arguably offensive and irreverent moniker, used predominately by Anglo Saxons.
A well-know radio presenter, in his bumbling attempt at shock-jock humour (think Howard Stern but not as successful), cast it out there this evening. It’s a favourite of this man.
On occasion, callers may have a go at verbal sparring, to be cut down with much self-satisfaction by his superior wit and dismissal (with the added safety of the cut-off button should he meet his equal).
Some do consider it offensive; some are driven to the extreme by its irreverence.
This same presenter earlier in his show, with equal triumph, alluded with his razor-sharp repartee, that the Irish by nature were stupid. This particular slur has been around for centuries. Yeah, let’s all laugh at the dumb Paddy! The Paddys don’t seem too bothered by it – of course, they’ve had other things commanding their attention.
Consider the following:
PADDYS AND TOWELHEADS
Yep – you heard right – I said it. The ‘T’ word. It’s the new ‘C’ word y’know! Sue me! But first let me say this; the ‘T’ word is a pet name/nickname for those that wear the headgear a certain persuasion wear.
Just like most have a nickname for their wife – and dog. In fact, here in Australia they have nicknames of a sort (more accurately shortening of words) for everything. Afternoon becomes arvo; Jonathon becomes Jonno and sausage becomes sanger. (How they came up with that particular one I’ll never know).
Moreover, they are referred to in such a way based on logical analysis of a familiar sight – they wear cloth in such a way that resembles the towels women, fresh out of the shower, wrap around their head while it dries – or something – not absolutely certain.
This headgear has a significance for the wearer, based in a fervent belief. And to discriminate against those of this (in fact, all) belief is of course unacceptable. No-one is disputing that. But we mustn’t become so over-sensitive that becomes farcical.
And, it doesn’t alter the fact that the image it promotes is of the aforementioned woman/shower thing.
Now, if you want to wear this particular head-dress, go right ahead, I’ve no complaints; in fact it’s infinitely preferable to baseball caps – especially white ones – worn backwards (by wee bastards who’d stick a knife in you as soon as look at you).
And if you want to believe in a particular deity – that’s okay too. That is your undeniable right and one I won’t be opposing. You’re not called towelhead because you worship Islam; or because you’re considered inferior; that you’re in some way less a person because you believe in something different.
You’re called it because of a sense of humour. Just like the ‘Paddy’ reference in jokes.
How many – wait, better this way – is there a man on the planet that doesn’t know or hasn’t heard a ‘paddy’ joke? They’re older than I am; the stereotypical red-haired, freckled dumb Paddy. A virtual career for many a comedian.
Wogs, Lebs, Pakis, Yanks, Pommies, Whiteys, Canucks, Chinkys, Abos, Frogs, Eyties, Nazis, Redskins, Palefaces, Hippys, Tree-huggers – and these are only some of the printable ones.
And I know there are many more. To have a nickname for most things is human nature and while some may be overtly derogatory, the majority are said (without prejudice.
Frankly, I couldn’t care less who’s offended at my term of endearment uttered with innocent indifference. My conscience is clear.
It could be that these extremists are simply unstable and like a drunk man with an imagined umbrage, (God, I’ve encountered a few of those in my time) they seek reasons to be offended in order to act out their ways.
I stand by this argument and invite anyone to present an alternative.
It’s an arguably offensive and irreverent moniker, used predominately by Anglo Saxons.
A well-know radio presenter, in his bumbling attempt at shock-jock humour (think Howard Stern but not as successful), cast it out there this evening. It’s a favourite of this man.
On occasion, callers may have a go at verbal sparring, to be cut down with much self-satisfaction by his superior wit and dismissal (with the added safety of the cut-off button should he meet his equal).
Some do consider it offensive; some are driven to the extreme by its irreverence.
This same presenter earlier in his show, with equal triumph, alluded with his razor-sharp repartee, that the Irish by nature were stupid. This particular slur has been around for centuries. Yeah, let’s all laugh at the dumb Paddy! The Paddys don’t seem too bothered by it – of course, they’ve had other things commanding their attention.
Consider the following:
PADDYS AND TOWELHEADS
Yep – you heard right – I said it. The ‘T’ word. It’s the new ‘C’ word y’know! Sue me! But first let me say this; the ‘T’ word is a pet name/nickname for those that wear the headgear a certain persuasion wear.
Just like most have a nickname for their wife – and dog. In fact, here in Australia they have nicknames of a sort (more accurately shortening of words) for everything. Afternoon becomes arvo; Jonathon becomes Jonno and sausage becomes sanger. (How they came up with that particular one I’ll never know).
Moreover, they are referred to in such a way based on logical analysis of a familiar sight – they wear cloth in such a way that resembles the towels women, fresh out of the shower, wrap around their head while it dries – or something – not absolutely certain.
This headgear has a significance for the wearer, based in a fervent belief. And to discriminate against those of this (in fact, all) belief is of course unacceptable. No-one is disputing that. But we mustn’t become so over-sensitive that becomes farcical.
And, it doesn’t alter the fact that the image it promotes is of the aforementioned woman/shower thing.
Now, if you want to wear this particular head-dress, go right ahead, I’ve no complaints; in fact it’s infinitely preferable to baseball caps – especially white ones – worn backwards (by wee bastards who’d stick a knife in you as soon as look at you).
And if you want to believe in a particular deity – that’s okay too. That is your undeniable right and one I won’t be opposing. You’re not called towelhead because you worship Islam; or because you’re considered inferior; that you’re in some way less a person because you believe in something different.
You’re called it because of a sense of humour. Just like the ‘Paddy’ reference in jokes.
How many – wait, better this way – is there a man on the planet that doesn’t know or hasn’t heard a ‘paddy’ joke? They’re older than I am; the stereotypical red-haired, freckled dumb Paddy. A virtual career for many a comedian.
Wogs, Lebs, Pakis, Yanks, Pommies, Whiteys, Canucks, Chinkys, Abos, Frogs, Eyties, Nazis, Redskins, Palefaces, Hippys, Tree-huggers – and these are only some of the printable ones.
And I know there are many more. To have a nickname for most things is human nature and while some may be overtly derogatory, the majority are said (without prejudice.
Frankly, I couldn’t care less who’s offended at my term of endearment uttered with innocent indifference. My conscience is clear.
It could be that these extremists are simply unstable and like a drunk man with an imagined umbrage, (God, I’ve encountered a few of those in my time) they seek reasons to be offended in order to act out their ways.
I stand by this argument and invite anyone to present an alternative.
POLITICIANS
Ahhhh…that special breed of individual. Found predominately tangled in a web of lies, they gravitate towards political opportunism like the proverbial flies round a cow pat.
In the beginning, they were men of wisdom; of fibre; of honour. They championed the common man with heart and fervour; and if they ever slipped, the ethically high standard bearing opposition were there to keep ‘em honest.
A visiting English professor is conducting several lectures on these fine protagonists.
Turns out they’re not like that at all! Gadzooks!
They still claim to have our best interests at heart; and sure enough if ‘best interests’ means filling their pockets and taking tax payer funded jaunts around the globe, then they deserve medals.
And the rot has sunk so deep that the once upright opposition now are like the manipulators they once sought to keep true.
The typical opposition leader, bereft of any alternative policies, now resorts to banal dirt-slinging and infantile denial.
Recently, one such (insert chosen adjective here) crowed with righteous belief – ‘if we were elected, we would performance-base MP’s wages’.
Further, he claimed (now on a wave of the earlier righteousness) that, ‘if they don’t make the grade, they’ll get docked wages – even sacked’. Oh, he was roaring along by the end!
Well, isn’t that fantastic? Judging by the ineptitude of one’s average politician, that should cut half the average cabinet. And we’ll have the cream of the crop left, I suppose? Foolproof.
Except, what actually would happen would be more akin to – they would be voted in, screw up as per usual, then cover up and misdirect. A senior member would strenuously defend – ‘well, we really can’t just arbitrarily withhold funds from the minister. He did his best, but there were extenuating circumstances’.
On he’d rattle with misdirection and avoidance until we all get bored. Soon it would fade away as the next crisis superseded it.
I mean, does anybody, seriously believe that anything politicians say during election time (especially election time but pretty much always) is ‘money in the bank’.
They so obviously say what they think we want to hear, get elected, and subsequently ignore it all.
And every time the voters fall for it. I am often left stunned at the gullibility of the average voter.
Politicians should be wise and intelligent; their aim should be the competent management of the country they represent. Instead, nowadays, they appear to do nothing but fill their pockets and manipulate the public to extend their own personal powerbase.
The same professor’s research has shown the public’s opinion of politicians is bordering on apathetic. In short, the public feel they aren’t represented. They feel as above that the ‘honourable members’ are ignoring their wishes and demands. That they simply no longer have any interest in serving anything other then themselves.
The problem begins with the election of incompetents into the various portfolios. Some of these…people have no actual training in the chosen field. They’re often just ordinary Joes, thrust into an arena in which they have zero experience. They have a go; they inevitably fail and they’re shifted around to another position – where, surprise surprise, they fail again.
Eventually they find themselves on the backbench where they exist on the public purse permanently. And such a purse it is. Lordy! Where do I get a job like that?
These people wouldn’t last to the end of the week in the public sector; wouldn’t get the job full stop actually, truth be told. I mean, would you employ these buffoons?
Performance basing wages of these cretins would certainly be effective (and frankly save an absolute motza) but as it is they who will legislate such a law, we’ll just have to keep hoping an honest man gets elected. Good luck waiting for that!
Like our porcine friends with their noses in the trough, they snort and bite as they manoeuvre for the perfect position. To quote a dear friend of mine – ‘it’s just wrong’. And so it is.
In the beginning, they were men of wisdom; of fibre; of honour. They championed the common man with heart and fervour; and if they ever slipped, the ethically high standard bearing opposition were there to keep ‘em honest.
A visiting English professor is conducting several lectures on these fine protagonists.
Turns out they’re not like that at all! Gadzooks!
They still claim to have our best interests at heart; and sure enough if ‘best interests’ means filling their pockets and taking tax payer funded jaunts around the globe, then they deserve medals.
And the rot has sunk so deep that the once upright opposition now are like the manipulators they once sought to keep true.
The typical opposition leader, bereft of any alternative policies, now resorts to banal dirt-slinging and infantile denial.
Recently, one such (insert chosen adjective here) crowed with righteous belief – ‘if we were elected, we would performance-base MP’s wages’.
Further, he claimed (now on a wave of the earlier righteousness) that, ‘if they don’t make the grade, they’ll get docked wages – even sacked’. Oh, he was roaring along by the end!
Well, isn’t that fantastic? Judging by the ineptitude of one’s average politician, that should cut half the average cabinet. And we’ll have the cream of the crop left, I suppose? Foolproof.
Except, what actually would happen would be more akin to – they would be voted in, screw up as per usual, then cover up and misdirect. A senior member would strenuously defend – ‘well, we really can’t just arbitrarily withhold funds from the minister. He did his best, but there were extenuating circumstances’.
On he’d rattle with misdirection and avoidance until we all get bored. Soon it would fade away as the next crisis superseded it.
I mean, does anybody, seriously believe that anything politicians say during election time (especially election time but pretty much always) is ‘money in the bank’.
They so obviously say what they think we want to hear, get elected, and subsequently ignore it all.
And every time the voters fall for it. I am often left stunned at the gullibility of the average voter.
Politicians should be wise and intelligent; their aim should be the competent management of the country they represent. Instead, nowadays, they appear to do nothing but fill their pockets and manipulate the public to extend their own personal powerbase.
The same professor’s research has shown the public’s opinion of politicians is bordering on apathetic. In short, the public feel they aren’t represented. They feel as above that the ‘honourable members’ are ignoring their wishes and demands. That they simply no longer have any interest in serving anything other then themselves.
The problem begins with the election of incompetents into the various portfolios. Some of these…people have no actual training in the chosen field. They’re often just ordinary Joes, thrust into an arena in which they have zero experience. They have a go; they inevitably fail and they’re shifted around to another position – where, surprise surprise, they fail again.
Eventually they find themselves on the backbench where they exist on the public purse permanently. And such a purse it is. Lordy! Where do I get a job like that?
These people wouldn’t last to the end of the week in the public sector; wouldn’t get the job full stop actually, truth be told. I mean, would you employ these buffoons?
Performance basing wages of these cretins would certainly be effective (and frankly save an absolute motza) but as it is they who will legislate such a law, we’ll just have to keep hoping an honest man gets elected. Good luck waiting for that!
Like our porcine friends with their noses in the trough, they snort and bite as they manoeuvre for the perfect position. To quote a dear friend of mine – ‘it’s just wrong’. And so it is.
CHRISTMAS -THE WORD I DARE NOT UTTER
Well folks, that time’s coming round again. December the 25th. Christmas – or (I’m loathe to say) Xmas; a time of joy and family. A time when kids’ eyes light up at the expectation of the jolly fat man with his big bag of goodies.
I remember the pure excitement as a young boy myself, of this time. Sent to bed early, I could never sleep. I would try – try sooo hard, but the thought of what waited for me when I got up the next day prevented it for some time.
Eventually I would drift off and when I awoke the next morning, I’d jump out of bed (a rarity itself – and the only time that happened) and race into the lounge to the waiting presents beneath the Christmas tree, and my bleary-eyed parents. (My father, suspecting a night-time excursion to the tree, more specifically the wonders underneath, would sleep on the sofa to guard against such action).
I ignored my mother’s pleas to ‘be careful with the wrapping paper, we could use it next year’ as I ripped the covering off, my eyes lighting up when I discovered the treat within. This joy was followed by the obligatory visit to church to celebrate the true meaning of Christmas
This was Christmas as I knew it. I would offer that it’s how most would remember it.
Unfortunately, it would seem, it is no more.
Christmas is under attack from the politically correct, fearful of offending those who don’t share such beliefs.
It started some time ago actually, with the removal of Christ from the title (that Christmas is Christ’s birthday and roughly translates as ‘Christ’s Day’ seems to have been lost on these people) and replacing it with the, oh so inventive X, and now has been further reduced to – wait for it – holiday. Merry/happy holiday? Nah, it just doesn’t have the same ring. Why? You know why – to placate some minority.
Further, Christmas isn’t just a holiday. Actually, Christmas isn’t even a holiday – it’s a celebration of the birth of a historical figure; a figure whose influence on society for the past 2000 years is hard to quantify, so colossal it’s been.
Now, you may not believe – that’s your undeniable right, and til the day I die, one I’ll vehemently defend on your behalf, however it’s
also the right of whomever to believe what he or she wants and to arbitrarily deny this by your absurd censorship of its true title is an infinitely worse act.
An example (one of many as it happens): a friend of mine works as a graphic artist and one of her recent jobs was to design a flyer for her company’s Christmas party. Simple, yes?
Afraid not.
She was told she wasn’t allowed to use the word Christmas; she could use a star – as long as it wasn’t the Star of David; and no tree.
So basically, design a card for a Christmas party without any mention or reference to Christmas or the fact that it was a religious holiday.
Oh – my – God (or should that be ‘divine being’ whomever you believe him – or her to be – gotta keep the feminists happy too!) – what’s got into these people?
If you PCs are so upset with Christ (whose birthday it is) being used in the title of the holiday, because it offends some minority (easily bloody offended if you ask me), then don’t take advantage of the Christ’s Day. You keep working throughout, believing in whomever or whatever you choose. Meantime those who do accept it as it is and should be can enjoy it.
Christmas is a religious festival and is it not a constitutional right to believe in whichever religion one chooses? Almost God-given?
I’m dreaming of a white …holiday? Aargh! Gimme a break! Bing would be turning in his grave.
You better watch out; you better not cry; you better be good; I’m telling you why; a large, sveltely-challenged, person is coming to town.
It’s getting a little bit silly, no?
I remember the pure excitement as a young boy myself, of this time. Sent to bed early, I could never sleep. I would try – try sooo hard, but the thought of what waited for me when I got up the next day prevented it for some time.
Eventually I would drift off and when I awoke the next morning, I’d jump out of bed (a rarity itself – and the only time that happened) and race into the lounge to the waiting presents beneath the Christmas tree, and my bleary-eyed parents. (My father, suspecting a night-time excursion to the tree, more specifically the wonders underneath, would sleep on the sofa to guard against such action).
I ignored my mother’s pleas to ‘be careful with the wrapping paper, we could use it next year’ as I ripped the covering off, my eyes lighting up when I discovered the treat within. This joy was followed by the obligatory visit to church to celebrate the true meaning of Christmas
This was Christmas as I knew it. I would offer that it’s how most would remember it.
Unfortunately, it would seem, it is no more.
Christmas is under attack from the politically correct, fearful of offending those who don’t share such beliefs.
It started some time ago actually, with the removal of Christ from the title (that Christmas is Christ’s birthday and roughly translates as ‘Christ’s Day’ seems to have been lost on these people) and replacing it with the, oh so inventive X, and now has been further reduced to – wait for it – holiday. Merry/happy holiday? Nah, it just doesn’t have the same ring. Why? You know why – to placate some minority.
Further, Christmas isn’t just a holiday. Actually, Christmas isn’t even a holiday – it’s a celebration of the birth of a historical figure; a figure whose influence on society for the past 2000 years is hard to quantify, so colossal it’s been.
Now, you may not believe – that’s your undeniable right, and til the day I die, one I’ll vehemently defend on your behalf, however it’s
also the right of whomever to believe what he or she wants and to arbitrarily deny this by your absurd censorship of its true title is an infinitely worse act.
An example (one of many as it happens): a friend of mine works as a graphic artist and one of her recent jobs was to design a flyer for her company’s Christmas party. Simple, yes?
Afraid not.
She was told she wasn’t allowed to use the word Christmas; she could use a star – as long as it wasn’t the Star of David; and no tree.
So basically, design a card for a Christmas party without any mention or reference to Christmas or the fact that it was a religious holiday.
Oh – my – God (or should that be ‘divine being’ whomever you believe him – or her to be – gotta keep the feminists happy too!) – what’s got into these people?
If you PCs are so upset with Christ (whose birthday it is) being used in the title of the holiday, because it offends some minority (easily bloody offended if you ask me), then don’t take advantage of the Christ’s Day. You keep working throughout, believing in whomever or whatever you choose. Meantime those who do accept it as it is and should be can enjoy it.
Christmas is a religious festival and is it not a constitutional right to believe in whichever religion one chooses? Almost God-given?
I’m dreaming of a white …holiday? Aargh! Gimme a break! Bing would be turning in his grave.
You better watch out; you better not cry; you better be good; I’m telling you why; a large, sveltely-challenged, person is coming to town.
It’s getting a little bit silly, no?
BIG DOG, BIG MAN?
We’ve all seen them; bull-necked, snarling creatures, straining at the leash, aggressively intimidating those with whom they come into contact.
With names like Spike and Biff; Killer and Sheba, they wear their leather collars sporting the pointed spikes like a badge.
People avoid them like the plague, fearful of being attacked by such vicious beasts.
How frightening they are as they strut, proudly, their way through the public domain, threatening anyone within reach with untold horrors.
And then of course, there’s the dog!
But if I may be serious for a moment, this issue is one of great importance. Dog attacks on people (mainly children) result in horrific injuries, both physical and emotional, often leaving the victim with a sense of perpetual fear towards all our four-legged friends.
This is followed by condemnation from the ‘good people’ of such violent animals, and the suggestion that they should be ‘wiped out of existence’ to quote a talk show host.
Let me say at this point, I don’t subscribe to this ‘wiping them out’. I love animals, especially dogs, and find them to be loyal and friendly. I’ve encountered vicious ones and have found the experience to be unnerving at times but not frightening.
Personally, I’m more concerned by the thug on the other end of the chain.
We must realise that dogs (all animals, in fact) are ultimately driven by nature, and as such are not subject to civilization’s laws. We can of course train most of the ‘nature’ part out of them but never will we be able to completely erase it.
Once accepted, the onus is on all of us to take responsibility for our own actions (and those of our inquisitive children) when in the presence of dogs.
Point in fact: recently on one of those anal TV shows based on people’s desperation for fame (and blatant stupidity), a perfect example of how a given dog can snap was shown.
We enter the scene to see a mongrel-type dog sniffing at something in a kitchen. In walks a small child, who proceeds to walk up to the unaware animal and insert her finger into the dog’s anus. The poor dog near jumped out of its skin. Funny stuff – har-dee-har-har!
Wouldn’t have been so funny had the animal snapped (which surely wouldn’t surprise any one of us – I mean, have you ever had a finger inserted without warning in your orifice? A sure way to get a punch in the mouth if you’re the owner of the finger). The little girl may have sustained a significant injury and doubtless the dog would’ve been put down.
All because we as adults were remiss in our responsibility to supervise our children. In this case, not only remiss in supervision, but actually videoing, therefore condoning the act.
And herein lies the bigger problem. We let our children clamber all over dogs, pull their ears, even kick and punch the animal while we watch and claim ‘oh, he’s such a well natured animal’. Well, well natured or not, dogs, just like people, have a limit and young children are surprisingly adept at finding these limits – to their horror and pain when they receive a vicious bite or worse, serious mauling.
And the typical reaction to it – execute the innocent party with a self-satisfied sanctimony.
Of course no-one wants to see vicious animals prowling the streets (if only we could put all these types down – see first paragraph), but a certain amount of perspective must be applied instead of resorting to the arbitrary extermination of anything that threatens humans, regardless of provocation.
Recently, I watched a Discovery Channel programme concerning the ASPCA. In one case an owner of a mongrel-type dog had kicked and jumped on the animal because (he claimed in order to justify and prevent his arrest) it had bitten him. Thankfully no-one bought his quite obviously manufactured excuse and did indeed arrest the offender. Bravo for the ASPCA!
But it just goes to show the way we treat our pets is nothing short of criminal. And when they inevitably turn we exclaim shock and outrage and execute them.
There are no such things as bad dogs – just bad owners and careless people.
With names like Spike and Biff; Killer and Sheba, they wear their leather collars sporting the pointed spikes like a badge.
People avoid them like the plague, fearful of being attacked by such vicious beasts.
How frightening they are as they strut, proudly, their way through the public domain, threatening anyone within reach with untold horrors.
And then of course, there’s the dog!
But if I may be serious for a moment, this issue is one of great importance. Dog attacks on people (mainly children) result in horrific injuries, both physical and emotional, often leaving the victim with a sense of perpetual fear towards all our four-legged friends.
This is followed by condemnation from the ‘good people’ of such violent animals, and the suggestion that they should be ‘wiped out of existence’ to quote a talk show host.
Let me say at this point, I don’t subscribe to this ‘wiping them out’. I love animals, especially dogs, and find them to be loyal and friendly. I’ve encountered vicious ones and have found the experience to be unnerving at times but not frightening.
Personally, I’m more concerned by the thug on the other end of the chain.
We must realise that dogs (all animals, in fact) are ultimately driven by nature, and as such are not subject to civilization’s laws. We can of course train most of the ‘nature’ part out of them but never will we be able to completely erase it.
Once accepted, the onus is on all of us to take responsibility for our own actions (and those of our inquisitive children) when in the presence of dogs.
Point in fact: recently on one of those anal TV shows based on people’s desperation for fame (and blatant stupidity), a perfect example of how a given dog can snap was shown.
We enter the scene to see a mongrel-type dog sniffing at something in a kitchen. In walks a small child, who proceeds to walk up to the unaware animal and insert her finger into the dog’s anus. The poor dog near jumped out of its skin. Funny stuff – har-dee-har-har!
Wouldn’t have been so funny had the animal snapped (which surely wouldn’t surprise any one of us – I mean, have you ever had a finger inserted without warning in your orifice? A sure way to get a punch in the mouth if you’re the owner of the finger). The little girl may have sustained a significant injury and doubtless the dog would’ve been put down.
All because we as adults were remiss in our responsibility to supervise our children. In this case, not only remiss in supervision, but actually videoing, therefore condoning the act.
And herein lies the bigger problem. We let our children clamber all over dogs, pull their ears, even kick and punch the animal while we watch and claim ‘oh, he’s such a well natured animal’. Well, well natured or not, dogs, just like people, have a limit and young children are surprisingly adept at finding these limits – to their horror and pain when they receive a vicious bite or worse, serious mauling.
And the typical reaction to it – execute the innocent party with a self-satisfied sanctimony.
Of course no-one wants to see vicious animals prowling the streets (if only we could put all these types down – see first paragraph), but a certain amount of perspective must be applied instead of resorting to the arbitrary extermination of anything that threatens humans, regardless of provocation.
Recently, I watched a Discovery Channel programme concerning the ASPCA. In one case an owner of a mongrel-type dog had kicked and jumped on the animal because (he claimed in order to justify and prevent his arrest) it had bitten him. Thankfully no-one bought his quite obviously manufactured excuse and did indeed arrest the offender. Bravo for the ASPCA!
But it just goes to show the way we treat our pets is nothing short of criminal. And when they inevitably turn we exclaim shock and outrage and execute them.
There are no such things as bad dogs – just bad owners and careless people.
HAVE WE REALLY DONE IT?
As I write this piece, I’m sitting in my back garden, the sun’s shining and a gentle breeze caresses my face.
Ahhh, it’s a beautiful world – it really is.
But, not according to the nearly President, Al Gore; according to him, and his recent movie, An Inconvenient Truth, we’re just about at the end. The damage perpetrated on the Earth by human pollution of all kinds is wide-ranging. Seas are rising; glaciers are melting; forests are dwindling (and CO2 is increasing).
Well, that may well be true, however there is a certain belief that this is simply a cycle; a cycle that occurs every 10,000 years (remember we and our detrimental influence have only been here for about 2 of those 10).
Many scientists believe this (at least the non-prophetic ones). Furthermore, if this is the case then the cycle, if it occurs every 10,000 years, could well last for, what, a thousand, five hundred, one hundred? Any way you look at it, it’s a long time to put up with El Nino type weather.
We’re told that we must reduce our emissions; that it’s not yet too late, that if we all pull together, Kyoto-wise, we’ll be able to pull it back from the brink.
With a population of six billion and rising, finding a way to exist in such numbers is proving to be the challenge to end all challenges.
The Dead Sea is now a trickle according to reports. The once holy Dead Sea is getting smaller and smaller. What’s left is being ‘plundered’ to use the actual term in the report, by a huge minerals company. Before our very eyes the Sea is dying. And for those whose only concern is financial, the report goes on to assert that buildings’ foundations on the edge are in danger of collapse. Tch! It’s a sad indictment that the final persuasion comes down to the ‘cold, hard stuff’.
An unstoppable force, man’s desire for wealth and power, consumes all.
Moreover, what if it’s too late and we can’t actually pull it back no matter what we do? No-one in any government is going to admit to such a thing because if they do, well the response will undoubtedly be one of apathy. Well, if it’s too late, what’s the point in trying anymore?
Or maybe Mother Earth and her weather patterns is just so big, (and we’re so insignificant) that nothing we do makes the slightest difference.
We as a species are destructive – it’s as simple as that and if as some believe, Mother Earth is a living single organism with countless parts, she may just step in and take control.
A recent report from the WWF, claims that in the last three decades three hundred – that’s right – three hundred species – have become extinct. Soon the only place to see certain species will be in a zoo. The report goes on to claim that we are living a ‘three world existence’, meaning that the rate at which we are using the planet’s commodities would take three planets to sustain. And still, man’s eternal quest for the mighty dollar supersedes all else.
And in this never ending search for the mighty dollar, we’ll rape and pillage the Earth and all it’s commodities until there are none left and the planet,s own sustainability will be affected.
Then, dear readers, we’re really screwed. Similar to trying to ‘put the genie back in the bottle’, it’ll be too late.
Y’know, as I was researching the subject of the article, I came across some disturbing information, illustrating frighteningly the danger we now face. I myself know how this’ll end. (But people write me off as some sort of doomsayer – rich really, considering these same people have their collective heads firmly ensconced in the sand).
Now, according to Sir Michael Stern, the author of the Stern report, a recent economic report on the current effects and solutions, we all know.
A 20% shrinkage of the global economy was one point. 100 million displaced by rising sea levels another.
Melting glaciers resulting in water shortages for 1 in 6 people and the advent of climate refugees will see tens, likely hundreds of millions more displaced.
Where will these people go? Well, to the only places left to them – unaffected countries. Potentially mass exoduses from the blighted land to the more prosperous (which actually won’t be prosperous for long once the millions find their way there).
A bleak picture indeed and one that calls for immediate action to prevent the eventual costs exceeding trillions of pounds.
However…
Previously, it had been recorded, that this El Nino effect was simply part of a cycle experienced by Mother Nature herself. A theory I chose to believe as it happens.
This latest report seems to offer an alternative theory; that our outrageously high level of taking and polluting is actually the culprit. The Stern Report offers, when considered (and typical of the English) the only realistic answer.
However, the sort of shift required to cease and repair the problem means we would have to return to something resembling caveman times. That, simply will not happen.
So we’re left with the choice of taxing the polluters to stop them polluting. Of course the actual guilty (the rich), won’t pay a cent under the ‘powerful protecting their own’ theory and the ordinary Joes (you and I) will be harassed because they don’t recycle their plastic.
Although what if, as mentioned earlier, this is as some less alarmist scientists believe, just a cycle?
Y’see, we have to understand, we’re looking at this from a human scale; this is happening on a global scale and perhaps we have ideas above our station. Let’s say, for example, the Earth is a billion years old and civilization’s been around for about 2000.
According to the boffins, this cycle occurs every, what, 10,000 years?
If we compress Earth’s existence into a year, the cycle then occurs about once a week and we’ve been here about 20 mins.
Now, with that in mind, we can now see our place in things.
The scientists who make these claims also assert that our pollution is so small in global terms as to be insignificant. And that being the case, the billions we need to spend in a desperate attempt to stem our filth, will result in bringing a plethora of economic disasters to society. And given the actual scale of the event, have absolutely no discernible effect.
Those of you with a nervous disposition had better sit down and grab a stiff drink.
Our civilized planet is unravelling. It won’t make the slightest bit of difference to Earth; it’ll be here for several more billions of years, regardless of what happens. Some species will dominate, some will falter (that would be us), but ultimately, life will go on.
‘What can we do?’ I hear you ask. The short answer – nothing, nothing whatsoever. And the long answer, well, it’s not much longer – we can enjoy our lives while we’re here, because if they’re right and this is merely the cycle of a much mightier entity, man, despite all his intelligence and brilliance will perish. If you’re Christian, you’d better start praying!
One thing I know for certain – if we keep stuffing the planet with humans, nature will step in, as it has done in the past and the results will be Armageddon-like. Never mind Katrina. In the words of Jack Nicholson’s Joker in Batman – ‘you ain’t seen nothing yet”! Are you ready?
Ahhh, it’s a beautiful world – it really is.
But, not according to the nearly President, Al Gore; according to him, and his recent movie, An Inconvenient Truth, we’re just about at the end. The damage perpetrated on the Earth by human pollution of all kinds is wide-ranging. Seas are rising; glaciers are melting; forests are dwindling (and CO2 is increasing).
Well, that may well be true, however there is a certain belief that this is simply a cycle; a cycle that occurs every 10,000 years (remember we and our detrimental influence have only been here for about 2 of those 10).
Many scientists believe this (at least the non-prophetic ones). Furthermore, if this is the case then the cycle, if it occurs every 10,000 years, could well last for, what, a thousand, five hundred, one hundred? Any way you look at it, it’s a long time to put up with El Nino type weather.
We’re told that we must reduce our emissions; that it’s not yet too late, that if we all pull together, Kyoto-wise, we’ll be able to pull it back from the brink.
With a population of six billion and rising, finding a way to exist in such numbers is proving to be the challenge to end all challenges.
The Dead Sea is now a trickle according to reports. The once holy Dead Sea is getting smaller and smaller. What’s left is being ‘plundered’ to use the actual term in the report, by a huge minerals company. Before our very eyes the Sea is dying. And for those whose only concern is financial, the report goes on to assert that buildings’ foundations on the edge are in danger of collapse. Tch! It’s a sad indictment that the final persuasion comes down to the ‘cold, hard stuff’.
An unstoppable force, man’s desire for wealth and power, consumes all.
Moreover, what if it’s too late and we can’t actually pull it back no matter what we do? No-one in any government is going to admit to such a thing because if they do, well the response will undoubtedly be one of apathy. Well, if it’s too late, what’s the point in trying anymore?
Or maybe Mother Earth and her weather patterns is just so big, (and we’re so insignificant) that nothing we do makes the slightest difference.
We as a species are destructive – it’s as simple as that and if as some believe, Mother Earth is a living single organism with countless parts, she may just step in and take control.
A recent report from the WWF, claims that in the last three decades three hundred – that’s right – three hundred species – have become extinct. Soon the only place to see certain species will be in a zoo. The report goes on to claim that we are living a ‘three world existence’, meaning that the rate at which we are using the planet’s commodities would take three planets to sustain. And still, man’s eternal quest for the mighty dollar supersedes all else.
And in this never ending search for the mighty dollar, we’ll rape and pillage the Earth and all it’s commodities until there are none left and the planet,s own sustainability will be affected.
Then, dear readers, we’re really screwed. Similar to trying to ‘put the genie back in the bottle’, it’ll be too late.
Y’know, as I was researching the subject of the article, I came across some disturbing information, illustrating frighteningly the danger we now face. I myself know how this’ll end. (But people write me off as some sort of doomsayer – rich really, considering these same people have their collective heads firmly ensconced in the sand).
Now, according to Sir Michael Stern, the author of the Stern report, a recent economic report on the current effects and solutions, we all know.
A 20% shrinkage of the global economy was one point. 100 million displaced by rising sea levels another.
Melting glaciers resulting in water shortages for 1 in 6 people and the advent of climate refugees will see tens, likely hundreds of millions more displaced.
Where will these people go? Well, to the only places left to them – unaffected countries. Potentially mass exoduses from the blighted land to the more prosperous (which actually won’t be prosperous for long once the millions find their way there).
A bleak picture indeed and one that calls for immediate action to prevent the eventual costs exceeding trillions of pounds.
However…
Previously, it had been recorded, that this El Nino effect was simply part of a cycle experienced by Mother Nature herself. A theory I chose to believe as it happens.
This latest report seems to offer an alternative theory; that our outrageously high level of taking and polluting is actually the culprit. The Stern Report offers, when considered (and typical of the English) the only realistic answer.
However, the sort of shift required to cease and repair the problem means we would have to return to something resembling caveman times. That, simply will not happen.
So we’re left with the choice of taxing the polluters to stop them polluting. Of course the actual guilty (the rich), won’t pay a cent under the ‘powerful protecting their own’ theory and the ordinary Joes (you and I) will be harassed because they don’t recycle their plastic.
Although what if, as mentioned earlier, this is as some less alarmist scientists believe, just a cycle?
Y’see, we have to understand, we’re looking at this from a human scale; this is happening on a global scale and perhaps we have ideas above our station. Let’s say, for example, the Earth is a billion years old and civilization’s been around for about 2000.
According to the boffins, this cycle occurs every, what, 10,000 years?
If we compress Earth’s existence into a year, the cycle then occurs about once a week and we’ve been here about 20 mins.
Now, with that in mind, we can now see our place in things.
The scientists who make these claims also assert that our pollution is so small in global terms as to be insignificant. And that being the case, the billions we need to spend in a desperate attempt to stem our filth, will result in bringing a plethora of economic disasters to society. And given the actual scale of the event, have absolutely no discernible effect.
Those of you with a nervous disposition had better sit down and grab a stiff drink.
Our civilized planet is unravelling. It won’t make the slightest bit of difference to Earth; it’ll be here for several more billions of years, regardless of what happens. Some species will dominate, some will falter (that would be us), but ultimately, life will go on.
‘What can we do?’ I hear you ask. The short answer – nothing, nothing whatsoever. And the long answer, well, it’s not much longer – we can enjoy our lives while we’re here, because if they’re right and this is merely the cycle of a much mightier entity, man, despite all his intelligence and brilliance will perish. If you’re Christian, you’d better start praying!
One thing I know for certain – if we keep stuffing the planet with humans, nature will step in, as it has done in the past and the results will be Armageddon-like. Never mind Katrina. In the words of Jack Nicholson’s Joker in Batman – ‘you ain’t seen nothing yet”! Are you ready?
HEROES?
The headline in today’s Daily Telegraph reads – ‘OUR ASHES HEROES’. Apparently the Australian cricket team have regained the Ashes, a minute trophy held in high esteem by those who crave it.
Faan-tastic – that cricket rates right up there with watching paint dry is neither here nor there. Fact is, I would really like to know exactly what it is that makes a team of grown men playing sport, (a sport may I add, that has virtually no risk of even remotely close to serious injury), heroes.
I’m getting really tired at the frequency with which the word ‘hero’ is tossed around these days. And it’s not just cricket. From all sportsmen (and women) to… bloody cooks almost –everyone’s a hero. Hero this and hero that. Is there an ordinary Joe around anymore? Not if you listen to the media nowdays.
‘Football heroes’ was the term when Australia reached the third round of the World Cup to face Italy. Lucas Neill, an Australian team member was one such ‘hero’. Lauded he was. Until he threw himself in front of an opposing player in the penalty box. And as is the rule, a penalty was awarded, Italy scored, and Australia went out.
Oh, how the masses objected. Cheats! They cried. Unfair! They shouted.
What was overlooked, though, was the fact that Neill was directly and exclusively responsible for their swift exit from the competition when he facilitated the award of the killing stroke in the form of that penalty. Only he will ever know if there was any intention in it or a benign mistake.
Doesn’t matter – the result was the same. It was, in fact, a clear and valid penalty and bloody Mr Neill, should have, as a professional footballer (allegedly), known better than to throw himself around the legs of the opposing player, in the penalty area. You’ll go a long way in Australia to find someone who’ll agree with that but those who know football, know it is exactly the case.
Radio stations in the constant quest for listeners, therefore money, whipped the dopey public, not for the first time, into a frenzy of patriotic fervour (meantime the sneaky government of the day make use of such patriotism to the full, and screw them a little more).
Y’see, while the public are concentrating on flag-waving, rah-rahing and ooh-ahhing, they’re less likely to notice if a little more of their freedom is quietly snatched. But I’m drifting…
Let me tell you about heroes:
Late in the afternoon of Sunday the third of October, 1993, Mike Durant, an US Army Black Hawk helicopter pilot lay in his crashed bird on the streets of Mogadishu, Somalia.
Part of a hundred and forty strong force whose mission was to remove some Aidid’s top militia who were meeting in a location known to the Americans, his aircraft was struck by an RPG (Rocket Propelled Grenade) and crippled. The helicopter half-buried itself in the ground as it slammed in.
One of just two survivors of five, he lay broken and relatively helpless in the smashed chopper. Somalian militia were closing in from all around and his situation looked truly hopeless.
Enter real heroes (in the truest sensed of the word).
Gary Shutgart and Gary Gordon were two Delta Snipers from the Elite US Army unit. The cream of Americas armed forces, they were lifetime soldiers. They were circling above watching and awaiting orders when Durant’s bird went down.
Knowing one of their buddies was helpless and knowing an angry mob, spurred to an even more frenzied state by the successful downing of the American chopper, was heading towards him, they asked to be inserted to defend their fallen comrade. They obviously knew the chances of survival were slim to non-existent, but regardless of their own safety, they responded as soon as permission was granted.
Through hails of bullets and RPG’s, and hundreds of armed Somalis, electrified on (a local, amphetamine-like drug), these two men defended that downed chopper and it’s hurt pilot to their very last bullet, resorting, when their automatic weapons spent their last, to handguns. Tragically, their efforts were in vain – for them at least – the chopper pilot was taken prisoner by militia, but released some time later.
These two men are actual heroes. Not swimmers, not cricketers, not football players – not even firemen or policemen(who as it happens, get paid handsomely for their efforts).
Much like ‘love’, ‘hero’ has been overused to the point its meaning has lost effect somewhat.
Shutgart and Gordon were posthumously awarded Medals of Honour, America’s highest award, for their bravery – and rightly so. True heroes, they laid down their lives for another, disregarding their own safety.
So enough of the hero tag for players of sport, givers to charity and other such insignificant pastimes, it belittles the true recipients. A real hero doesn’t think of himself. Or bask in self-indulgent adoration from fans cause he scored...whatever.
And before the feminist lobby start whining about my apparent sexism– or herself.
An ordinary woman (one of the aforementioned 'Joes' - or Josephines, I suppose) driven by desperation demonstrated this careless attitude to oneself with as much disregard for her personal safety as the D-boys.
She, with her daughter, was at a picnic with some friends and their children. The children were drifting around the banks in an inflatable dingy. Splashing and having fun whilst their parents looked on. In the blink of an eye (the way these things can happen), the small inflatable was dragged towards the relative rapid part of the river.
Panicked, the youngsters started screaming in fear as the little boat was suddenly bucking around with the force of the rapids.
The woman’s friends looked on, stunned into inaction as the kids were swept away. Breaking her own reverie the woman kicked off her shoes and leapt into the water. Not once did she think of herself, commenting, that at the time, she remembered thinking whether or not she should take her watch off. Off she swam, a female Indiana Jones almost and was thankfully victorious. She reached the small craft and hauled it and its occupants to shore.
Maybe not Medal of Honour stuff, granted, but this woman acted with as much selflessness in principle as the two warriors did. Just an ordinary person. A mother protecting her young. Brave lady.
Another hero. More power to her.
So enough! Winning a football match doesn’t make someone a hero; nor does swimming a fast time. OR regaining the smallest trophy in the history of the world.
Faan-tastic – that cricket rates right up there with watching paint dry is neither here nor there. Fact is, I would really like to know exactly what it is that makes a team of grown men playing sport, (a sport may I add, that has virtually no risk of even remotely close to serious injury), heroes.
I’m getting really tired at the frequency with which the word ‘hero’ is tossed around these days. And it’s not just cricket. From all sportsmen (and women) to… bloody cooks almost –everyone’s a hero. Hero this and hero that. Is there an ordinary Joe around anymore? Not if you listen to the media nowdays.
‘Football heroes’ was the term when Australia reached the third round of the World Cup to face Italy. Lucas Neill, an Australian team member was one such ‘hero’. Lauded he was. Until he threw himself in front of an opposing player in the penalty box. And as is the rule, a penalty was awarded, Italy scored, and Australia went out.
Oh, how the masses objected. Cheats! They cried. Unfair! They shouted.
What was overlooked, though, was the fact that Neill was directly and exclusively responsible for their swift exit from the competition when he facilitated the award of the killing stroke in the form of that penalty. Only he will ever know if there was any intention in it or a benign mistake.
Doesn’t matter – the result was the same. It was, in fact, a clear and valid penalty and bloody Mr Neill, should have, as a professional footballer (allegedly), known better than to throw himself around the legs of the opposing player, in the penalty area. You’ll go a long way in Australia to find someone who’ll agree with that but those who know football, know it is exactly the case.
Radio stations in the constant quest for listeners, therefore money, whipped the dopey public, not for the first time, into a frenzy of patriotic fervour (meantime the sneaky government of the day make use of such patriotism to the full, and screw them a little more).
Y’see, while the public are concentrating on flag-waving, rah-rahing and ooh-ahhing, they’re less likely to notice if a little more of their freedom is quietly snatched. But I’m drifting…
Let me tell you about heroes:
Late in the afternoon of Sunday the third of October, 1993, Mike Durant, an US Army Black Hawk helicopter pilot lay in his crashed bird on the streets of Mogadishu, Somalia.
Part of a hundred and forty strong force whose mission was to remove some Aidid’s top militia who were meeting in a location known to the Americans, his aircraft was struck by an RPG (Rocket Propelled Grenade) and crippled. The helicopter half-buried itself in the ground as it slammed in.
One of just two survivors of five, he lay broken and relatively helpless in the smashed chopper. Somalian militia were closing in from all around and his situation looked truly hopeless.
Enter real heroes (in the truest sensed of the word).
Gary Shutgart and Gary Gordon were two Delta Snipers from the Elite US Army unit. The cream of Americas armed forces, they were lifetime soldiers. They were circling above watching and awaiting orders when Durant’s bird went down.
Knowing one of their buddies was helpless and knowing an angry mob, spurred to an even more frenzied state by the successful downing of the American chopper, was heading towards him, they asked to be inserted to defend their fallen comrade. They obviously knew the chances of survival were slim to non-existent, but regardless of their own safety, they responded as soon as permission was granted.
Through hails of bullets and RPG’s, and hundreds of armed Somalis, electrified on (a local, amphetamine-like drug), these two men defended that downed chopper and it’s hurt pilot to their very last bullet, resorting, when their automatic weapons spent their last, to handguns. Tragically, their efforts were in vain – for them at least – the chopper pilot was taken prisoner by militia, but released some time later.
These two men are actual heroes. Not swimmers, not cricketers, not football players – not even firemen or policemen(who as it happens, get paid handsomely for their efforts).
Much like ‘love’, ‘hero’ has been overused to the point its meaning has lost effect somewhat.
Shutgart and Gordon were posthumously awarded Medals of Honour, America’s highest award, for their bravery – and rightly so. True heroes, they laid down their lives for another, disregarding their own safety.
So enough of the hero tag for players of sport, givers to charity and other such insignificant pastimes, it belittles the true recipients. A real hero doesn’t think of himself. Or bask in self-indulgent adoration from fans cause he scored...whatever.
And before the feminist lobby start whining about my apparent sexism– or herself.
An ordinary woman (one of the aforementioned 'Joes' - or Josephines, I suppose) driven by desperation demonstrated this careless attitude to oneself with as much disregard for her personal safety as the D-boys.
She, with her daughter, was at a picnic with some friends and their children. The children were drifting around the banks in an inflatable dingy. Splashing and having fun whilst their parents looked on. In the blink of an eye (the way these things can happen), the small inflatable was dragged towards the relative rapid part of the river.
Panicked, the youngsters started screaming in fear as the little boat was suddenly bucking around with the force of the rapids.
The woman’s friends looked on, stunned into inaction as the kids were swept away. Breaking her own reverie the woman kicked off her shoes and leapt into the water. Not once did she think of herself, commenting, that at the time, she remembered thinking whether or not she should take her watch off. Off she swam, a female Indiana Jones almost and was thankfully victorious. She reached the small craft and hauled it and its occupants to shore.
Maybe not Medal of Honour stuff, granted, but this woman acted with as much selflessness in principle as the two warriors did. Just an ordinary person. A mother protecting her young. Brave lady.
Another hero. More power to her.
So enough! Winning a football match doesn’t make someone a hero; nor does swimming a fast time. OR regaining the smallest trophy in the history of the world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
