abs0rbed's thoughts

The End

2003-11-01T01:00:00.000Z

I've lost the will to post anything.

Gone

2003-10-31T16:49:00.000Z

Spain showed what ordinary people can do given the right conditions. The next time somebody says workers are stupid and could not take over the running of society, point to Spain. Show them what the workers and peasants (most of whom were illiterate) did. Tell them Anarchism is possible.

Seems that the anarchistic revolution in spain wasn't all fun and games unfortuntely. It appears that they only reason they got into such a situation was because they did kill quite a few people who opposed them. And it seems that they would have never survived anyway, even though it seems they did make quite a few compromises to their ideals in order to attain some sort of sustainability.

Obviously, I've only read about this today and therefore don't really have a clue what I am talking about.

Freestyle Disco

2003-10-29T22:04:00.000Z

Galloway to take on Labour - BBC
Rebel Galloway launches political party - Al-Jazeera

The difference between the two articles is astounding. The Al-Jazeera article presently the biggest story on the front page, where as the BBC article isn't on the front page at all.

Al-Jazeera says:
Rebel MP George Galloway has announced the launch of a new political movement which could change the face of British politics for ever.
...
Galloway, a lifelong member of the Labour swore British Prime Minister Tony Blair would live to regret his decision in having the Scots-born MP expelled from the party last week.

Now it appears he has kept his word.

I am quite excited that he has formed a party that has a chance to win, but they won't get any media coverage and will have a difficult fight on their hands.

I will admit I wasn't excited about it from reading the BBC article, where the Al-Jazeera article is obviously pushing it as a very big move for UK politics.

BBC says:
Expelled Labour MP George Galloway has revealed he will challenge Labour in every European seat in England and Wales next year.
...
The rebel MP intends to build a new political movement based on the anti-war coalition to stand against Labour in every European seat next June.

When I think about it now, maybe I should have been excited about it from reading the BBC article, and perhaps it was only a little bit of reporting bias that drove it home.

Hair Pie - Bake 2

2003-10-28T21:08:00.000Z

If there is one thing you can always be certain of: that all leaders will always act in their best interests, as Putin reveals:

Russia had to "approach this pragmatically and follow its own interests as the Americans have always done and will continue to do so", he said.

Hair Pie - Bake 1

2003-10-28T20:37:00.000Z

It seems that arguing about the Iraq war has just descended into insulting anyone who is opposing it now. There are no valid arguements about the evidence involved, only name calling.

My view?

Sounds to me like people are trying to build a house on air.

I've been having a few thoughts about how political activism is carried out and how it could be improved. It seems to me that there are loads of groups out there doing a lot of work that seems to achieve absolutely crap all.

Why is all their work achieving nothing?

Because all activists are segregated into seperate groups which would be powerful together, but are useless apart.

And why are they seperate?

Because their opinions differ on details that will never matter as far as their activism is concerned, because they'll never get the chance to carry out that something that was a difference in opinion or anything else for that matter.

Of course, these views could be an absolute load of tosh, which is why in the future I plan to study all NGO's in a local area and then devise a plan as to how they can work together most effectively to actually make the hours of work they do more meaningful.

Something In The Way

2003-10-27T12:09:00.000Z

Iraq: the missing billions

In particular the British government, which has promised financial transparency in dealings with Iraqi oil funds, should use its influence to ensure that the missing money is accounted for. Christian Aid is calling on Prime Minister Tony Blair to deliver on his promises.

Phaedra

2003-10-27T11:29:00.000Z

US shuns Vietnam war claims

Of course the USA government wouldn't want to reopen that box. Something that they don't want the USA public to know might... escape...

Alberto Balsalm

2003-10-27T00:43:00.000Z

Monbiot: The jobs Britain stole from the Asian subcontinent 300 years ago are now returning.

There is a profound historical irony here. Indian workers can outcompete British workers today because Britain smashed their ability to compete in the past. Having destroyed India's own industries, the East India Company and the colonial authorities obliged its people to speak our language, adopt our working practices and surrender their labour to multinational corporations.

He's just talking about lots of British jobs are moving to India. The only reason it is in the news is because it might effect the UK... negetively. I think Monbiot puts it best:

We begin to understand the implications of the system we have created only when it turns against ourselves.

Amen.

I found quite a chilling story the other day, which I didn't read properly, talking about children who are having their tongues cut so that they can have an English accent.

Matilda Mother

2003-10-27T00:36:00.000Z

Soldiers are indoctrinated?

Soldiers get most of their news watching Armed Forces Network television or reading Stars and Stripes newspaper. Both are official military media and provide the soldiers with what the military wants them to know.

This segment is a bit one sided, but still it makes total sense to me. If you want soldiers to kill people then you're going to have to control what they believe, and you can do that by controlling what information they're basing their opinions on.

Flaming

2003-10-27T00:27:00.000Z

Lynch gets to work on world peace:

The answer, says Lynch, is simple: Transcendental Meditation. Once sought out by the Beatles, it is the hottest Hollywood spiritualism of the moment. Other practitioners include actress Heather Graham, recently pictured meditating on the front of Time magazine, which devoted a cover story to the craze. But for Lynch it is no passing fad.

I'd give it a try, but I doubt it will bring world peace as Lynch claims. But hey, we've all got to do what we think is right. I just find it slightly frustrating that Lynch is going to waste a crap load of time and effort on something that I view to be a load of crap. It sounds a little bit like the hippy movement, and, well, that didn't work.

Spanish Castle Magic

2003-10-26T02:35:00.000Z

There seems to be a system where people believe that what occurs locally is fundamentally different to what happens in other countries.

For example, if someone dropped a bomb on your next door neighbour, a person may be horrified. But if someone is told that we need to drop a bomb on someone else's next door neighbour in a far off country then, they will accept it without the same consideration they would give the permission to drop a bomb on their next door neighbour.

This wasn't something I had really thought about until I had listened to a radio show from USA that was reporting the events unfold on 9-11.

The presenters seem to have the logical flaw mentioned before. They show compassion to the innocent people who died in the World Trade Centre, but then say that the solution is to go to war and use atom bombs in retaliation. This seems to me to be colonialist behaviour. One of the reporters actually said that they've stopped the colonialism, but I don't necessarily believe that it is the case.

I Think I Understand

2003-10-25T01:09:00.000+01:00

The greatest day of my life was when I learned to take a step back and laugh at myself. It seems like such a simple skill, but I actually found it quite hard to achieve, and also essentially now I have it.

I have been reading a lot about anarchism over the last couple of days. I've actually properly read the anarchist FAQ, so I have started that tonight, and it will continue through the night.

Last night I was reading about Norwich Anarchists. Makes me interested in the sort of anarchists who advocate violent resistance in self defense to the extent where the violence is prepared for.

I am going to buy some anarchist books from here. They seem cheap and hopefully will give me a sense what it is all about. Obviously the key is going to be to read them judging their content effectively; it's always so easy to give advice on how to form an opinion, but creating your own is always a lot more difficult.

May my search for the truth be a successful one.

There Is A Light That Never Goes Out

2003-10-23T23:17:00.000+01:00

It seems I've lost my ability to watch Newsnight. I watched about 20 minutes of it, and frankly, I found it sickening the way the news was twisted to the UK governments favour. I don't watch much television these days, and it always suprises me with it's mind dulling whenever I do.

So I sat and watched George Galloway get the "impossible to win arguement" treatment. The interview wouldn't have changed anyone opinion. There is no discussion on television; British television has very rarely challenged any of my views.

Regardless of whether you think Galloway was guilty of the things he has been charged, he did make a comment that wasn't replied to during Newsnight. I can't remember exactly how it put it, but it was something along the lines of "we don't support the war and we will show it when George Bush comes to visit with 100's of thousands protesting in the streets of London."

Wonder if it will be bigger than the original anti Iraq war protest. Mr Bush seems to be meeting protests everywhere he goes...

Galloway paints a lovely picture. If he can continue as an independent candidate it would certainly be a victory for the people.

Needles In A Camel's Eye

2003-10-23T15:25:00.000+01:00

I was just wondering. Suppose that the universe could be reduced to a Turing machine. If this is the case then maybe the 3D world that we see is nothing but our consciencousness' attempt to representation of some sort of computational process.

The reason I ponder this is because I've recently been pondering gravity, and it seems unlikely to happen due to particle exchange, so maybe therefore the gravitational pull on each object/atom or whatever it computed individually and then applied upon we believe to be happening in the 3D world. This would mean that there isn't a need for exchange of particles.

Obviously though, I know nothing about physics and therefore this is probably the biggest piece of crap I've posted in quite a while.

Eclipse

2003-10-23T10:03:00.000+01:00

This article, I think, is incorrect.

Yes, they are anti-semetic views. Our media also express anti-semetic views towards Arabs just as they have done with Jews. I don't believe that this makes their anti-semetism correct, I am saying that both should stop.

Article says:
Masood looked me right in the eye: "No. Al Qaeda didn't bomb the buildings. The Mossad did."

I thought, Hey, Asshole, Al Qaeda claimed responsibility for the murder of all those innocent people!

I think the fact that people think Al-Qaeda claimed responsibility is one of the largest political myths at present. Let's assume that it is Al-Qaeda, as the USA government seem to advocate, then why don't they perform an investigation into what happened on 9-11? There can be no reason except that there is something that they don't want to the public to see.

The reason people believe that Al-Qaeda claimed responsibility is due to the one video tape that is alleged to be Bin Laden talking about the attacks. As mentioned before, that video appears to be faked. There seems to be geniune tapes where he denies responsibility, but links to this can be difficult to get hold of, but obviously not as difficult as I thought.

Anyway, then this man goes on to say:
What I can tell you is that experience scared the hell out of me. How the hell can a guy be so well-educated and smart and successful in America and be so close-minded at the same time?

Says he, who has clearly not explored the possibility that the tape which supposidly proves Al-Qaeda's guilt has been faked. Closed-mindness is never something that can truly be judged, as there always may be someone else out there who knows something that you don't.

Bigmouth Strikes Again

2003-10-23T08:27:00.000+01:00

I wouldn't believe everything you read in newspapers
Jack Straw on radio 4.

Valuable advice.

Frankly, Mr Shankly

2003-10-23T01:28:00.000+01:00

This poem is entitled "Sledgehammer Society." It's an incomplete work.

The glass works of the human mind
Tend to fracture from time to time
The world turns a misty grey
Swinging on vines from day to day

The eyes swell with intent to blame
It's in the tap water or the rotten clay
Or the shoddy society of a modern age
With forgotten fears that fade away

I Can't Be Arsed Finding A Song Title

2003-10-22T18:25:00.000+01:00

I didn't doubt that North Korea has done questionable things. And I don't say this in a way that means to trivialize what they have done, but people should realise that most countries have done questionable things and why one story should break and another remain under the carpet usually depends upon the relationship between the country being reported, and from which country the reporting is being done.

I have no doubt that there will be plenty of new information reported on North Korea and Middle-East countries that people have never heard of before...

which reminds me: I need an atlas.

If countries like the USA and the UK really cared about the welfare of people, we would help the countries that are suffering the most, not those countries that are important to our leaders for strategic reasons.

Clap Hands

2003-10-22T12:20:00.000+01:00

So, Glenn Reynolds, or InstaPundit. Firstly, I think that if you look at his website without looking at the opposing view there is a very strong case to believe what he says. He appears to make a lot of good points.

The first sign that I found that it could be a propaganda website was the way he attacks issues he disagrees with. Here is an example:

CONCERNS ABOUT THE VALIDITY OF ELECTRONIC VOTING MACHINES are being met by:

1. Opening up the entire systems to external scrutiny, so as to ensure trust and reliability;

2. A heartfelt dedication to improving the systems;

3. A public-relations campaign.

Guess which answer is correct.

His writing doesn't attempt to present things in a factual way.

Also, his website doesn't allow comments, and therefore doesn't allow an opposing view to be expressed. Therefore a reader who isn't aware of the opposing view will not be able to explore it without searching on their own initiative. I understand that there are perfectly valid reasons for not having comments, but that doesn't change the fact that an article cannot be discussed when they aren't there.

When the opposing view is known, it is blantantly obvious how selective he is with what he posts. There are (what I view as) big issues that are totally avoided.

InstaPundit is clearly a very clever man, it's just a shame that he seems to be fighting for what I believe to be the wrong side. I think he is aware of opposing points of view, yet he never really mentions them, and therefore he is probably deliberately attempting to mislead readers of his website. I have no answer as to why he would want to do this.

Someone should set up a blog called anti-instapundit, and mirror all of his posts, except give the opposite side of the story for every post of his. Would be quite interesting. Obviously, the person doing it would have to be knowledgable, very knowledgable

Daybreaker

2003-10-22T08:43:00.000+01:00

More philosophy for future reference
It seems that I am a rationalist who believes in a priori knowledge. But I believe that some of this knowledge is useful to humans to understand "the real world" and other times can be distracting. For example, I believe sense-data from the eyes can be helpful to understand that we live in a 3D world, but I don't believe that emotions are concepts that are ultimately useless, except to progress evolution.

Roll Over Beethoven

2003-10-21T22:08:00.000+01:00

News, but Not as We Know It - Robert Fisk:

Needless to say, the television “news” is a miserable affair that often fails to make any mention of the growing violence and anti-American attacks in Iraq which every foreign journalist — and most Iraqi newspapers — report.

From Healing Iraq:
He was enthusiastically talking about the humvee that flew in the air, and the 4 injured soldiers. I didn't see any of that. I was bewildered. Someone next to me told me that nothing like that happened at all. My brother and a couple of friends of his started to chant in front of the camera: LIAR, LIAR,... Everyone laughed at this, but the bearded guy started to swear by Allah. Someone pointed out that the bearded guy wasn't even in the area when the bomb exploded.

I will be honest and say that I am more tempted to believe Fisk's article than HealingIraq's, but it isn't easy to dismiss the views of someone who is in the country. Perhaps there is already propaganda in Iraq now as Fisk states.

Also, I don't think there is a total correlation between the event HealingIraq describes and what Fisk describes. There is a definate difference between the orchestrated event that HealingIraq claims and the attacks that Fisk claims local residence are saying is the USA.

Fisk's article was published on the 7th of October.
HealingIraq's article on the 19th of October.

Slippery People

2003-10-21T01:12:00.000+01:00

Parallel 'government' finds support - Seems an Iraqi is attempting to set up a government at the same time as USA, and it seems to have a lot of support.

I am having a little bit of confusion about how Iraqis view the war.
This bloke seems to be, suprisingly, for the war. I read a bit of his blog and it turns out that has been in the UK for a while, so it's difficult to say what are the basis for his views. I shall have to read more later to truly establish what the situation is.

I have been reading a little bit of Instapundit, and his views seem to be ridiculously pro-USA-government. I'll say more about that later.

U-Mass

2003-10-20T22:21:00.000+01:00

It's quite weird how often BBC and Al-Jazeera disagree on Palestinian casualities. Al-Jazeera always gives the upper boundaries of casualties, and BBC the lower boundary.

In one instance, helicopters fired two missiles at a car near a refugee camp in central Gaza killing at least six people, according to witnesses and Palestinian sources. - BBC
The Israeli army has launched a further two missile strikes on targets in the Gaza Strip, killing at least seven Palestinians and wounding scores more. - Al-Jazeera

You could accuse me of being pedantic, but this isn't just a one-off incidence - these difference in casuality figures happen almost every time there is an incident.

Phaedra

2003-10-20T20:25:00.000+01:00

Philosophical questions for future reference
Is it possible to know something else than ideas? For example, if we study the structure of a human body, or any animal, we may find that it is designed to interact with a physical world, and therefore know that the physical world exists.

Example: why do humans have two eyes? It must be to observe some sort of data from an external environment.

Also, if a human believes in evolution, then it may ask the question: "what instinctive beliefs would it be reasonable to expect a human to have, given how the process of evolution has evolved it?" This question - for me - ties up all instinctive beliefs we have, and therefore, seems to be a theory where everything fits into place.

Psycho Killer

2003-10-20T01:20:00.000+01:00

There are a few points of discussion for me to review tonight.

Firstly, a Japanese inventor on Adam and Joe Go Tokyo said that according to his research, if you make sure that you sleep less than six hours a day and you don’t watch any television you will be highly inventive. I rarely watch television these days, but I do sleep a lot.

The sleep is going to have to go.

While I have stood by my principles and refused to watch David Blaine’s exit from his Perspex prison, I did succumb to the BBC news article. All rather poultry except for one line that interested me:

"I have learned more in that box, than I have in years," he said.

Perhaps isolation is a good form of learning. This of course poses a few questions, firstly what did he learn while he was in there? And would it be useful for me to learn what he learnt?

Presumably he got very bored at first, but once the boredom settled in, what does the mind think of then? And what do we define as boredom anyway?

Unfortunately, isolation isn’t really a practical option for me, especially for that length of time, but if I ever have an opportunity to do something similar I think it may be a valuable exercise.

Incidentally, I refuse to watch illusionists because they are supposed to do something that they don’t actually do. Therefore the whole purpose of creating a trick is to get someone to watch it, regardless of what they think of the trick itself. I have to draw the line and refuse to watch something that is clearly never going to aid me in any way whatsoever, except to fuel my stupid curiosity in what happened when he left the box. This curiosity is no different than the curiosity to what will happen in the next episode of a soap opera, and those I despise.

Update: "I have learned how strong we are as human beings."

The Barbarian

2003-10-18T20:34:00.000+01:00

Bin Ladin widens anti-US war - Al-Jazeera

'Bin Laden tape' warns US - BBC

I noticed that the two different articles differ on one issue.

BBC says:
"I tell the American people we will continue fighting you and we will continue martyrdom operations inside and outside the United States until you stop your injustice, and you end your foolishness," it said.

It gives the impression that he wishes to actually fight directly with American people.

Al-Jazeera says:
"We, God willing, will continue to fight you and will continue martyrdom operations inside and outside the United States until you abandon your oppression and foolish acts," he said.

He also addressed the American people, accusing them of electing an "evil" leader.

"Bush has sent your sons into the lion’s den, to slaughter and be slaughtered, claiming that this act was in defence of international peace and America’s security, thus concealing the facts."

This gives the impression that he is talking to the USA government and USA citizens seperately.

Such Sweet Thunder

2003-10-18T12:22:00.000+01:00

Lieberman heckled at Arab forum

Senator Lieberman, who is an Orthodox Jew, was interrupted after he refused to condemn Israel's construction of a security fence through the West Bank.

I read some article that was predicting how Lieberman is a possible future president; perhaps it will happen. With a lot of pro-Israel supporters in the USA senate, it could lead to more trouble in the Middle East, regardless if the democrats return to power.

Worrying time, as it always is.

Get Behind The Mule

2003-10-18T09:49:00.000+01:00

I have done some searching around the web, and this is what I have found:
Activism: US Security Pledge for North Korea.

What You Can Do: Call the White House at (202) 456-1111 to condemn the possibility of a security guarantee for North Korea. Tell them a security guarantee for an aggressive dictatorship threatens American security. This alert is part of the "Support Military Action against North Korea" campaign.

Say for a moment that all countries under the world were in a democracy. According to this pretzel logic, war is inevitable under democracy because North Korea seems to be trying to defend themselves by developing WMD, and USA believe there is a security threat. It seems that USA is more of a threat to North Korea than North Korea is to the USA. So under the capitalist ideas North Korea should have the right to defend themselves, but this isn’t the way it seems to work.

Under the capitalist view it isn’t equal rights for all. Some countries are more equal than others, and providing you’re a capitalist then you’re country is more important than any other country. I have nothing against this view, providing you admit that you believe some humans are more equal than others.

Anyway, I always find these websites a good indicator of what will happen in the future, and they seem intent on military action against North Korea. So the three countries next up for invasion: North Korea, Syria and Iran.

Feel It

2003-10-17T22:40:00.000+01:00

One thing on which I am presently undecided is fate.

I believe that inevitably I can only choose one course of action, and therefore, there can only be one way that things actually happen. Therefore in some sense I believe that there is a fate for us all, and that what will happen cannot be changed.

But the true question is: do I actually have some control over the choices I make? If consciousness is the decision making process then maybe I do have a choice. If not then maybe it is all an illusion. If it is an illusion then I believe in fate. If it is not an illusion then I believe that perhaps my consciousness can change what will happen.

But then the question is: what does consciousness use in order to make its decisions. If it is only using all the information it has received, then consciousness is already decided as I will process the given information and come to the resulting conclusion, much like a mathematical formula.

Maybe the question I should be asking is: do humans have a soul? Being an atheist, I believe humans don’t and therefore maybe that means I believe in fate. Even if our consciousness is the decision making process, and although we have the choice to choose what we do, we still will always choose the same thing.

I don’t know, it’s very difficult to say. I am sure I could be persuaded to believe that there is no fate, but believing that there is no fate may require a drastic change in my beliefs, as if you don’t believe in fate, then you must believe that there is “something else” apart from what science leads us to believe and therefore maybe the answer is a soul of some kind.

Maybe I should seperate the decision making process from the inevitablity of one thing happening.

Us And Them

2003-10-16T23:41:00.000+01:00

This poem is entitled "Student House." I am not sure if it is complete or not.

Through the keyholes of wooden doors
Are concrete carpets and barren walls
And through the creeps of crooked floors
Are coffee mugs and ceaseless scrawl

And through the windows of our minds
Are scattered clocks on barren walls
And resting beyond their rings and chimes
Is something we don't know at all

Tea For The Tillerman

2003-10-16T10:43:00.000+01:00

Found this as a link from... here.

Seems to put a little bit more realism into how suicide bombing works:

What these cells do is very similar to what our military, or any modern military, does. They form small groups of intimately involved "brothers" who literally sacrifice themselves for one another, the way a mother would do for her child.

Devil Blues

2003-10-16T10:27:00.000+01:00

Syria targeted for US sanctions. - Al-Jazeera
US set to tighten Syria sanctions - BBC

And yet more reasons to believe that Syria is one of the names top on the USA tick-list.

The Distance

2003-10-15T22:20:00.000+01:00

I am proud to say that my blog seems to be serving it's purpose, namely to improve my written english. I read a few of my first updates to find that my english has improved, although I do make plenty of mistakes as I don't double check my updates as much as I should.

All rage has been vented and uncontainable thoughts that I couldn't express by telling someone have been said.

Also at some stage I would like to compile everything posted on this page into a more readable format and see if it can be used for some purpose.

I am sure if you wanted to be analytical about it you could find plenty of mistakes, but this is only the first stage of improvement.

May the creativeness be with me.

Ring A Ding Bird

2003-10-15T21:58:00.000+01:00

My beliefs, provided "as is." I hope that they may give you a different view of the universe.

The only thing I know is that I cannot know anything.

The first question I ask is do I exist? I believe I have consciousness and my senses model the world for my mind to interpret, but I don’t strictly believe that “I” exist separate from the rest of the universe. A human and all it’s processes are built up from atoms, just as is the rest of the universe, and therefore humans are part of it. So in consequence, humans are no more important than anything else in the universe. We are simply atoms which have come together by the process of evolution. The distinction of what is human and what is not is created by humans; this distinction may be incorrect.

If this is the case, and a human is part of the universe, then my next question is how will this effect the way a human perceives the world around it? In order to answer this question the process that a human has been produced by needs to be analysed. Evolution works on competition therefore a human will attempt to act in the way that makes it most likely for him to reproduce and then his children to reproduce and so on. It would therefore make sense that it is a trait of the human race to believe that an individual is the most important thing in the universe. Therefore for a balanced view this bias needs to be taken into account.

Emotions are also therefore all biases on our judgement of the universe, and should therefore all be suppressed when trying to make any judgement effectively. But then the question then arises that where does philosophical thought come from? It is born in the human consciousness that has evolved, and therefore it is impossible to think outside of the confines of emotions. This means that philosophical thought is impossible as a human, as evolution will always determine our view of the universe. Perhaps the only way to change this is by especially made drugs to alter our view of the universe in a way that allows philosophical thought, although it may be impossible to tell if this has been achieved, which brings me back to my original point.

Harvest Breed

2003-10-15T19:42:00.000+01:00

If the claims of Individuality are ever to be asserted, the time is now, while much is still wanting to complete the enforced assimilation. It is only in the earlier stages that any stand can be successfully made against the encroachment. The demand that all other people shall resemble ourselves, grows by what it feeds on. If resistance waits till life is reduced nearly to one uniform type, all deviations from that type will come to be considered impious, immoral, even monstrous and contrary to nature. Mankind speedily become unable to conceive diversity, when they have been for some time unaccustomed to see it.
John Stuart Mill - On Liberty

On Liberty was written a long time ago, so I am hoping what he is saying here isn't true. I do quite often feel alienated from others due to my individuality. My sense of humour seems to be often viewed as crazy, although I would say that no one is able to understand it.
(Update: Well not no one, obviously)

Masters Of War

2003-10-15T12:28:00.000+01:00

A flash animation about the war in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

A war that not a lot of people know about, probably because DRC doesn't have anything particularly important to anyone. The animation is probably biased, but it probably needs to be to make people sit up and take notice.

But I live in a bubble, and it is impossible for me to imagine their pain, and therefore I remain apathetic.

We're all Nazis, Stalinists and Republicans at heart. I blame the media.

Don't Let It Bring You Down

2003-10-14T22:21:00.000+01:00

I have just discovered Neil Young. Sometimes I need to not listen to something for a long time and then return to it before I get it...

I’ve also just had a small revelation. Throughout my life there have been a few books that have influenced me in a big way; now I realise that it is dangerous to let any book influence you in a big way, even though it is very natural to agree with something.

I would like to be able to re-evaluate all my beliefs, but I think it is impossible to do objectively, as the prejudices are now fixed. I’ve always considered my self a good judge of information - having processed a lot of information - I think it is something that I’ve definitely improved at over time. Of course, the question is have I been exposing myself to the correct information or pushing my beliefs in the wrong direction.

I don’t mean to say I don’t have confidence in my beliefs, as I have a lot of confidence, but anything that can be done to bring me closer to reality has to be a good thing.

Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss it you will land among the stars.
Les Brown

and another... why not...

The life which is not examined is not worth living.
Plato

War

2003-10-14T20:32:00.000+01:00

Interesting article.

She sounds like a good woman and I am glad she has got the award, but I can't help feel that this is a scheme to side the public against the Iran government. I have no idea what Iranian government have done in the past, and I am sure there are some questionable things, but I have never seen them mentioned in the mass media before today.

As I have seen said somewhere before, the war on Iraq seems to not be a one off war, but instead seems like the first of a campaign of wars around the middle-east.

Iran and Syria seem to be the names popping up for the next target on the list. Their ability to defend themselves seems poor, war is good for business, and in the USA election time approaches. The lack of funds seems to be more of a problem for USA than the eagerness to take the path to war.

I've noticed before, that the way the nobel peace prizes have landed in the past has been questionable, with Henry Kissinger being an example of past winners. It does seem bizarre that the award has gone to someone in Iran.

Anyway, this is all quite presumptious. It will probably never happen.

Hit The Road Jack

2003-10-14T18:38:00.000+01:00

It has become evident that the next door neighbour's children like playing in their parents car. And once in the car they love to lock the doors and start beeping that horn, disturbing the whole neighbourhood, and disturbing my ever so important reading.

I am a patient man, but there is a line, and these children are coming dangerously close to it.

And this hasn't happened just once, but is actually a frequent occurance. Commonly you can hear the parents shouting "stop it," or whatever they shout.

IF YOU WANT TO STOP THEM FROM BEEPING THE HORN JUST DON'T LET THEM IN THE FUCKING CAR. IT'S THAT SIMPLE. THIS ISN'T QUANTUM PHYSICS.

One thing my neighbours don't know is that I finished reading "The Godfather" a few days ago, a fact that is bound to work to my advantage.

(Special note: This is not a serious post. I am not a murderer, but actually a peace loving thorn in the side of injustice.)

Paint It Black

2003-10-13T22:33:00.000+01:00

Richard Feynman pisses me off.

It's not his personality, as I truly think he is quite a funny guy. What pisses me off is the fact that he had the opportunity to do anything he dreamed of, and he decided to create the atom bomb.

Anyway, enough mumbling.

I Will

2003-10-13T00:48:00.000+01:00

If I could do some form of eugenics for millions and millions of years, I would love to evolve a form of human that grows from a seed. I don’t know how the seeds would be produced, but a human would produce the seeds, plant the human seeds in fertile earth and then tend to them for nine months until you have a baby. Also I would like the baby’s head to sprout up out of the ground and their body and arms and finally legs.

Finally I would like the baby, once ready, to just start walking into life...

That would be an achievement in the field of eugenics, I am sure no one could disagree.

Lets Go Fly A Kite

2003-10-13T00:32:00.000+01:00

For a while I’ve been lost in the argument of religion vs. atheism or whatever religion is vs. Tonight I feel I have an answer which is satisfactory.

As established in a previous post, if you wish to determine the truth from a situation you must look at something from as many different view points as possible. Atheism has no restrictions on allowing the person who holds the belief to explore the religious view point. Religion, on the other hand, has faith, which allows a person who holds a religious belief to only hold one viewpoint which is unchangeable. An atheist may truly consider changing to the religious argument. A religious person may not truly consider turning to an opposing belief.

(When I say truly consider, I mean actually say to themselves “I may change sides, I might be wrong.”)

I think this truly markets the end of all religious discussion for me. As Mary Poppins says, enough is as good as a feast.

Sultans Of Swing

2003-10-12T22:47:00.000+01:00

I have just had a rewarding debate with a friend over MSN. Here was what was said:

People learn most from their friends as all friends in a social group bring different perspectives. TV is becoming too much of an influence on people opinions because it is commonly thought that TV represents a lot of peoples views, when in fact it only represents Rupert Murdoch’s (or large media firms) view. In a lot of ways this resembles what Bill Hicks says about the choice between fear and love, fear being watching television and love being gaining information from people. But as Donnie Darko says, it’s not that simple, as there are other factors involved. It is useful to hold a black and white opinion on these matters to make sure these factors don’t cloud your judgement, but it is also definitely useful to have a grasp of all the colours involved.

The few people in the UN present the opinions of 7 billion people. This is a level of representation that is outrageous, and it is people like the debaters who give them this power. This shows how a simple thing can be made to seem ridiculous - as it should be - if simple questions are asked. Mass media phrases these sorts of things in such a way that they seem legitimate, because those in power wish to remain there. In order to hold onto this power they have to convince people that they are not capable of making the decision the UN make. They also encourage widely held beliefs not to be questioned. The debaters find that the only people who have truly challenged their beliefs are their friends.

The debate ended here, with an accomplished feeling that the argument went full circle.

I should really stop posting update... someone may think me a compulsive poster...

Well, I think the excuse of not having posted anything on here for a while justifies the come-back-with-avengence.

Goon Gumpas

2003-10-12T22:24:00.000+01:00

I believe that when it comes to forming an opinion you must choose a strategy and then follow it through to the result. The result should be the opinion you hold regardless of how stupid it seems to be. You have to hold confidence in your own strategy for forming a belief if you actually aspire to hold an opinion that is truthful.

So then I ask myself, what strategy shall I use? I believe a good strategy takes into account the way that the human mind forms an opinion. For example, the human mind will make an opinion on little information, if you let it, so one strategy may be to withhold your judgement until you have looked at more information on the subject.

Another strategy may be to ask what different viewpoints could there be on the situation. Upon finding as many viewpoints as possible, you can then attempt to understand all the different opinions on the subject. Once this is done, I think it is reasonably safe to say that the answer you find will be near to the truth.

Of course, these strategies all assume that one has infinite time to dispose towards finding an opinion, but this, unfortunately, isn’t the case. So on a practical level there must be strategies that one can use to save time. There is of course a sacrifice, whereby the time you save may lead to the formed opinion being less accurate. This is also a fact that has to be accepted.

The concessions I make are usual down to the way an article is worded, and also how truthful I have found a particular source of information in the past. These are two judgements that I think it is safe to accept.

Here is an example of an article that I believe is worded (I have highlighted key words) in a way to persuade the reader:

The French-fried brains of Paris have stooped to yet another low - bestowing the title of honorary citizen on notorious convicted cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal.

The whole sentence here is largely opinion and could have been described in a far more matter-of-fact way:

France have given convicted cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal the title of honorary citizen.

I feel the wording of the original in a way to persuade people to their opinion. This doesn’t necessarily mean that their opinion is incorrect, but from past experience I have found that largely it tends to be.

After being shown this article I looked for an alternative source, as I became sceptical of the opinion held. I found an article by Amnesty International. AI is an organisation that I hold trust in since I have agreed with them in the past. Immediately upon reading the AI article you can see that they seem to have a lot more information on the subject and it is worded in a lot more of a factual manner. One thing that I have learned is that nothing is worded totally in pure fact, and this is something that I have learned to meander around.

Anyway, this update is large enough.

Oxford Town

2003-10-12T20:43:00.000+01:00

"I think, therefore I am" makes sense, but I feel that "I feel, therefore I am" makes more.

When I think, I can choose what I wish to think and therefore there is choice. Perhaps this choice is just an illusion, although it does seem pretty obvious that I exist because I think.

But I would argue that sensory information is more of an indicator of existance than thinking.

Feelings, on the otherhand, are involuntary and cannot be controlled, and therefore, if I don't exist then I am still subject to these feelings which I have no control over. I don't know why I value this over thinking, but it seems more plausible.

Maybe I don't mean feelings, but the senses...

And moving on...

Incidentally, you may have noticed that now all my posts have a title. This is a bit of a gimmick that I plan to play around with.

When someone visits my website, I want it to be a multi-sensory experience, and therefore I would like any reader to listen to the song that I have named in the title whilst reading the post.

If, for whatever reason, you don't finish reading the post by the time the song ends then I would like you to listen to the next song on the album from which the song is on. If it is the last song on the album then I suggest you listen to the first song on the album.

Thank you for your co-operation.

I shall end........ on a quote.

Every child is an artist. The problem is how to remain an artist once he grows up.
Pablo Picasso

Stanley Road

2003-10-11T21:46:00.000+01:00

I've got bored of writing the story for my other blog so I've decided to move back here again. Copied the layout and I am ready to post all the things I haven't been able to put on the other blog. I might continue the story on the other blog with either:
a) I get some motivation.
b) I get some encouragement.

And now to make you think a little, my man, John Stuart Mill has just given me a little bit of justification for arguing all the shit I argue:

In the case of any person whose judgement is really deserving of confidence, how has it become so? Because he has kept his mind open to criticism of his opinions and conduct. Because it has been his practice to listen to all that could be said against him; to profit by as much of it as was just, and expound to himself, and upon occasion to others, the fallacy of what was fallacious. Because he has felt, that the only way in which a human being can make some approach to knowing the whole of a subject, is by hearing what can be said about it by person of every variety of opinion, and studying all modes in which it can be looked at by every character of mind. No wise man ever acquired his wisdom in any mode but this; nor is it in the nature of human intellect to become wise in any other manner.
On Liberty - John Stuart Mill

Just a bit of a shame it's damn difficult to read. And some more:

People more happily situated, who sometimes hear their opinions disputed, and are not wholly unused to be set right when they are wrong, place the same unbounded reliance only on such of their opinions as are shared by all who surround them, or to whom they habitually defer: for in proportion to a man’s want of confidence in his own solitary judgement, does he usually repose, with implicit trust, on the infallibility of ‘the world’ in general. And the world, to each individual, means the part of it with which he comes in contact; his party, his sect, his church, his class of society: the man may be called, by comparison, almost liberal and large-minded to whom it means anything so comprehensive as his own country or his own age. Nor is his faith in his collective authority at all shaken by his being aware that other ages, countries, sects, churches, classes, and parties have thought, and even now think, the exact reverse. He develops upon his own world the responsibility of being in the right against the dissentient worlds of other people; and it never troubles him that mere accident has decided which of these numerous worlds is the object of his reliance, and that the same cause which make him a Churchman in London, would have made him a Buddhist or a Confucian in Pekin.

2003-10-06T00:59:00.000+01:00

I am moving here.

2003-10-06T00:42:00.000+01:00

After meeting the man who never spoke, I was quite amused to find a similar type of person. Tony was similar to the man who said nothing, because most of his words amounted to nothing.

Tony was a white male who had been raised in the suburbs and who had a university education. Living in a safe environment with a loving family as a child, he never had truly experienced any pain. His situation is as stereotypical as it sounds. The poorer sides of our country seemed to elude him, and sometimes when he put together some words that had some meaning, his misplaced views would appear.

I had a small talk to Tony, and it was going no where – with all my questions resulting in vague answers. So I began to quiz him about his insignificant speech and started to see that he was trying desperately for his words to amount to nothing. I asked him why he was trying so hard to say everything and nothing at the same time, and he answered with the only direct statement he ever said to me.

‘Because,’ Tony said, ‘I want to be a politician.’

2003-10-05T02:07:00.000+01:00

I went into a bar the other day to see a man who never speaks. Rumour has it that he comes daily to the same seat and sits there, listening, and never letting out a peep.

Many people go to see him, and in a lot of ways the stories of him have become platitudinous, turning him into a clown at a circus. When I heard the stories I had to go and see him for myself.

I saw him in his seat and I went and sat next to him. There was no point in attempting to talk to him, so I sat quietly next to him and tried to see the world through his eyes.

The man had a presence that cannot be described; a fermented atmosphere that was created by a length of silence that makes the air feel dank. His tortured soul sat there, listening and observing the world around him, but never saying a word.

After a while I began to see that he was no clown as described by the stories of him, but he was a demonstrator against the society we live in today – the society that had driven him to silence. Or perhaps it wasn’t a protest but a reminder of the grey human suffering in a world that has been painted black and white.

I sat up, gave him a respectful nod, and left the bar, understanding that in this world we must share our problems. Only that man was able to illustrate the foolishness of silence.

2003-10-04T03:33:00.000+01:00

‘You’re a little boy. You were too lazy to learn to dance till it was nearly too late, and in the same way you were too lazy to learn to love. As for ideal and tragic love, that, I don’t doubt, you can do marvellously – and all honour to you.’
Steppenwolf – Herman Hesse

Even though it was a crappy translation, it was still very good.

From the recent protests in London...
Also among the crowd was Wasan al-Tikriti, 16, an Iraqi girl, who lives in London. "My parents have just come back from Tikrit, where our family live, and it's very unstable there - like living in a horror movie," she said.

Bit crap.

”…Like they shoulda stopped Hitler at Munich, they should never let him get away with that, they were asking for big trouble when they let him get away with that.”
Michael had heard his father say the same thing before, only in 1939 before the war actually started. If the families had been running the State Department there would have never been World War II, he thought with a grin.
Mario Puzo – The Godfather

Interesting thing I might look at about Munich. There is wealth in books.

2003-10-02T22:17:00.000+01:00

Counter people have screwed me over. I had 495 hits as well, so close to that big 500. Oh well, start again. All I ask you to do is click refresh a few times, and together we can get back to that 500 without too much trouble.

Noam Chomsky said that he believes that one of the scariest elements of some societies can be how reasonable sensible people can view a war with a total detachment and equanimity. He says this can be a lot scarier than the occasional Hitler/Stalin or the rest. I think I agree with him.

I haven't been watching television for quite some time now, and now when I watch it I can't help but feel that it is a load of total and utter bullshit. I never thought this was the case while I watched television, but I think this space of not watching it has made me realise.

One of my friends asked a good question, which is why is television so crap? They should put me in control and I'd give the public something to think about.

Firstly I'd start with soap operas. They need something to make people think. I am talking about aliens. I am talking about psychedelic colours. Basically soap operas always limit themselves by some sort of sense of reality. I say remove it and let a flood of decent storylines flood through.

Ok a storyline off the top of my head. Person starts to grow a tentacle out of the back of their head. IMAGINE THAT EH?

Actually, if I controlled television, I would just shut it down. These days people base their opinions on television and not people.

Decentralisation.

I think most people would agree that splitting up countries into smaller countries is a good idea because it might prevent the huge wars we have these days. Won't happen though.

2003-10-02T00:37:00.000+01:00

Life is a balancing act. And today I’ve successfully screwed up that balance and am presently riding out the consequences of this mess.

You see, what I did was go to sleep at 7pm for 3 hours. So as you can see I am not going to be getting any sleep soon. Ah well.

2003-10-02T00:13:00.000+01:00

I just realised that I can temporarily become the most intelligent human possible for a temporary period of time, on call.

Now you’re probably expecting something rather special from me, if I make this rather sensational claim.

Well it involves accepting the fact that you don’t know anything. If I pretend for a period of time that I don't know anything I become the most intelligent person possible. I’ve tried to do this permanently, but I don’t believe it is possible.

And when I feel I must know something again, I think that judging what is real and what is not real in the world is actually a much more difficult task than it is made out to be. And I mean for quite fundamental things. There is plenty of evidence out there for ghosts and the rest, enough, I am sure, to convince anyone if they wished to look at it all, but I feel you’ve got to draw a line somewhere.

If I personally had an experience with a ghost then I would review my belief on the subject, but until that happens, I have to believe they don’t exist.

I had an idea for decorating my room. I could get a load of pieces of A4 paper and on them all I am going to write “FREAK OUT” in big bold letters. I wonder if it’ll actually freak anyone out. Well, there is only one way to find out…

2003-09-30T23:18:00.000+01:00

Decided not to provoke as much; I haven't got the stomach for it.

Finished Knots and Crosses and Rankin has really pissed me off. Now he’s trying to belittle my views.

There is a scene where Rebus talks to some student in the Workers Revolution or something fighting capitalism. And in the scene Rebus just rips it without realising that all his problems in the whole of the book are caused by what she is trying to fight against.

Then he starts going on about how she is so idealistic and that will soon wear off.

Well I am sorry that Rankin has given all hope for changing the world for the better, but I just wish he wouldn’t fucking go criticising others just because he’s lost the ability to dream.

Frankly I found that little section of the book insulting. Fucking self righteous bastard. The argument is so one-sided in the book. God I can’t wait till I can really kick some ass in debate and really fucking rip out the facts. Give me a few more years and I’ll be there, don’t you bloody worry about it.

2003-09-28T15:54:00.000+01:00

I should stop being to bitter about the fact that there are people who can be convinced to kill others or force authority on others (i.e. army/police). It's clearly part of human nature that humans can be made to do such things and therefore I should just accept it.

2003-09-28T00:14:00.000+01:00

I've decided that my posts have become boring and therefore I am going to start being a little bit outrageous, self-righteous and the rest. This is all in order to make my posts provoke a bit of emotion out of the reader. I will try to recall the weird humour I have, but it comes and goes in torrents, and if it isn't here then I will have to rely on something else.

Politics is a life long commitment and I will be researching till the day I die, and maybe on the day I die, I will discover something that will totally change my viewpoint. I don’t deny the possibility. I try to make my view as fluid as possible so that I am open to new perspectives on events.

I think it is important to understand that politics isn't something that you can figure out, as there will always be information that you don't have and perspectives that you lack.

I have started "Knots & Crosses" by Ian Rankin. I can't say I am that keen to start off with. It's not that it doesn't entertain me, it does, but I just feel from what I've read so far that he wants to be something he isn't.

I've only started the book and therefore shouldn't be quick to judge. I hope he proves me wrong.

What won't change, however, is the fact that it is a detective novel. I find detective novels quite distasteful as they try to paint authority as something that should be accepted as normal. I pity Rankin.

If I wanted to take this frustration a step further I could say that the whole book has this ignorant air about it. For example, they start watching boxing on the BBC and other stuff.

I really do feel the temptation to become a graffiti artist and just write "YOU MUST THINK OUTSIDE OF THE BOX" all over the place. No one would get it, but I'd do it anyway. I am quite a firm believer in the fact that it is better to try and fail (even if it is inevitable failure) than to not try at all.

Hmm, I think I might be repeating myself in posts.

2003-09-27T17:08:00.000+01:00

The vertical thinker says: ‘I know what I am looking for.’ The lateral thinker says: ‘I am looking but I won’t know what I am looking for until I have found it.’
Lateral Thinking – Edward De Bono

With political beliefs (and all tasks that involve information handling) I believe it is best not to perpetuate your present belief, but to attempt to break it.

I’ve had quite a few conversations about politics recently and I believe one thing that I’ve been unable to communicate is the need for lateral thinking and not vertical thinking.

I try to explain that a viewpoint disregards a lot of different perspectives on what’s happening and that my point of view seems more likely because of the different perspectives I look at.

I am than asked to explore the perspective I believe to be most likely. I explore it vertically and then I come to a conclusion which is viewed as quite ridiculous. I say yes it may sound ridiculous but it isn’t about exploring one path to a conclusion but to explore lots of paths simultaneously until one of the paths clearly stands out as the solution. AND BY THE LORD JESUS CHRIST OUR SAVIOUR LA DE DA IT IS NEVER AS RIDICULOUS AS THE OTHER VIEWPOINTS.

Choosing one path because it looks correct and then exploring deeper and deeper can lead to a lot of presumptions and disregard a lot of information. I think this is totally the incorrect way to go about analysing information. To build a skyscraper you need a solid foundation.

Treasure Island was kick ass. It is a very well thought out book, although, I didn't like it as much as Steppenwolf, which was something special.

I am really quite glad I started reading this book about lateral thinking. It seems my thoughts have been leading up to the point where I start reading the book.

Keyword: seems

2003-09-26T00:43:00.000+01:00

I think people get fixated on the box and need to pop out of it and look outside. I mean maybe it's a matter of taste, and maybe people like staying in the box. I personally though feel a lot more comfortable looking out of the box even if I must remain in the box. Ok so maybe looking out of the box isn't very practical and doesn't help you while you're inside the box.

So what? I like QUIXOTIC pursuits.

Quixotic - Caught up in the romance of noble deeds and the pursuit of unreachable goals; idealistic without regard to practicality.

AREN'T I THE CLEVER ONE

2003-09-24T11:38:00.000+01:00

I found the song I want to be played at my funeral. So if I die any time soon can you please make sure that this song is played. Nice one. I do worry that it is a little long... (not that it is _actually_ long at 3:30 roughly)

Ekseption - Peace Planet

In Cairo, on February 24 2001, Powell said: "He (Saddam Hussein) has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbours."

This is the very opposite of what Bush and Blair said in public.

Powell even boasted that it was the US policy of "containment" that had effectively disarmed the Iraqi dictator - again the very opposite of what Blair said time and again. On May 15 2001, Powell went further and said that Saddam Hussein had not been able to "build his military back up or to develop weapons of mass destruction" for "the last 10 years". America, he said, had been successful in keeping him "in a box".

Oops.

Fox news is great. You don't even have to have information to form an opinion; it's like a mystical spell that they cast on us all.

The big headline on the front page of their website was:

Bush: Iraq War Was 'Right Decision'

Here is the article it linked to. The headline and the story seem to be painting two different stories.

Maybe we should all chant it until it turns true.

Iraq War Was 'Right Decision'
Iraq War Was 'Right Decision'
Iraq War Was 'Right Decision'

Thank fuck for that. I thought that we had just invaded a country.

2003-09-23T04:16:00.000+01:00

I just got a taxi home. The taxi driver must have been very drunk. He was driving very slowly. He was wobbling from side to side of the road. He had to manoeuvre around parked cars. I felt ready to grab the steering wheel in case I needed to save my life.

I didn’t bother him about it. We all have problems.

Our lives are based on a lot of assumptions. The biggest assumption is that “I” exist.

In all my philosophical thought so far "I" have made this one very large and incorrect assumption. It actually seems that "I" don’t exist. "I" do wonder how much this effects the thought considered so far.

Anyway… in order to tackle these assumptions "I" realise we need to tackle the last assumption that has been made and then work our way backwards to the first assumption that we presume. For example, the presumption that we can own things is one that "I" believe we are close to tackling; the presumption that “I” exist is quite far away.

"I" do wonder if humans will ever be ready to question existence. Quite an exciting thought "I" must say.

Ignore this post - it isn’t correct whatsoever - except for the incorrect assumption I made. And the taxi driver.

2003-09-22T02:07:00.000+01:00

You’re right. You’re right. Not those fuckers who want to tell you how to think. You’re fucking right.
Bill Hicks

Is it just me, or do we live in a society of fear?

Maybe we don’t realise because we are born in the environment of fear and therefore it is normal. We live in a society where people keep their problems to themselves and where people don’t help others because it reminds them of their own problems.

True democracy is a form of anarchy. Sounds stupid? Well if every single person has exactly the same share of power you have anarchy. Same applies with communism I think.

You ever noticed the way your brain learns and understands a word? I have just been thinking about it recently.

The way I see it is that your brain thinks in pure thoughts. Therefore to understand English you must associate thoughts with words. Therefore when you read you are just combining the thoughts associated with the words you’re reading. Learning a new word is just the act of associating a thought with the new word.

2003-09-21T00:52:00.000+01:00

Something a little strange to start.
Update: The link has changed now. It used to be linked to a $1,000,000 keyboard with L shaped enter key.

Apparently, Socrates believed that philosophy couldn’t be recorded in writing, but only in conversation. At first I was highly sceptical, but now I am coming around to his point of view.

Say I disagree on a particular point with someone then the only way to establish an agreement is to debate it with the particular person until an agreement is reached. Potentially an agreement could never be reached, but I believe if you had infinite time to debate something then it is inevitable that an agreement will be reached. Questionable belief…

So that bring around the point that if I disagree with someone I haven’t met I cannot truly disagree with that person until I have debated it with them. Therefore a disagreement on a philosophical viewpoint can never be held unless it has been debated with everyone.

I believe this to be correct as it establishes the view that philosophy is something that is constantly evolving. To study philosophy is to understand that your viewpoint isn’t fixed.

Hmm… trying to explain something I cannot in English…

2003-09-20T15:46:00.000+01:00

’”Most men will not swim before they are able to.” Isn’t it witty? Naturally, they won’t swim! They are born for the solid earth, not for the water. And naturally they won’t think. They are made for life, not for thought. Yes, and he who thinks, what’s more, he who makes thought his business, he may go far in it, but he has bartered the solid earth for the water all the same, and one day he will drown.’
Herman Hesse - Steppenwolf

I don’t intend to drown. I intend to arrive at the beach just before I drown. And that is if I do start drowning; I have a lot of confidence in my swimming ability.

Time for a little talk about conspiracy theories. If I say something that is far away from the widely accepted story, I will be told that I am a conspiracy theorist. I don't like the term personally and I believe it is a way to marginalise my statements.

I believe that in reality, "conspiracy theory," as a phrase, is used to discourage people from gaining different perspectives on events.

A balanced view, in my opinion, is one where all perspectives have been taken into account regardless of how far fetched they appear to be. It is impossible to know if a story is true or not without analysing it from the perspective that it comes from. I find that people who tend to say something is a "conspiracy theory" usually haven't explored the theory they claim is obviously bollocks. They claim that the theory is totally outrageous, which to me suggests that they are accepting the fact that they know little about the situation. Therefore when someone uses the term they are basically accepting that they are narrow minded.

I think I've screwed up my arguement because I've presumed that if you find a statement outrageous that means you haven't looked at it. Actually, no, I think I might be ok because you wouldn't find it outrageous if you had already explored it.

And when I say this, I am not saying that all "conspiracy theories" are true. I am just saying that all perspectives should be explored.

2003-09-18T13:12:00.000+01:00

I would say a good journalist is a person who wishes to report events as they are. This isn't possible present under the current system because if a journalist did they would get sacked. So a good journalist has to know when to report controversial information and how to report it. This brings me to a BBC article I've stumbled upon.

It all seems like a very normal article about 9-11... but then look at the last two paragraphs.

The FBI has named five hijackers on board Flight 11, whereas Ms Sweeney spotted only four.
Also, the seat numbers she gave were different from those registered in the hijackers' names.

Quite incredible that something, which could be such big news, was only reported in the last two paragraphs in such a brief manner. But at least some journalist did convey the information.

abs0rbed salutes the journalist responsible.

The internal battle that is happening between journalists and the restrictions they're under is definately there.

Also the 9-11 Bin Laden tape that is supposed to prove his guilt is looking like it was definately faked. There are plenty of stories kicking about some of the reported hijackers still being alive, meaning they weren't the hijackers. One of the people reported to still be alive was mentioned in the tape that I consider to be a fake. The fact that he was mentioned when he definately didn't have anything to do with the hijacking suggests that the tape was definately faked.

I find it quite surprising that there was a simple reason as to why the tape was faked. I thought it was impossible to tell for certain.

2003-09-18T02:39:00.000+01:00

Politics is a difficult subject. To sucessfully study politics and try and work out plausible answers for what is happening around the world you need a variety of skills:

Information Processing
To look at a lot of news and process an answer out of it all you must have a mind for information processing. The information is so vast that it quite literally takes a life time devoted to politics to have any sort of sensible answer for anything. The majority of people, like myself, must take some information in confidence because the time is not available to explore every angle of a situation. Also the quicker you process information the more you will know. My views are amorphous to any new bits of information I gain. I accept that fact that I don't really know what I am talking about and that there are people out there who understand a lot more than me. Pride cannot interfere with this process. I have had it shown to me that my views were incorrect on a several occations. Funnily enough it never deters my passion about arguing my point of view. I personally think the "I cannot be wrong" attitude is part of human nature. Any senisble person would just admit that they don't know.

Language
You've got to understand how it is communicated and how language can be used to communicate some information. I try to seperate the information from the opinion, but it seems almost impossible to do so totally. In a lot of ways I think my language has improved a lot because of my interest in politics.

Philosophy
I've found that philosophy is important when I started thinking about what I believe will be the best way for humans to live. Also around words like "good," "better," and the rest.

Debating skills
I do wonder whether a good debater with crap views would be able to beat a bad debater with correct views. Debating skills are what politicians are about. They are bloody good at debating. Hell knows they need to be. Noam Chomsky is the bomb at debating. He knows all the tricks. I really don't believe it would be possible for anyone to beat him in a debate. It is very difficult to not just listen to Noam Chomsky and accept what he says as fact. Must... double check.... information....

I am quite worried that what I post on the website gives the impression I am stuck up my own arse. I hope it doesn't.

Mind you it is my website and I can say what I want. Therefore I should just dismiss these fears.

2003-09-16T23:57:00.000+01:00

PURE COMEDY.

All the vetoing in the UN with USA and Israel (and UK sometimes) and then suddenly this is the veto that is reported. Pure comedy. Almost as comical as USA/UK having a go at France for vetoing the UN resolution for a war on Iraq.

I was watching the news once and I think it was Jack Straw talking about the Iraq elections. He said they were pure theatre. I'd agree with him. I'd agree with him so far infact, that I would go on to say that the house of commons is pure theatre as well. THERE'S AN IDEA. People could pay to come into the house of commons and watch the parties "battle it out."

Ah, if they only reported all the votes that happen at the UN. Now that would be interesting.

EDIT: Erm... This veto looks like pretty bad news for Israeli and Palestinian people alike... if kill Arafat...
It's a crap situation either way I suppose because Israel won't rest until they have as much land as possible.

Iraqi fighters reject label of terrorist
I personally think they are terrorists. You may think I am joking, but there is no joke. They incite terror on the USA troops. I would also say that the USA troops are terrorists for inciting terror in the Iraqi troops/civilians.

Got to have standards, that's what I say.

2003-09-16T14:53:00.000+01:00

"I tell them that those who fear climbing up mountains will live forever in holes."
Al-Qaida number two Ayman al-Zawahri

Was reading some forum posts about an anime...
I disagree. I think he is just a pshyco pure and simple. People like that exist you know, they don't always need a good reason.

I hate it when people do this black and white crap. There is only one reason to say that a person is psycho for no good reason and that is to hide why that person is truely doing what he/she is doing. Yes, there are serial killers I suppose, but even they kill for a reason, even if it's not a very good one. Bin Laden has been painted in black and white because he satisfies the two conditions.

1) He's a sadistic bastard.
2) (and more important than 1 I would say) He's an enemy of our country.

(Edit: I don't know how sadistic bin Laden is actually, he may well just be trying to defend his country...)

Only when the two conditions are met will the person be vilified. There are plenty of people who are our friends and kill.

$1 billion international image campaign isn't enough to buy U.S. love
The Bush administration spends $1 billion a year trying to polish the United States' image around the world, yet polls show anti-Americanism rising to record levels, especially in Muslim and Arab nations where the government is concentrating its efforts.
Nice big fat piece of propaganda. "They've even shown them adverts and they don't like USA. What is going on? There couldn't be some logical reason behind why these people hate USA... could there?"

Algerian pilot sues US over 9/11
Raissi, who was detained by the British for five months following the attacks, says his life has been ruined by the trauma he was put through.
We are such nice people.

And to end on a bright note... check this.

I don't sleep in any of those position. I sleep in a very weird position which involves saying on my side, having my elbow from the lower arm pointing infront of me and the rest of the arm hanging over my neck. My other arm is used to stop me from falling on my face.

I don't think it is a particularly healthy sleeping position.

2003-09-15T03:59:00.000+01:00

Governments are a way to cheat people. They are a way to create rich and poor; they are a way to make people unequal. But I am glad to report that I believe that this form of cheating a population may end in a certain amount of time.

The reason this cheating takes place is because there are people who are able to be cheated. If you look at human nature’s defences against being cheated, it seems to be good for defending in a situation of small tribes of people; where each person is aware of other's personality.

A good example of this was when my school at university decided to remove the student common room for office space or to make a meeting room. The student backlash was quite incredible due to the fact that the students recognised the fact that they were being cheated, even if it was perhaps relatively minor.

The repercussion of people being cheated by governments is that there will be a percentage of people who are being cheated and have no other choice but to accept the fact that they are being cheated. But thankfully, there exists a percentage of the world population who are able to understand the fact that they are being cheated and able to do something to change the situation. At present it would seem that the percent of people who understand the fact they are being cheated, and are able to do something about it, is not high enough to stop the cheating from taking place.

Perhaps humans are able to be cheated now because humans aren’t evolved to deal with being cheated using instruments such as global communications. The real question then, I guess, is not shall humans evolve into a state where they realise they are being cheated by using these instruments, but, when they do evolve to such a state, shall there be a new way for people to cheat other people?

This question is fundamentally a lot more important than the problem of eradicating people who cheat populations using governments because it involves the controlling of evolution into a course where people are never cheated whatsoever and would therefore lead to a situation as near to an equalitarian society as possible.

The question whether evolution could ever be controlled in such a way is a totally different one. And one that I don’t believe has a bright outlook.

'now what I am sayin'? Do ya really? Cushty mate. Cushty.

2003-09-14T16:36:00.000+01:00

The Top 25 Censored Media Stories of 2002-2003

Some interesting stories in there, all from a USA perspective.
#1: The Neoconservative Plan for Global Dominance
#2: Homeland Security Threatens Civil Liberty
#3: US Illegally Removes Pages from Iraq U.N. Report
#4: Rumsfeld's Plan to Provoke Terrorists
#5: The Effort to Make Unions Disappear

Moving on...

As I stated self belief is important and therefore you have to believe that your knowledge is better than people who probably know more than you on the subject that you want self belief in. It's not being elitist, you've just got to have the self belief, that's all.

2003-09-12T16:00:00.000+01:00

Just one quick question before I start, are you visiting this site and you don't know me? If so I'd be interested to know where you got a link for my site from as I am trying to understand how to publicise my website. The comments await you.

sfx: *bang*
sfx: smoke engulfs the room
sfx: blue light turns on and gets gradually brighter

I always thought that the question was “Why do I behave as I do?” but recently I decided that I have been asking the wrong question.

I began to think that the real question is “Why do I want to understand how I behave?” That’s a little bit deeper towards something that might make sense, BUT THEN I REALISED I WAS TRAPPED.

If I analyse why I want to understand then I have to analyse why I want to understand why I want to understand (!). From here I just go into a loop where I am analysing why I am analysing why I am analysing why I am analysing… etc.

As you can see, it’s a slight problem.

sfx: blue light gently turns to red

"There is no such thing, at this date of the world's history, as an independent press. You know it and I know it. There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinions out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job.

If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone. The business of the journalist is to destroy the truth; to lie outright; to pervert; to vilify; to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell the country for his daily bread. You know it and I know it and what folly is this toasting an independent press. We are the tools and vassals of the rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes. "
John Swinton, the former Chief of Staff for the New York Times at the New York Press Club.

An interesting article.

sfx: lights begin to stutter until they turn off to leave a black void

2003-09-11T21:20:00.000+01:00

A Definition of Happiness:
To realise that everything you say is bollocks, but to say it anyway.
-
Today I’d like to be a little controversial and voice my opinions on charities. I think that charities are crap.

So, now you’re probably thinking “abs0rbed is a heartless bastard”, but I believe you are wrong. I am not heartless only I think I see charities for what they truly are. Firstly, I’ll attempt to describe charities using an analogy.

A man goes to his dog. The man looks down on his dog; he pities the dog and therefore gives it a treat.

You see if we truly lived in a free world then charities wouldn’t exist and the government (if there was one, I believe it to be questionable) would make sure that all wealth is spread equally among the world. Under capitalism in the UK, there is no equal spread of wealth. Wealth is an X factor which is determined either by someone’s greed (in my opinion), luck or some other miscellaneous influences.

Why doesn’t the government spread the wealth? You could argue that people aren’t interested in giving money to poorer people as shown by our cities which have extremely rich and poor areas. I would try to argue that if any human saw a person starving to death they would help, but it is questionable. Needless to say, our government has seen a lot of people starving and they don’t give a crap, hence why there are charities.

So when someone donates money to a charity what are they really doing? Are they really trying to help or are they actually doing it to make themselves feel better? I believe that people who donate to charity are in denial because they will neither except the fact that they are Nazi’s who don’t mind people starving so they can live the rich life or do they actually properly put themselves to the task of attempting to change the world.

Now you might say that I have developed this whole theory so that I can avoid charities and not feel bad about it. I don't think this is true because I put myself in the category of someone who is a Nazi who can’t be arsed to do anything. My excuse is that I believe changing the present system is impossible.

2003-09-11T17:12:00.000+01:00

Once upon a Saturday, the flying ponies were circling the paddock looking for clues!
‘What’s that down there?’ hailed the King of all ponies, Sir Fuckalot.
Suddenly SHAZAM! A great white flash came from the sky. The ponies scattered, spiralling away from the shock wave, and regrouped at the edge of the paddock.
‘Well,’ said Sir Fuckalot’s second in command Sir Benishot. ‘If that’s not a clue then you can scorch my buffet.’
They looked around to see the scorched corpses of their fellow ponies lying on the ground. Now only Fuckalot and Benishot were left to solve the mystery of the horse ripper. They knew that trusting the farmer was a mistake and since they revealed their powers to him their kin had systematically “Disappeared” from the dale. Looking up to the sky they saw what seemed to be a 1920’s Bentley with wings disappearing over the dark silhouette of the snowy hillside.
The beautiful car turned around, and the ponies were unaware of it. Then the Bentley appeared once again.
‘HOLY FUCK-A-FUCK-A-FUCK-FUCK-A-FUCK-A LOT. What should I do sir?’ said Benishot.
‘What should I do?’ echoed Sir Fuckalot. ‘You should DEAL with the situation. That’s what you SHOULD DO.’
Benishot furrowed his brow. A bend of sweat appeared on this horses forehead. The charred bodies of his comrades lay before and the laste of vengeance was bitter on his tongue.

‘Yes’ came the voice of Sir Fuckalot. ‘Pass the porcine, you know what we have to do.’
‘Yes SIR!’ replied Benishot.
The pigs had been equipped with homing tails and nuclear war snouts. Bred to track and destroy and eat what remained. No evidence, no questions. The ponies had recently acquired a stylond in return for a job involving reindeer and butter knives once again. No questions asked.
‘Take aim!’ bellowed Fuckalot. ‘And FIRE!’
The pigs flew in formation towards the Bentley. The leader of the formation, Huckle Pig, was going to hit the Bentley. There was a flash of smoke and Sir Benishot and Sir Fuckalot squinted. Then out of the smoke came the rusty Bentley. Then the Bentley spoke.
‘DO YOU TWO KNOW THAT THERE ARE MILLIONS OF CAR RESTORERS DOTTED AROUND THE WORLD? WELL,’ retorted the Bentley, ‘YOU HAVE MADE ME STRONGER THAN YOU CAN EVER IMAGINE! HA! HA! HARR!’
‘Oh shit.’ Said Sir Benishot.

2003-09-10T04:47:00.000+01:00

the abs0rbed life philosophy
What has happened has happened.
What happens happens.
What will happen will happen.

This philosophy gives you the belief in fate without actually believing in fate, or maybe you do actually have to believe in fate. I really don’t know if I believe in fate or not, but the way I see it is that if we are in the universe, and if we have evolved, then our decisions are not of our choosing because consciousness is an illusion. Maybe the universe is just like a big computer with a lot of memory and a big fat processor. So it is programmed to make the universe and time is essentially the processing of this computer. So rather than what happens in the future being undecided I believe that the computer will process it, but that process can be worked out “by hand” if you knew what the process was and you could therefore see into the future.

So yes, maybe I do believe in fate after all.

I believe that dreams are important. When I say dreams I mean dreams for the future, perhaps a career, a family or whatever. What I do not believe, however, is that it matters whether these dreams actually become a reality. While someone holds a dream they will be happy. Once someone achieves that dream they will realise what they dreamt isn't the reality. If someone gives up their dream because they have failed to achieve it then that is also crap. SO THEREFORE, the key to successful dreaming is to dream about a goal that you will always believe is achievable and yet really isn’t. And obviously something that you want to do.

2003-09-09T20:19:00.000+01:00

The war in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo is a human rights and humanitarian crisis of vast proportions. Since August 1998, at least 3.3 million people are estimated to have died because of the conflict, most from disease and starvation. More than 2.25 million people have been driven from their homes, many of them beyond the reach of humanitarian agencies.

Just shows sometimes with politics. You can really think you know whats going on and then something can pop up in your face and tell you otherwise. I knew there was a war in the Congo, but I didn't know the amount of people who have supposed to have died. It was on my links and I hadn't looked at it.

Depressing news.

Reminds me of the time when the mass media were reporting the torturing of Iraqis and how the media reported them to be playing Sesame Street and Metallica to them. To me it just sounded like they were trying to trivialize the fact that they were torturing people. Torturing isn't ever plesant and breaks plenty of international laws/treaties.

2003-09-09T00:28:00.000+01:00

I am normally one of the first to criticise the usually crap website fades, but today I have found a website that has touched my heart. Unless you are willing to wait, this is mainly for the broadband people I am afraid to say. For the badger/mushroom/snake experience click here.

Colourless green ideas sleep furiously.
Noam Chomsky

I am not a person that enjoys taking a dump, and when I am forced to take a dump in someone else’s house I feel that I must apologise for the dirty deed with which I stink out their toilet. Because, you see, taking a dump is dirty enough when it is in your own home, but when you around someone else’s house, I believe it to be uncouth.

This works both ways, I am sorry to say. When I see a stranger take a dump on my toilet I cannot help but feel a little dismayed. It’s not that using the toilet for a dump is forbidden. It’s just that (as I am sure all the readers are aware) it can create a difficult situation, which I think could be easily avoided if everyone just took dumps in their own houses.

2003-09-08T03:08:00.000+01:00

A squid eating dough in a polyethylene bag is fast ’n’ bulbous, got me?
Captain Beefheart

Been reading some Captain Beefheart's lyrics from "Trout Mask Replica". He can get quite dark, like in Dachau Blues about Dachau concentration camp (supposidly) and also try to show his sense of humour, like in Old Fart At Play (no explaination needed).

2003-09-06T02:11:00.000+01:00

THIS IS WHAT JOURNALISM IS ALL ABOUT.

Spain can't take a bit of good journalism it seems.

2003-09-05T04:12:00.000+01:00

Britney Spears avoided the political pot hole that other entertainers have fallen into when she was asked about whether she supported the war in Iraq.

"Honestly, I think we should just trust our president in every decision that he makes and we should just support that," she said.

She said she trusted President Bush but said she didn't know if he would get re-elected to the White House.

What a fucking great idea, well fucking done Britney Spears. You're just such a perfect role model for all the youngsters of today; you are fucking marvellous.

And thats from CNN, the masters of propaganda. Just look at it. The "political pot hole". Yes, lets just support everything the president does regardless, what a good idea. I am quite tempted to say this is the biggest piece of propaganda I've seen in a long time. Well erm, actually no that is a blatant lie -- I saw Bush speaking once.

Just had to get that... off my chest...

Atheism proves that humans are capable of separating logical and emotional thought. Why? Because Atheists believe that death is irrelevant, yet all humans have an innate fear of death. These two beliefs seem contradictory for a human to believe. I do not believe this is true because I feel you can know that death is irrelevant but that doesn’t necessarily mean human nature will allow you to “know it in your bones,” as I like to put it.

In order for humans to effectively analyse themselves we need to step out of our emotional selves and attempt to place ourselves in a position where our emotions do not affect the analysis. Is it possible to do so? I am not entirely sure, but I believe that it is possible to an extent.

The other question is how far can humans analyse humans? I personally think it is likely that because we are using our brains to analyse our brains, it is impossible to understand the brain by using the brain. So therefore we will inevitably miss a lot of facts about how the brain works because we are contained within the system of the brain. We will never truly know our own species’ nature.

2003-09-03T21:14:00.000+01:00

An interesting political blog can be found here.

2003-09-03T20:45:00.000+01:00

I am afraid you're going to have to stick one more story; I apologise.

Untitled.
Written by Mark H, Graham N, and Mark Y.

Bang, KA-BOOM went the magic wand of Wind. Ooh Shaboom came the clap of itching thunder. The dark skies opened up like an incontenant grandma and the howling storm arrived. Covered in just a blanket Frank was making quite a racket, but the storm was not to be outdone. “Crack!” went the storm as he burled down a bolt of his finest shiniest lightning. He rolled the wand on his hand to make his knowledge expand. And next to the river flow a Fisherman stood with a cow.
‘Most unusual weather’ said the cow. The Fisherman chewed on an apple reflectively.
‘Aye, I ain’t seen weather like since since old wizard Tutter got heavy with the gin jay. I’m wondering if this young ‘uns not been sipping liver liquor, he don’t half look red don’t he?’ The cow rolled his eyes.
‘Personally, I couldn’t give a toss. Come on, I’m getting wet’ and they moved on.

With his eyes blurred from the constant splatter of Grandma’s warm juices, Frank stumbled to his feet and quickly proceeded to fall flat on his plump arse. ‘Well, you win some and you lose some’ he thought profoundly. (Readers note: This might not be profound in the general sense of the term but if you knew Frank this comment was VERY profound).

The Fisherman and cow started moving on a path converging with Frank’s. The cow looked at Frank daintily. ‘He could be troublesome this one,’ nodding towards Frank.
‘Aye’ said the fisherman. Their path met Frank’s. They all walked parallel.
‘Well master wizard. You join us for a royal piss upon, I hope you’re not planning to pick any posies.’
‘Not today Master Fisherman’ replied Frank, ‘and I’m sorry to say the weather is my fault. I was trying to conjure the sand wind from Arashan. All I could manage was Old Granny Wet Wind.’
‘Ah’ said the Fisherman, being far too sensible a man to take a wizard to task, no matter how wet he was becoming. ‘Well,’ the Fisherman said philosophically ‘at least my fishes ‘ell like it. Nice meeting you young wizard but my cow is getting wet so I’ll bid you farewell.’
‘Erm… before you go’ said Frank, plucking up the courage. ‘I would like something to eat and your cow looks, if you’ll excuse me Mr. Cow, scrumptulitious. I can arrange a small little barbeque.’ Frank pointed his wand to the sky, summoning thunder to cook the cow’s tender meat. The thunder turned the cow to dust.
‘Ah, little overcooked’ said Frank naively. The fisherman gasped.
‘Now if you don’t mind me saying Master Wizard, that thar was a sentient cow, not to mention my bastard brother’s wife. He’s going to have my soon tanned hide.’
‘Oh really?’ replied Frank.
‘Aye.’
‘Then can you say how you and your bastard brother’s sentient cow of a wife come to be out here, all alone on a day like today? Don’t tell me you were picking posies!’
‘No,’ replied the Fisherman calmly. ‘I was fucking her royally up the arse.’

And the camera pulled back, someone shouted ‘That’s a wrap.’
The director stood up and declaimed ‘I’M GOING TO BE THE NEXT DAVID FUCKING LYNCH!’

2003-09-02T01:28:00.000+01:00

Don’t Fuck With The Monkey.
Written by, (in alphabetical order): Mark H, James M, Graham N and Mark Y

‘I’m sorry Tegwin but the monkey has to go!’ said Drake (the controller of the BBC). ‘It just isn’t making an impact.’
‘But… but…’ she said, stumbling for words ‘look here, I know TV. I didn’t suck cock for 20 years to be told by some upstart how to do my job.’
‘Now now, there’s no need to brag like that’ Drake responded, only to hear his office door slam shut behind the prancing premadonna.
Tegwin pursed her lips and blew, the whistle echoed through the empty corridors. She knew he was near, he always had been. Funky the monkey came to Tegwin, carrying himself with his arms, swinging to her feet. Tegwin gave Funky a treat; Funky’s face turned to one of contentment.
‘You know Funky, I’ve heard that among rich capitalists monkey boxing has become very popular. If you put on these red gloves DRAKE WILL LOVE YOU.’
The monkey looked bemused and farted. ‘I don’t need no gloves,’ he grimaced ‘I’ll rip that lung slung fuckers throat out with my teeth. So I take it my contract isn’t going to be renewed?’ he spat.
‘I’m so sorry’ said Tegwin, ‘he won’t listen to reason. Of course viewing figures are low; the new show’s only been on a week. People have got to catch on and that takes time.’
‘Oh that’s bullshit and you know it as well as I do.’ Funky spat with venom. ‘I just haven’t got it. End of story. Now, if you’ll excuse me…’ Funky turned to leave. As he walked through the door he thought about giving Tegwin one last parting glance but all that came out was another small, high pitched fart. A hand touched his shoulder.
‘Funky, please, don’t go. You HAVE got it! What does that nob jockey know?’
‘Fuck all that’s what. We can get around him’ she said with a glimmer in her eye. The unlikely duo minced purposefully back towards Drake’s office. Monkey wasn’t happy, but was willing to trust in Tegwin’s arrogance one last time.
As they turned the corner, the Gents door swung shut. They had both caught a glance of Drake’s outrageous orange shirt passing through. Knowingly they snuck into his empty office. Tegwin and Funky lay under Drake’s desk. Tegwin passed Funky the gloves, Funky nodded solemnly, donned the gloves, and awaited a creak at the door.
It creaked. Funky jumped onto the desk, determined to show Drake what monkey boxing was all about. Funky threw a right with the gracefulness of an orchestral conductor and conviction of an evangelist. Drake stumbled backwards and fell to his knees. He looked up to see Funky towering over him, coiling his arm for a punch that Drake wouldn’t live to feel.
‘Wait Funky!’ Tegwin shouted before the punch could land. ‘That’s not part of the plan, just subdue him.’ Funky shrugged and Drake’s lights went out.
When Drake came to he was strapped to his desk, trousers round his knees. He was in some considerable pain.
‘Ok Tegwin?’ came Funky’s voice. ‘Do you think you’ve got enough?’
‘Yes Funky. I think that’s a wrap.’
Drake looked around to see two things. The first was Tegwin putting a small camera into a case. The second was Funky the monkey adjusting his flies and smoking a nice, fat cigar.
‘So long monkey fucker,’ said Tegwin. ‘See you for the second series.’

2003-09-01T12:51:00.000+01:00

Free from the shackles of censorship and government control Aljazeera has offered its audiences in the Arab world much needed freedom of thought, independence, and room for debate. In the rest of the world, often dominated by the stereotypical thinking of news “heavyweights”, Aljazeera offers a different and a new perspective.

Aljazeera's correspondents opened a window for the world on the millennium’s first two wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Our expanded coverage competed with and sometimes outperformed our competitors bringing into the spotlight the war’s devastating impact on the lives of ordinary people.

Al-Jazeera's english website is now up and running. Should give an interesting slant on all middle-east news. Find the website here.

2003-09-01T04:11:00.000+01:00

NEW WEBSITE FUCTIONALITY!

The casual reader can now leave comments after posts. I look forward to the anti-climax of no one posting any comments.

2003-09-01T00:21:00.000+01:00

Iain Banks is a sick man. I am presently reading The Wasp Factory. It is not recommended to anyone with a vivid imagination or anyone else for that matter. And the funny thing is I watched an interview with him on RelaxWithABook about his new book Dead Air and I was thinking that he looked quite homely and civilised. That's a lesson I shall learn: Do not judge people on first impressions.

How about re-showing Ken Burns' documentaries The Civil War and The West? Also, why not commission an epic series on the history of all the countries that made up the USSR, before, during and after its formation/break up? Surely that is a huge, untapped reservoir of fascinating history, much of which is still unknown to many in Western Europe?

And I am not saying that Iain Banks isn't good, I am just saying that he isn't good, if you follow me...

I can't remember where I got this from but it certainly is a good question. Who in the UK knows anything about the USSR? A bit like the distinct lack of reporting in west Iraq during the height of media coverage. Plenty of reporting about the south (Basra etc.) though, has to be said.

Anyway, I'll attempt to finish The Wasp Factory tonight, sleep it off, and then start The Pickwick Papers which promises to be more interesting. It is a Big Read (weighing in at 880 pages), which I like. I was slightly put off reading it as it is apparently Michael Portillo's favourite book. Slightly distressing I think you'll agree, but I was pleased to be told that the book holds a political sentiment I will like and that Portillo has probably chosen it because he is an electioneering scumbag. At least, that's what I am hoping.

2003-08-30T02:52:00.000+01:00

Today two new A4 posters adorn my room. Both posters were created by me yesterday and display the following comments:

"You are a GENIUS"
"Can you feel DEATH approaching?"

Now, to the casual observer these statements may seem like nonsensical crap, but they do have a purpose. Oh yes.

The first statement is to provide me with self belief. I personally believe that you cannot become a genius if you do not believe that you are capable of genius. Therefore to be a genius you need to believe you are a genius. I don't know if you find this obvious or not, but it seems quite logical to me. Whether whatever I produce is genius or not doesn't matter. Neither does whether I actually happen to be a genius or not. All that matters is that deep down I believe I am a genius.

The second statement is the one that I believe may not be serving its purpose. The second statement is supposed to motivate me to create these works of genius that I am now capable of producing due to my unshakable self belief. I believe that the ultimate motivation is death and so therefore if I can invoke the fear of death I will become motivated to produce the aforementioned works of genius. Anyway, the problem with the statement is that as I look at it I say to myself...

'Well, no, I don't believe I can feel death approaching.'

I think the key is to create a slogan that both makes me tremble and doesn't make the casual observer think I've gone nuts. A difficult task, I think you'll agree.

I remember crying about death as a child. I seem to remember asking my parents to reassure me while we were in a pub. Of course, they had no reassurance to give because, to put it frankly, they were (and still are) shitting it about death along with everyone else. I do remember my mother saying 'forget about it' and how I began to feel desperate as the realisation dawned on me; it was the best answer I was going to get.

I think this is a powerful memory and can be used to conjure up an image which will motivate me.

"Do you remember crying about death as a child?"

Yes. That is potent.

UPDATE: I've decided against the death idea and have now decided to go for "You are forgettable and loveless"

2003-08-28T01:09:00.000+01:00

There are some people who may believe that killing isn't always wrong.

They are incorrect because the only chance we have on this planet for peace is if all countries similtaneously stop killing. Therefore even if your country is being invaded you still must not kill anyone because that is the best chance of world peace that we have.

Edit: There is an often arguement used against anti-war people as myself which is to try and make me look ridiculously pacificist so that therefore makes all the rest of my arguements nullified in their eyes. I believe if you go to war you need to be 110% certain that it is "correct". Somewhere along the lines this viewpoint has been lost. If I would kill someone else in self defense I cannot tell you, but the above comment is from a philosophical standpoint, not from a emotional standpoint. I am simply pointing out that the above statement is what I believe to be the best chance we have to obtain world peace, if that is what people want... I am trying to point out how remote the chance of world peace really is.

And moving on...

Writing is just one means of pursuing what I regard as the honourable calling of professional trouble maker. Trouble making is the means by which both our dispossession and the laws enforcing it are challenged. It is a costly nuisance, a drain on public resources, an impediment to the smooth functioning of government. It is also the sole guarantor of liberty. It forces our representatives to listen to those they have failed to represent. It inoculates the political agenda with new ideas and new perspectives. Without it, political systems sclerotise and succumb to corruption. A political system is only as good as the capacity of its critics to attack it. We can defend open, democratic politics only through a constant process of exposure, enfranchisement and dissent.

A professional trouble maker should be prepared to make trouble everywhere. She can afford no loyalties. She should seek not to be restrained by embarrassment or fear. She should not balk at causing offence, for those we feel most anxious to appease are those whom we should be most prepared to challenge. I have certainly managed to offend many of the people who expected loyalty from me, attacking people or organisations I had previously supported, or supporting people or organisations I had previously attacked.

George Monbiot is the man. I read Captive State a while ago and have just been reading his website. He makes a lot of sense but I don't know if I agree with what he believes is the best way to bring liberty to the majority of the worlds population. His ideas are a lot more realistic than mine though...

2003-08-27T16:31:00.000+01:00

INTELLIGENCE is something which I don’t understand. I happen to meet a lot of people who think they are intelligent, but, in my personal opinion, are not as intelligent as they view themselves. You see the fact of the matter is that anyone who views themselves as intelligent is actually not very intelligent. This of course brings about the question, who are the real intelligent people in this world?

Well that is also something else I’ve been pondering. You see I actually believe that I myself am very intelligent. Why? Well the fact of the matter is that I don’t actually view myself as being that intelligent, therefore that means that I must be very intelligent. Are you following me here?

Also I exhibit what I would call “markers” of an intelligent person. That I believe I understand things that other people don’t. I am always correct under all circumstances because I understand that you can never know if you are correct or not, therefore making me correct. I persistently score highly on IQ tests, although my excuse for not getting a ridiculously high score is that an IQ test is actually a load of bollocks.

So now you know you’re not very intelligent. I am sure there will be intelligent people who will read this and realise that they are not very intelligent and may be gently sobbing while they read this. Well to those people I offer them a soft pat on the back and a shoulder to cry on. The world is a harsh place, I don’t deny it, but be happy to know that there are intelligent people like myself who are able to explain these things to you.

2003-08-27T01:38:00.000+01:00

I am a person who likes to analyse things in depth. This brings its advantages and disadvanges.

On the one hand, when I am trying to think up an idea, my mind set makes me very original and abstract meaning that I have a lot of confidence in the ideas I create. Over analysing an idea or a rule carries disadvantages initially because it means that you have to start from a lower level. For example, when I was learning maths it took me a long time to understand rules that other kids understood quickly, but once I understood them they were crystal clear in my mind. When I had this foundation, I would be able to understand more complicated maths that built upon the knowledge I had been taught. That is the advantage of my way of thinking, that a simple twist which seems perfectly normal in my brain can appear weird and wacky to someone else.

On the other hand, over analysing social situations only leads to one place and - I can reveal to you exclusively today - it isn't a happy place. If you over analyse a social situation you start to miss the main points that occur in any conversation. You start misunderstanding what people mean. You start worrying about things that you shouldn't worry about. Basically you start freaking people out and appear what some people may call "odd" because you cannot grasp what is going on. Also it becomes quite worrying to the person who is analysing because they can no longer understand what type of friendship they hold with anyone. It all becomes confused. The person can analyse it to death, but will never truely understand what is going on. Basically if you over analyse you will feel lost.

So the question is, is it worth analysing things in my peculiar manner in order to gain its advantages? Or are the disadvantages too great?

This is a question which is quite personal and will depend on the person. It seems that I personally am willing to accept the disadvantages so that I can reap the rewards. Have I made a good decision? Only time can tell.

Note: This is a very simplified version of the method of thinking I am trying to describe.

2003-08-21T19:59:00.000+01:00

A thought just struck me. Perhaps all political systems amount to exactly the same thing. It is impossible to determine which system is "best" because there is no factor or factors which "best" can be measured on, therefore perhaps the behaviour of humans is determined by human nature rather than the political system. Democracy is seen as the best political system at present, but is what actually happens to democratic countries and other countries any different that what happened under dictatorships?

A little bit of food for thought.

2003-08-21T03:05:00.000+01:00

I am like a pirate on the waves of human consciousness. I'll tell you one thing, if you play with matches you'll get burnt.

Some people may be required to be "reintroduced to society" That would be nice, I've got to say. I mean, well, apart from the brainwashing and all the rest of it. If you just had someone who would solve all your social ills, solidify your friendships and make sure the cage of sanity is firmly locked.

. . . all combined to form a picture, like the illusory semblance of a phantasmagoria, almost leaving me in doubt whether that on which I looked were indeed reality, or the mere creation of a distempered brain.
--Julia Pardoe

Some interesting things happening in the book I am reading. I would tell you but I don't want to spoil it. It's a good book and I would like to hope you'll all go out and buy it and read it.

So remember to do that.

I had another revealation recently. That people tend to make judgements by presuming what another person is thinking. A lot of errors are made by people expecting that someone has some prior knowledge to a subject and then missing a vital bit of information. I am surprised how often this type of mistake happens, to be frank about it. You'd never catch me making such an amateur mistake. Anyone who makes that kind of mistake is an arsehole. Now you may say that I am not being very fair here, but if people won't be bothered to learn how to use the english language I say we shoot the bastards.

And don't ever accused me of not being jocular. I have been generous with the jokes tonight.

2003-08-19T20:57:00.000+01:00

I IZ USA AND I SUPPORT A FREE MEDIA AND STUFF.

Intention bad use of language there, just incase anyone was wonder...

2003-08-17T15:24:00.000+01:00

Also I'd like to point out that for the last post the only evidence against him is that video tape, as far as i am aware.

2003-08-16T20:22:00.000+01:00

Osama bin Laden.... did he do it? hands please...

Guilty?

Mark peers around the room with interest. 'Interesting...'

Not Guilty?

Mark peers around the room again. 'Hmm... yes... now... combine the two... together'

Okay, so maybe it's not totally crap journalism, but you can see how if a person was to read one article and not the other that would certain decide upon their viewpoint. Anyone in the UK will know how the story of the video proving his guilt was a huge story. They will also know what a small story the other one was...

Hmm, now here is a story that the BBC didn't run at all... you have to rely on al-Jazeera for this, but unfortunately their english website isn't running yet, so the information has to come 2nd hand...

Al-Jazeera is actually comprised of a lot of ex-BBC journalists who were made redundant for some reason but then found some cash from some rich bloke to start up the middle-east tv news channel.

Also as it says in the article, previously when bin Laden had wanted to release stuff to the public he had done so through Al-Jazeera, which raises the question, why didn't he give the tape admitting his guilt to Al-Jazeera like usual?

And if they didn't want to make the meeting public, why did they tape it then? (ta Fresh|Meat)

You can pick holes in my arguements, I don't deny that, but what I am trying to do here to look at all the information and choose the side which is most likely. I believe it is more likely that it was faked. I understand how that could be difficult to believe for some people because this goes against a lot of what they've been told. If we really wanted to have a proper arguement then we would discuss for whom does sept-11 really benefit? That is the most complicated question of all which I have tried to work out but it is impossible to say. Needless to say though, it is easy enough to conclude who are the obvious winners from the event now that we know what happened afterwards.

So yes, do i think bin Laden had anything to do with september 11th? No. I believe that bin Laden has denied being behind the attacks but due to our media it has simply not been reported.

And to finally end the update, before Afganistan war the USA government said bin Laden did it. Before Iraq war they say Saddam did it. Now we are past those wars and now we still find they are pointing at new people saying they did it. Make your own conclusions.

2003-08-16T18:36:00.000+01:00

Actually I'd like to present a new research topic that all you budding scientists can think about. I call it "Realistic Anarchy". I've probably given it a crap name, well not probably, I have given it a crap name. Anyway an explaination.

The theory for anarchy and all the rest of it is great, I like it, but that system will never come into being from any of the present systems if you consider a realistic world, well at least thats the way I look at it. So say you wanted to create a type of anarchy that actually would have a chance of coming together how would you do it?

Now I'd like to explain something on a side note. How has democracy come about? Well in the UK it was because the dictatorship created a parliment which then went into cival war against the dictatorship (or monarchy, same thing) and won. That is how the present form of democracy came about. It isn't true democracy although that is impossible....

Anyway I don't really know anything about politics. I accept the fact that politics is a life long study. I will study it all my life and I hope that one day I will maybe considered wise or something. Politics is such a huge subject. It is beyond the capacity of a human to understand it because we our brains create it. Or something...

Yes finally coming back, the question is how can we get from our present form of leadership to a form of anarchy? That is the million worthless dollar (because they would quite literally be worthless...) question.

I imagine it would require a lot of inbetween forms of leadership and infact is probably a totally crap question cause who would have predicted that the monarchy would be so stupid (if losing power unintentionally is stupid) to create a parliment and let it get out of control like it did.

I apologise for the spelling mistakes. I am sure there are a few here.

2003-08-15T20:25:00.000+01:00

Individualist Anarchists thought "Interest is theft, Rent Robbery, and Profit Only Another Name for Plunder."
This anarchy FAQ doesn't half make a load of sense...

In Tucker's words, a free society would see "each man reaping the fruits of his labour and no man able to live in idleness on an income from capital" and so society would "become a great hive of Anarchistic workers, prosperous and free individuals" combining "to carry on their production and distribution on the cost principle."
Yes, I think I can see where this Tucker bloke is coming from...

"The common wealth being scattered right across the planet, while belonging by right to the whole of humanity, those who happen to be within reach of that wealth and in a position to make use of it will utilise it in common. The folk from a given country will use the land, the machines, the workshops, the houses, etc., of that country and they will all make common use of them. As part of humanity, they will exercise here, in fact and directly, their rights over a portion of mankind's wealth. But should an inhabitant of Peking visit this country, he [or she] would enjoy the same rights as the rest: in common with the others, he would enjoy all the wealth of the country, just as he [or she] would have in Peking."
Hey! This sounds pretty good!

"Since authoritarian society reproduces itself in the individual structures of the masses with the help of the authoritarian family, it follows that political reaction has to regard and defend the authoritarian family as the basis of the 'state, culture, and civilisation. . . .' [It is] political reaction's germ cell, the most important centre for the production of reactionary men and women. Originating and developing from definite social processes, it becomes the most essential institution for the preservation of the authoritarian system that shapes it."
Sound familiar?

and ENOUGH. If you continue to feel that anarchists are just raving looneys then feel free to read the FAQ or don't read the FAQ and continue to be ignorant about it. I don't have any misgivings towards you if you can't be arsed to read it, there are a lot of things I can't be arsed to read either. Ignorance isn't a fault, it is an inevitability.

2003-08-15T19:53:00.000+01:00

Democracy is the new Communism.

Meaning that one day people are just going to start saying "democracy is a load of crap" etc and they'll invent a new hierarchical form of leadership. The new system will be to democracy what democracy was to communism, or in layman terms, a wanktard idea.

2003-08-14T17:55:00.000+01:00

Basically what is natural language all about? It's about turning something which is pure thought or desire into something that can be communicated to other humans. It's about mapping a continuous value into a discrete value. This means there will be error and this means that the person who tries to understand what another person is saying will inevitably get it wrong. Infact there won't be a single situation where anything is understood correctly because it is impossible to express yourself using natural language.

So that means that there are misunderstandings. So a lot of how a sentence is percieved depends upon the relationship between the two people who are communicating. Good friends will be unlikely to interpret insults into something that is said where two acquaintances will be more likely to interpret something bad into what is said.

I've added a new link to an anarchy FAQ. Quite a lot to read but sounds good from what i have looked at.

2003-08-12T05:16:00.000+01:00

I have also had another personal revelation recently. I believe that in any given conversation there are billions upon trillions upon villions of misunderstands. I think that the human mind is actually geared towards trying to work around all the possible misunderstandings.

I can't be arsed to discuss this now because my mind needs rest. I'll do it when I am feeling more energetic.

2003-08-12T05:10:00.000+01:00

One interesting facet of human nature that I have personally discovered is human natures eagerness to have an opinion. Humans always have opinions. I tried once before to have no opinions, I failed. Now I try again in an attempt to be wise.

Why is holding no opinion wise? Because no one can know anything. Any person who holds an opinion and argues it has to be sure for what they are arguing, but you can never be sure that what you are arguing is correct and in some cases the correctness of the situation is probably subjective anyway. The way it seems to me is that people can see one piece of information on a subject and they will be quite willing to base a whole opinion around it. I try to inform myself and make sure my opinions are not those possessed by a stupid twat. But, of course, incorrect opinions (in my opinion) are what have caused all human suffering to date. Therefore, anyone who holds an opinion is endangering themselves as they could be acting on an opinion which is false and balls-ing up the world.

You see? Anyone who holds an opinion is a stupid twat, which pretty much makes the human race a load of stupid twats. I would like to escape this cycle of stupid twats, be fresh, and not hold an opinion.

Obviously it is not an easy task, I am sure a life long commitment to it might start to bring around a result that borders on the satisfactory. Except for that, I am screwed.

2003-08-10T02:03:00.000+01:00

It was winter. An old woman came rushing out of her house, clenching on to her woolly hat and yanking her handbag. She moved her legs using a bizarre method which one might call the “old woman run”. And she did the “old woman run” in a way that no one had seen before, because she was late for something very, very, very important. She was late for the bus.

Her white hair wrestled with the air and her handbag gasped for air. She pulled herself around a tight corner and began running across the road. There was no traffic to be seen except for the bus behind her. She was running directly towards the bus stop. She shook from side to side.

I was watching all this trouble unfold before me. It was a sight like I had never seen before. And as she rushed across the road and finally got at the bus stop, just as the bus arrived, I smiled. I was so very happy that she was able to get the bus which she made so much effort to get on.