Congratulations to Lorna Rider

Like most people, I have my school friends on Facebook.

Politically, I'm very revolutionary. Coming from a Catholic school I have never taken much interest in the posts that my old school 'friends' decide to share. That's not to say that all my old school attendees are particularly conservative, I'm sure many of them have opened their eyes to the world we live in. It's just that I never see it. Perhaps they never share their anguish at the system we live under. Perhaps it is because most do not care.

Either way, it is always refreshing when I see someone from my school life actively participate in political situations. Unfortunately it rarely happens.

So I want to take this opportunity to congratulate someone I was at school with.

Lorna Rider, to me was just a 'goth girl' that I went to school with. You know the type, black hair, lots of make-up and generally on the outside of the 'norm'. Being somewhat esoteric myself, I never judged.

She grew up to be a nurse, a dedicated one at that. I've seen lately many posts in support of the junior doctors strike, fighting to save the NHS, but never from my old school friends, not until I started seeing Lorna's posts.

So I commend Lorna, for standing up to the current Tory goverment's plans to privatise the NHS. I commend her for having the courage to stand up in public and say what is on the mind of most NHS staff. It makes me proud to see that others care, and it gives me hope for the next generation.

Well done Lorna, good for you. 

I hope you can all see this link, Lorna standing up for all of us

https://www.facebook.com/truthrecords87/posts/1132459526784708

Today's good deed

I've been casually learning Spanish now for about a year. By casually I mean I've been doing a Spanish lesson daily for nearly three months (The smartphone app named Duolingo) During my whole journey of learning, I've always told people I can't speak Spanish. Anyone who's tried learning a foreign language for the first time can testify that a large part of it is confidence. Confidence in speaking the language being learnt.

I've tried throwing myself into Spanish speaking situations, which mainly involved asking for things in shops; asking for directions; trying to listen to Spanish conversations; but when you live in a mostly English speaking area, it is easy to fall back on English and not bother with Spanish. I have met so many people who have lived in Spain for decades without speaking a word of Spanish.

I never wanted to be one of those people. I wanted to be able to communicate with the locals. I wanted to show that I was in fact making an effort.

So today, in Gibraltar, I walked past an elder Spanish lady who was struggling with two big, wheeled carriers, and two shopping bags. I walked past normally as most people did, then I turned back and asked her if she wanted some help, in Spanish. She was thrilled and took me up on the offer.

This was at Eroski, which is a few minutes from the border. I got to practice my Spanish, and as I'd had a bit to drink, I was quite confident. I managed to have a few conversations and I worked out where the lady was going. I deduced that she was 66 years old (because she told me in Spanish) and I even told her my age. I ended up walking her to the bus station in La Linea, for which she was very grateful. I spent about half an hour with this Spanish stranger, and not a minute of it felt awkward.

Anyway, I wanted to share this in case I ever forget. There have been times in my life where I have struggled to carry a weight. (quite literally), and to a certain degree I believe that one 'reaps what they sow' in life, and if I was in this lady's situation, I would certainly appreciate help, regardless of whether they spoke perfect Spanish or not. That is why I wanted to help. I guess in a way I wanted to prove that language barriers aren't as much of an issue when it comes to human goodness.

I feel good about my deed. Maybe it will come back to me one day, maybe not. Either way, I am happy with the way I feel about it, and I'd gladly do it again.

Modern Poets

I haven't always been a fan of poetry, and for many years, I didn't see the appeal in either reading or writing poetry. Mostly because I didn't understand, and partly because my scepticism led me to thinking that the non-fiction side of arts was a pretentious con. I would see paintings and arrangements that made no sense to me, and I would wonder if there really was any meaning behind the work, or whether the artist merely threw colours at a canvas, letting the audience choose the meaning.


When a piece of art is released to the world, the artist has a message or a story to tell. It means something, as intended by the creator of said art work. When the audience admires the work, because the meaning behind the piece has not been explained, the audience gives the work a meaning, by analysing and studying the piece. This means the same work of art can in fact be interpreted different ways, and can invoke conflicting emotions in different members of the audience.



I had the wonderful privilege of attending an Arts By Offenders exhibit, hosted by the Koestler Awards at Southbank in London a few years back. One of the pieces, was an A5 piece of paper with a formula on it.

Z + Y = X

x = horse in formaldehyde

y = a gullible idiot 

z = lots of money

It was sold for around £50, and I can only imagine the convict sitting in his cell, chuckling to himself.

Though it was somewhat of a satirical art piece, in my opinion it was more valid than some works I've seen over the years. First of all it had a clear meaning and message from the artist. There was something of his/her personality that shone through this piece vividly, a kind of narcissistic personality with a disdain for pretentious art, a sceptical, even suspicious mind. Secondly, it clearly struck a chord with the buyer. Perhaps the wit of the piece impressed an art lover, or perhaps the buyer agreed with the message it contained.




Getting back to poetry, it's similar to visual art in the sense that it requires a certain level of decoding or analysing. So I've always found rap an interesting creative art. The way an mc or rapper (I don't know the difference) collates words into an aural art piece takes skill, creativity and a seasoned vocabulary. Having the confidence to shorten, lengthen or even amalgamate words is also a must. The content within rap tends to be much darker than other forms of poetry, and the contemporary issues speak to a wide range or audiences. NWA spread the bitter tune of police brutality throughout America. Immortal Technique acknowledged worldwide struggle from an urban angle. Eminem has powerful poetic lyrics up there with the greats.

So I'll say it, there are rappers out there who are modern poets, worthy of the same respect as the likes of Whitman, Poe and Browning.

Anyway, in true traditional rant style I've wandered from one point to the next, so I'll end by mentioning one of the rising stars of modern rap. Head over to my poetry page for a listen (because he is a poet), or click the link below.

Spit-E-Zen

PDSA Promote Animal Slavery

Lucca, a US. Marine Corps. German Shepard, has been awarded the PDSA Dickin Medal after losing his leg in an explosion and being forced into early retirement, after being forced into war zones for over a decade. The news report that I saw recently showed Lucca 'proudly' displaying his medal. Personally I'm not convinced that dogs feel pride, but that is besides the point here.

Lucca may have lost a leg, but at least he got a medal. That'll keep him occupied when he's rotting in a kennel.

What is more concerning is that an 'animal welfare' charity, PDSA, would promote and encourage the exploitation of animals for military purposes and thus furthering the suffering of animals. From looking at their website, it is difficult to see any mission statement other than 'help a vet help a pet', so the PDSA seems to lack any real long-term goals. 'Encouraging responsible pet ownership' doesn't quite cut it if they aren't actively discouraging the pet industry. It leads me to believe that these kind of charities are merely around to legitimize abhorrent practices such as using animals for war and promoting pet ownership for the purpose of aiding the veterinary industry.

PDSA had this to say on their website and Twitter: "Lucca has become a symbol of hope for many, meeting the public at military outreach events."

Perhaps, I'm being ignorant here, but what symbol of hope? Hope that by sending animals to their death in a foreign country will somehow protect domestic innocents? We are told that no US soldier was killed whilst Lucca was on tour, so the service dog gets to live the rest of his days out in retirement, likely in a kennel if he can't be re-homed. That's if they don't kill him.

Brus wasn't so lucky:

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/540010/Military-Dogs-Destroyed-MOD


Still it's no surprise that an army would destroy an animal once it's outlived it's usefulness, they are just as bad with their humans, sacking people hours before their pensions and failing to help soldiers adjust to society. Just ask any one of the numerous ex-soldiers that end up sleeping rough on park benches in Civvie Street, who are usually bullied away by the police.

Handed in my notice today - Hope my boss has a sense of humour

Quick Update

Some months have passed since I last posted anything, not for lack of enthusiasm, just lack of time. This year so far has been very productive and there are many exciting things in the pipeline which will go live very soon. The copyright agreements with some of my old material has now expired, so I’ll be uploading them shortly too.

In the meantime, if you’re craving a fix of whatever my mind spits out, sign up to my page on the Channillo writing platform. I have a comic-esque short story series, The Heroes of New Rec, that is really taking off now, but don’t threat if you feel you’ve been missing out, just sign up today and you’ll get all back issues of the series as part of the subscription. So if you fancy supporting your favourite writer (that’s me by the way), get over to www.channillo.com

Alternatively, click the link below for a cheesy picture of me with my Channillo biography.

 http://channillo.com/user/1631/

Until next time…

London - Sydney in Four Hours: What the Media Missed

At the beginning of November, the papers were reporting that a plane capable to reaching Sydney, Australia from London, UK in just four hours. This was too exciting not to look into. So here's what happened.

The UK government recently promised £60million to Reaction Engines in order to build the Synergetic Air-Breathing Rocket Engine, also known as SABRE, a plane that can theoretically travel from London to Sydney in four hours. The hybrid engine will be able to function in both in space and within the Earth's atmosphere and can reach just under 4,000mph. Reaction Engines have been designing this for twenty years, so why is this big news? And what does it mean for the rest of us?

According to the media, a full ground based test is planned for 2020. This is good news. We'll probably have to add another decade onto that before we see them in public use. Even 15 years will fly by. This has great potential for global tourism and commerce, making those long gruelling 24-hour flights to Australia a thing of the past. Maybe.

Passenger Flights

When it comes to passenger flights, I suspect one of two things will happen:

Prices will be astronomically high, standard flight prices will be roughly the same.

This will be true if these new planes are only sold to a select few airliners. Reaction Engines is a British company, so it is possible that the UK will have a monopoly over this product and service, which would explain why the £60mil investment has been granted in a 'debt-ridden' country. 

Prices will be reasonably high, but will push standard flight prices down.

If Reaction Engines open their business to other countries, we should hopefully see competition and government policy keep prices reasonable. With such short journeys to anywhere in the world, every government of a developed country will want a piece of the action. Trade and tourism are major financiers of large cities, which are a huge proportion of the economy. 

Space Flight

Looking a bit further forward, here is a great opportunity for public space flight.

The hybrid engine brings commercial space flight that little bit closer. Richard Branson's Virgin Galactic has encountered a few pitfalls in its plan to get the public to space, with the original deadline passing 8 years ago. With governments paying attention and investing in this technology, I may theoretically be able to see the Earth from the Moon in my lifetime, though I doubt I'd be able to pay for it in my lifetime. 

Skepticism

Sounding too good to be true, I couldn't resist digging a little deeper to find that... actually, no-one beyond the media has mentioned space flight. In fact not much of the intention of this investment has been released at all. We all seem to be assuming that this will be used primarily as a tourism and therefore economical boost, but it seems the 'London to Sydney in four hours' statement it merely just a comparison showing how fast the place will be able to fly. So all of this excitement about boarding a UK flight in the morning and stepping off the plane in Australia in the afternoon may be for nothing. Reaction Engines are open about what they can achieve with this project, and on one news item on their site tells us that the UK are investing in order to 'investigate it's application for space access vehicles', so there is a shred of hope for public space flight. However, the same news item also shows us a red flag, something we should really be talking about rather than fantasizing about short flights down under.

BAE Systems invests over £20million in Reaction Engines

That's right, back in November, the giant Defence company BAE Systems invested £20.6million and agreed to a working collaboration in order to speed up development. Oh and they also now have a 20% stake in Reaction Engines. Take one look at the BAE Systems 'What We Do' page and tell me what this new technology will be used for. Services include: Design, manufacture, upgrade and support combat aircraft, land combat vehicles, ships, military electronics, oh and of course HR and IT. Looking at their website, it's hard to find any service that doesn't contain the word 'military'. Though under the 'Future Technologies' tab, we see the statement:

"Partnering with academic and industrial leaders we develop new technologies to support our future product strategies."

Future product strategies eh? Unless BAE Systems is planning on entering the commercial travel industry, I think we can put our 4-hour dream flights to Australia on the back burner.

History has taught us, unfortunately, that technological advances aren't always used for the good of everyone. I have yet to see a constructive use for nuclear weapons (though this article gives a few ideas). The military-industrial complex will inevitably have big plans for this technology. 

We can only hope for (and work towards) a day where military and security companies do not hold such influence over the technologies that come to pass.

To Bomb or not to Bomb

Two days ago the UK government carried out airstrikes on Daesh targets in Syria, sparking mass debate across Europe. With phrases like 'terrorist sympathiser', 'Iraq all over again' and 'Western hypocrisy' being banded around, this is an issue that has divided a nation. A survey conducted by Survation showed that 48% of people backed the decision, which is only a slight minority. So what are people saying?

Tory politicians and certain sections of the working class are both calling for action, arguing that inaction is a threat to security. We'll cover that later. People that lean against the airstrikes argue that thousands of innocent people will die as a result of the decision made in parliament. While Western governments claim that modern laser-guided missiles reduce civilian casualties, they aren't entirely sure how many targets have been killed, as they aren't any ground troops counting the dead. US estimates vary by source, so in actual fact, they do not know who they are killing, but yet they claim to be killing them more accurately. Innocents will die and while no-one is denying that, pro-war advocates unempathetically state it is necessary, caring not for the lives of the innocent. Either that or they have the grave prejudice that all Syrians are terrorists. Let's look at that.

Daesh is a Sunni Muslim extremist organisation, and 70% of the Syrian population is made up of Sunni Muslims, though not necessarily Daesh supporters. In fact latest estimates put the strength of Daesh at 200,000 soldiers. When compared with the 20 million citizens in Syria, that tells us that 1% of Syria is a Daesh militant. According to this statistic, it follows that for every thousand Daesh extremists killed, 99 thousand innocent lives will be lost. In reality this figure would of course be subject to many variables, but simplistically, a lot more innocents will die. A poll from the Pew Research Centre has shown that there is an overwhelmingly negative view of Daesh within their countries of operation. Considering that Daesh has support from a minority of people, a relentless attack on Syria by the western alliance is nothing short of genocide.

The less politically-aware pro-war supporters seem to be under the impression that Daesh has come out of no-where, a problem that needs to be nipped in the bud, but it's no secret that the US has been funding Daesh for years to destabilise middle eastern governments. Tony Blair even admitted that he believes that the Iraq war contributed to the rise of Daesh, in an interview recently. This is where the Western hypocrisy element comes in, for the same nations fighting extremism are the same ones that have fanned the flames that led to this inferno.

Far from watching events unfold from a distance, Western governments are an active contributor to the terror attacks.

Politicians congratulated each other and declared the UK a safer place now thanks to the decision, which is a declaration of ignorance more than anything. After the collateral damage that the bombs will inevitably cause, Daesh recruitment will sore as mentioned in my previous blog post (The Fake Passport: Theories and Ideas Surrounding the Recent Co-ordinated Terror Attacks), by giving the Daesh struggle legitimacy. The moderates won't be so moderate once their families are massacred by Tornado jets. When we consider the influx of Syrian refugees, it isn't hard to imagine that bombing Syria will make the UK a far more dangerous place. Ask yourself this, if the UK is now safer because the government bombed Syria, why is the current UK threat level 'severe'? The Survation survey mentioned earlier also showed that 59% of people believe that sending planes to Syria would increase the risk of a terrorist attack in the UK

Another question of note, where is all the money coming from? When the UK's debt is used as an excuse for the stifled NHS, why is this not a factor when considering acts of war? War is an expensive business, and while profit can be made it takes a big investment. It seems the UK government can magic up some funds when it comes to killing foreigners, but not to house it's own citizens and cover healthcare.

When it comes down to it, despite resistance from the public, including a Stop the War Coalition protest outside the debate at the House of Commons, the UK government have proved again that they will go to war as and when they please with or without consent of the public. In 2003 it was Labour with Iraq, now it is Conservative with Syria. Members of both parties voted for both wars, showing just how out of touch with each other these politicians are, let alone the public. That and the media's treatment of Jeremy Corbyn shows just how low this Demockery has stooped. With the mainstream media spreading fear on a daily basis, legitimising the decision for war, it's no wonder there are many people backing the decision. If Iraq is anything to go by however, public backing will only decline as the death and misery ensues. My thoughts are with the victims in Syria in their dark times.

Stop the War Coalition are holding a national demonstration. Click here for more details.

Football Fans and Facebook French Flag Filters

In the wake of the Paris attack, French flags are popping up all over Facebook as a symbol of solidarity with the French people who suffered at the hands of ISIS. Social pressure to include the Facebook encouraged red, white and blue filter on profile pictures mounted exponentially within hours, which is all well and good right? There's certainly nothing wrong with a little show of solidarity.

So why all the controversy? Why were Turkish football fans allegedly booing during a memorial minute's silence at a Turkey – Greece friendly football match?

The answer to this has been reconstructed by the right wing media to demonize Muslims, as per usual. The Daily Mail and The Sun have shone a dim light on a foreign culture they don't understand and used it to promote more hatred.

So that's the story they spin, Muslims everywhere are evil, but what's the flip side? What happens when we turn the light on?

As with most religions, there are various degrees of participants amongst the individual. It would be naive to think that there were no pro-ISIS members in the crowd, but it would be more so to believe that every one supported ISIS. Remember two bombs were detonated in Ankara on October 10th, so they have a recent reminder of the horrors of terrorism.

Explanations have now started to surface as to why this happened. Mustafa Ozsari, a Masters student, has given a thorough breakdown.

In short, it all comes down to culture. In Turkish culture, minute silences are rarely silent. Chanting can be heard throughout the crowd, a chant that respects the deceased and denounces the terrorists responsible. There's a funny irony that the people who claim that everyday Muslims should come out and denounce terrorism, yet when they do, it is misinterpreted thanks to an ignorant or conniving press. The chant 'Alluhu Akbar' was allegedly heard as The Daily Mail claims. In the video you can hear 'Şehitler ölmez, vatan bölünmez ', in English: 'Martyrs, they do not die (they are immortal), homeland (land, our land) is indivisible.'

There is another explanation. Turkish fans are upset with the hypocrisy of the Western world's ignorance towards similar attacks, specifically the attack in Ankara mentioned previously. This brings us back to the Facebook French Flag filter. There have been 298 terrorist attacks in 2015 so far. The highest death toll in a single attack has been over 2000, which happened between January 3rd and 7th in Nigeria. There weren't any Nigerian flags appearing on my news-feed then. In fact the Paris attack was the only attack that received this special attention.

When it comes down to it, these explanations seem contradictory, but in reality, people vary. It is probably that elements of both of these theories combine in the truth. Political views are different from person to person as much in Islamic countries as much as in Western civilizations, as does commitment to faith.

It is important to acknowledge that the Facebook French Flag filter users are not at fault here. Yes it is nice for the global stage to show this symbolic solidarity, the fault lies with Facebook. When the designer of the filter published this work, he was either horrendously ignorant to think that the Paris attack was an isolated incident, or he made a conscious decision and put a higher value on the lives of French people than people of other cultures. It is a starkly clear symbol that the world only cares when white westerners are murdered in the street.

The Fake Passport: Theories and Ideas Surrounding the Recent Co-Ordinated Terror Attacks

ISIS/ISIL have now claimed responsibility for three suicide attacks, and Brussels is now on lockdown due to an 'immediate threat'. First there was the takedown of a Russian airliner on October 31st, killing over 200 people. The western world reacted by, well, just getting on with their lives. Dead Russians aren't that important I guess. Then on the 12^th November, Lebanon suffered the worst attack since the civil war, I don't even remember seeing that in classical media, and there certainly isn't a Facebook option to put a Lebanese flag as a profile picture filter. Then of course, after the co-ordinated attacks on Paris on the 13^th of November, the rest world has been forced to weather the political storm that has arisen. The victims of this attack were white after all. Leaders, politicians, the media, bloggers, and anyone with a Facebook account, all have something to say on the matter. The discovery of a fake Syrian passport has led to pertinent questions and theories to arise. Be they valid arguments or wild conspiracy theories, here is a few of them.

Fake passport dumped by the ruling class/illuminati/aliens*

*delete as appropriate

As soon as the news report was released regarding a Syrian passport being found near one of the suicide bombers, people were cynical. It gave me a smile when I saw old school friends instantly question the authenticity of this claim, seeing the holes clearly on first glance. Whichever dominator you put into the equation (bourgeoisie, illuminati etc), whichever truth you believe, the theory is the same: someone placed the passport after the attack in order to use this information to sway opinion on refugees, tighten borders and increase both military and security funding. Whether this claim is substantial or not remains to be seen, but the motive is certainly there. Borders were instantly closed in France, and the security industry in the UK was given a huge injection of funds. With all the unanswered questions surrounding the 9/11 attacks in 2001, I suspect there is more to this story still to be revealed.

Regarding the immediately available facts, there were two initial questions I had: Why would a suicide bomber need a passport? And why was the passport not destroyed in the attack?

The second question can be resolved if we believe that the attacker with the passport was shot. Problem solved. The first question can be argued that the passport was used to cross borders legally. Fair enough, but something still doesn't add up there. Assuming the attacker used the passport to enter France, why would he need it for the attack? Surely he would have just destroyed it before leaving to meet the reaper. Which ever way you look at it, the passport placement was intentional. Which leads us into our second theory.

Fake passport intentionally taken by attacker

This one isn't too hard to believe. It makes sense that the presence of a Syrian passport would be taken to the attack, in order to encourage a racist backlash from western society. The government violence that follows acts of terrorism are predictable enough that the attackers themselves are aware of the consequences. The point is that when western society reacts by pointing anger at a particular country, it legitimizes any retaliation. Once a plan for retaliation or invasion is executed, that plan in turn legitimizes the ISIS cause. Civilians will be bombed and people will die, as with the US invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan after 9/11, and consequently, the ISIS recruitment will increase. It's easier to convince people to fight for you when there is an external evil attacking their land.

Global media will inevitably provide evidence of this theory by reacting with anger. The Daily Mail already published a controversial cartoon reminiscent of Nazi propaganda (see below), and even when the Calais migrant 'jungle' was ablaze in the wake of the Paris attack, the same paper downplayed any reports of a far-right reactionary attack and still managed to blame refugees. For the devout believers of the Daily Mail will give this hegemony a working class edge. When elections come around, this will be the key issue that elects the next government.

(Top image: Daily Mail cartoon referring to the refugee crisis, showing refugee's walking alongside rats into the EU. Bottom image: Nazi propaganda cartoons likening Jews to rats.) Credit

The xenophobic and racist reaction hinges on one key piece of misinformation: that all Muslims are the same. Pointing to and vilifying Islam makes for a simple clear picture for the masses to buy into, regardless of how far it is from the truth. It is likely that the attack in Lebanon was played down for this reason, as Muslims were the target of this attack. The story of Adel Termos, the Muslim man who sacrificed himself by tackling a suicide bomber and saving many lives, was hard to find in the daily press, as this would clash with the false idea that Islam is a big evil monster intent on taking over the world, as opposed to the reality that beliefs and views held by followers of Islam are as divided as those between Catholics and Protestants. Religion may be used as a tool for thought control in war torn countries at present, by ignorance and misinformation are major instruments in the western world.

Zionist Israel has a part to play

Israel had a part to play in the attack. To start, there is no evidence of this, and as far as I know this isn't being discussed (at least outside neo-nazi circles) but there is a possible motive here. With France taking actions to recognize the state of Palestine in a two-state solution, and Spain issuing an arrest warrant for Netanyahu and six of his officials, it is clear that key members of the EU are looking at Israel.

So why would Israel help this horrific attack take place? Distraction.

It's not like these kinds of attack never happen in Israel's neck of the woods, quite the opposite, they happen everyday in the Gaza strip. A worldwide catastrophe would take the attention off of the Israel/Palestine conflict and the war crimes within, and potentially start a war.

Just an idea that one.

World War 3

Here's one more theory floating around. Paris was targeted and the passport was planted in order to start World War 3. With German Chancellor Merkel welcoming Syrian refugees with open arms, she blazed a trail the likes of which are few and far between, one of compassion (seemingly so at least). By increasing the terror alert in France and putting the blame on refugees, there is a chance that Merkel will be demonized for allowing 'potential terrorists' through the borders. A clash between France and Germany may divide Europe between left and right once again, and remember there is profit in war, though I think this result is highly unlikely.

So those are a few theories to be aware of as more evidence comes to light. The western world should show solidarity with the victims of these attacks, whatever colour their skin may be. We must also remember that the main goal of these attacks, whoever turns out to be involved, is fear. The fear of the masses is in the palm of their hands, but we must be strong and take an analytical and pragmatic approach to the situation that has occurred. Question all the stories you read, and question how the UK government can increase security funding with a crippled economy, but cannot sufficiently sustain the NHS, the privatization of which will take the back burner while this crisis dominates the papers. My thoughts are with all the victims of this tragedy, and with the sufferers of fear currently in Brussels.