Picture Perfect

Yeah, in case you hadn't noticed, I've actually been away from the internet world for the past week. "Why?" I hear you ask. The reason is because I am no longer connected to the internet at home - we have changed our internet deal, and so the old ISP (Service Provider) has closed our account with them, but the new one has run into technical difficulties, thereby not opening our account yet. This means, of course, no internet connection. Hence my absence.

If you recall, my line of work is "freelance web designer" and thus not being connected to the internet is a major blow to my job. However, I have managed to hang onto my job and single client, despite having no contact with them for the past week. I am arranging a meeting with them this week (sometime tomorrow, or on Tuesday) and will be introduced to their "designer" (whomsoever that may be) who the client has  told me I will be working with. I will at last get down to work, once some answers have been provided to my questions, and BAM! A few hundred pounds later, they'll have themselves a website.

But i'm here now, back to the net right? Wrong. I am currently connecting to the internet via a simple mechanism of plastic cups and string. Alas. I won't be here for a long while, methinks. But let's catch up with my life quickly, shall we?
------------------------------------------

Monday, Tuesday. These days I spent doing things with friends. I can't remember what we did, but we did something, and it was even fun. Ah. I played tennis at 7:00am on Monday, which was an experience. To say the least.

Wednesday. This was the big day where me and Jo went to the climbing frame place. Fun, fun, fun. Potnoodleboy, who expressed an interest in this, can find the website at www.goape.com. The location of this place was in Bracknell Forest (and therefore accessible by national rail, destination Bracknell, of course). For more info, see website.
In short, we all had a good time, and Jo got to see 1) where I live, (2) my little maroon automobile (which is currently very, very dirty. It has spiderwebs around the door handles outside and everything! I should really take it to be washed. But then again, I could just do it myself. Meh. Who am I kidding? Taking it to the wash it is.)
For Jo's birthday, I got her something. This was extremely fun, considering the something I got was perfume. I spent two hours looking for a suitable perfume for her (and even found a perfume with the words "Pure Poison" around the bottle. I just HAD to have a sniff of that. And yes, it smelled like pure poison to me too). The fun came in when salesladies attempted to show me the aftershave section, kept on asking me if I knew the fraguances i was looking at were for women. I think they all assumed I was weird, or gay, or both (except two of them, who I told I was looking for a gift for a friend). Anyway. One of those two was an attractive looking blone girl in the chanel department. She looked least uptight and didn't look at me like I was a weirdo, so I asked her for advice. The other was an elderly lady, who looked like she had a few grandkids. She looked so sweet and funny I decided to ask her advice too.

20 perfume samples and two hours later, I narrowed it down to either "Kenzo" or "Coco Chanel." Neither of these have been used by Jo, as far as I know, and so I decided to introduce her to a new perfume, rather than get an old favourite (against my better instincts, and against the advice of all salespeoples. But hell, what do they know? A great deal more than me when it comes to perfumes. Ok, it was a risk). I chose the coco chanel eau de toillet (haha. That always cracks me up. Odour of toilet? Really? Hah!) Despite it being an "odour of toilet" fraguance, it smelled deliciously nice to me, so I bought it. And that's how Jo ended up with her birthday present.
Btw, Jo, if you change your mind about the perfume, do say. I have the receipt still, and you will be able to change it even after a few uses.

Thursday> This was the day Jo, myself and friend, were going to go to Alton Towers, which then changed into Thorpe Park, which then changed into nothing at all, due to bad weather. Instead, I went with another friend to see Wedding Crashers. I have a general rule in reference to films, which is: If Jews feature in the film in the first 20 minutes, it's going to be hysterical/a brilliant flick. I mean, it's so weird, having a bunch of Jews in a film, so...well, just funny. You've got to laugh. I was in hysterics. Great films with Jews in the first 20 mins of it: Snatch. Hysterical. Brilliant. And features Orthodox Jews (who then whip out sub machine guns and raid a diamond shop. Oops. Not real Jews then, eh). Anyway, I don't want to labour the point. Even though I already have. Ok. Wedding crashers, it's a 15, and don't see it if you object to seeing pretty, naked women. I'd give it 7/10, so it's not the best, but it's certainly a good film, in my opinion.

Friday> This saw me waking up late, going shopping, and doing nothing in particular.
Saturday> Ahh, I love saturdays.
Sunday> Well, I'm here. I refused to play tennis at 8:00am today, due to finishing a film last night at 3:00am. The film was "anger management" and also featured Jews in the first 20 minutes, and, sadly, is the only film I know of to break the rule quoted above. It was not a good film. I rented it at 1:00am, as a friend was feeling down. It was a comedy, Adam sandler's in there, who's usually hysterical. However, 'twas a weird film, and I don't recommend it. Watching it at 1:00am probably increases the enjoyment of it, and even then, it was pushing it. However, I must admit, I laughed out loud in my bed, when i remembered one of the jokes there.

This week: As I said, website design meeting stuff.

MAJOR ANNOUNCEMENT

I leave the country this month. I've been writing in this blog for the past 8 months that I will shortly be gone, am leaving these green lands, to go to Israel. Well, that time is upon me. I leave on the eve of the 14th of August, 2005. After next week, therefore, I will not be able to write as frequently as I have been doing in the past, in this blog. I won't dissapear, I hope. I shall send e-mails to the likes of Jo, Arty and Mindy and such, and continue to update this blog for those who follow this blog. If I stop updating this blog, it's because I have no time. If I stop sending e-mails, i'd worry. If I stop updating this blog AND stop sending e-mails, it means i've been shot. And that, folks, is that.

Oh, one last thing. Everyone should go to Jerusalem one day. The religious folk should go there for obvious reasons, the atheist folk should go there just to see what the darn fuss is about, and everyone else should go there because it is a land so steeped in history, and yet that history is as alive today as it was 2,700 years ago. If a person living in Jerusalem 2,700 years ago was transported to today's Jerusalem, as far as they'd be concerned, the only change is technological. But they'd understand the language, the customs, and everything else which goes with it. Not so for someone living in England 2,700 years ago, who was probably Celtic anyway.

What else? Errr. Oh yeah. I drove on a motorway to hertfordshire (where I have family) the other day. This is significant because this is the first time i'v ever been on a motorway. It's actually not that bad, but then again, that could have been because it was 9:00pm when I went, and 11:10 pm when I started to go back into London. Oh yeah. I have some lovely poems which I'd have liked to share with you, but alas, as mentioned previously, I am not using my own computer. Shame.

Anyways, folks. Take care, and If I don't write soon, it's because you're a boring lot. I mean. Err. It's because as much as i'd like to, I simply cannot, due to no internet.

RESPONSES

PNB> Politics stuff: Hmm. Many people say that, and say things like "yeah, tribal warfare, blah blah blah." Hardly! There are no tribes in modern-day Israel, and the war in the middle east is due to theological reasons on the side of the Palestinians - that theology being "Itbach al-Yahud."
Other stuff: In case you missed it in the above post, climbing frame place is at www.goape.com and is located in Bracknell Forest.

Arty> There's a lot of things I agree with in your post, a lot which I have no opinion on, and some with which I disagree. As the UK entered the war,  believe they should finish it. It's just a shame that the UK weren't in charge of the tacticians, as I feel this US-led war is, as you imply, shoddily done. As I have said before, though the US et. al. went into iraq with ulterior motives, isn't it kind of better there is one less tyranny in the world? "Oh!"  I hear many say "so why don't we go in to ALL tyranical leaderships and destroy the lot of them, hmm?" - better part of the loaf than no loaf at all, m'dear. Better part of the loaf than none at all.

Jo> Oh, come on! Don't pretend you don't know! You, as well as I do, know that he loathes me to the core. Ok, fair enough, when we first met I was in a weird mood and gave him a bit of a hard time (hehehe) which he dutifully returned to me, but all of which means he doesn't like me. I'm sure he's a nice chap, but I do know when I am disliked :p .

Closet Catholic> hehe!

So I'm going to this wicked climbing frame-assult-course place with Jo (y'know who I mean, THE Jo) et. sister et. others from family (I think). I am also going to Alton Towers with her et. her friend.

I have a nagging suspicion this friend doesn't like me much.

.....

............

...................

Ok, I lie. I have an outright solid-rock source, that this person loathes me. Oh well. Can't please everyone all the time? The moment you try, is the moment you fry. Or something. "Don't do it" is the message i'm trying to get across. 

Oh, I'm fasting today. It's actually 2:30am, so technically, i'm fasting later on today (sunrise) until sunset. Why? Because something terrible happened 2,000 years ago. And this fast is in memory of that. "Forgive and forget!" I hear people shouting "2,000 years?! Are you INSANE?!" Oh, we forgive. Yeeees, forgive. Forget? No, never forget. Never.

Enough of scaring you with my life now. Let's get into politics, and scare you even more with international events. 

Politics in red. 

So Israel are giving the Gaza to the PA. They are, however, retaining control of the borders, air space and ports.

"WHAT?" Says Abbas, arms flailing around, "are you going to turn us into a prison?!"

To Mr. Abbas, I would first point out that only criminals are kept in prison: if the entire palestinian population are criminals, then yes, it will be a prison, and not merely a blocaded country.

Second, I would show Mr. Abbas the following report:

"An Israeli couple have been shot dead and several other people wounded in an attack by suspected Palestinian militants close to the Gaza Strip." (BBC)

Surprise, surprise. The so-called settlements haven't even been disbanded yet, and there are attacks coming from the Gaza. Imagine if Israel didn't seal the borders, how much more attacks would there be? There is no doubt that if the PA would be given control over their own borders, Hamas would go in and out of it freely to Israel, which means suicide bombers, rocket launcher attacks, etc. (of course, Hamas and the PA are still fighting. I think if Hamas want to fight against the PA, then Hamas will win, to be honest. They seem to be inflicting greater damage to the PA than the PA on them).

If the PA were to be given control over the sea ports, this translated into bombs, arms, etc. The Israeli navy has confiscated and continues to confiscate ships full of arms en route to the palestinians, which result in more israeli's dead.

In light of the above reports, and in light of the attitude of the US and UK towards Israel (i.e. stop fighting the palestinians, even though they're nasty buggers who want to blow you up) i'm finding it increasingly difficult to empathise with the common londoners and brits over suicide bombings in london.

At the end of the day, the muslims fighting with these terrorist tactics want me dead as much as anyone reading this blog (maybe they want me dead a little more, as i'm the traditional enemy) which is poo for both of us. The way to sort these people out is not to appease them (e.g. by giving them land - such as what is happening in the mid east) but to go out, find them, and kill them. Don't like it? Us or them, your choice. After pulling down all the politically correct poop which no doubt one would be spouting out, about this point here, I'm sure you'd prefer it to be them, rather than you. The same choice exists in Israel for the Israelis: us or them? Israeli blood is cheap to the world, it seems, and the choice being made for Israeli's is constantly "you."

Piss off, world, leave us alone.

Seeing the interest that Jewish dietry laws seem to be causing, especially in reference to you Nor, I have dedicated this post, as only a bat in broad daylight could fail to see, to kosher.

For those who have just joined, or those who are interested, you can read what people have been saying about kosher previously, over here. I will post what Nor said anout kosher here, as it is all correct, and as Nor noticed, I didn't say any of it - and in case you're wondering, Nor, I just decided it would be less complicated to not say whatever I didn't sa. However, as you have said it so brilliantly...here it is, your very own words. The red type are my own additions, or comments, whilst the green is the original post.

For those that want to know a bit more on kosher like PNB than what DJ is telling you, Here are the basics (as I know them, so the could be a bit vague, or wrong but I’m sure DJ will correct me if that’s the case) Indeed I will! But there hardly seems to be a need for that!

Certain animals may not be eaten at all. This restriction includes the flesh, organs, eggs and milk of the forbidden animals. Animals that have cloven hooves and chew its cud are what you want. Deer, cow, sheep, goats are all fine. For sea food it needs to have fins and scale to be kosher (there’s a joke about DJ never having crabs there I’m sure of it). For birds no birds of prey or scavengers. Birds of prey, quite accurately stated, are forbidden. I don't know if pidgeons are classified as scavengers, but there are some types of pidgeons which are kosher. The identity of said pidgeons are unknown today, however, so all those city dwellers: I'm afraid Jewish people everywhere will be unable to solve the problem of pest pidgeons, by including it in their cuisine.


Of the animals that may be eaten, the birds and mammals must be killed in accordance with Jewish law. And cant of died from natural causes or been killed by another animal.

All blood must be drained from the meat or broiled out of it before it is eaten. Just as a side note, kosher meat tends to be quite salty. Meat is salted extremely liberally in the blood removing process, and yes, broiled, etc.

Certain parts of permitted animals may not be eaten. Like the sciatic nerve and its adjoining blood vessels and the fat which surrounds the vital organs and the liver. This is quite true. In some places, the rear quatres may not be eaten. The hind happens to be one of the best parts of the animal, for those unfamiliar with the location of the better meats. This ruling is effective only in the UK, and perhaps has since been copied by Europe, and even America, but that is mere speculation on my part. The reason is, we are now unable to remove the sciatic nerve as once we were, the art has been lost in recent times. In other parts of the world, however, the know-how has not been lost, and it is therefore permitted in those places (like Israel, or Brazil). Why not get those who DO know how to train British Jewry up? A question I ask myself, and the answer, quite simply, is *plays music from Fiddler on the Roof* tradition. And respect for the considerably great minded person who forbade it in the first instance. As a general rule, a ruling may not be retracted, unless it is retracted by a group of rabbis greater in knowledge and numbers than those who made the ruling.

Meat, cannot be eaten with dairy. Fish, eggs, fruits, vegetables and grains can be eaten with either meat or dairy. (According to some views, fish may not be eaten with meat). As far as I know, fish may not be eaten with meat according to any views. According to some views, fish may not be eaten together with dairy. I am not amongst those who hold that view, however.

Utensils that have come into contact with meat may not be used with dairy, and vice versa. Utensils that have come into contact with non-kosher food may not be used with kosher food. This applies only where the contact occurred while the food was hot. And may I add, a utensil may be used if it is cold, even if it contravenes the rules stated so ably by Nor. Anything which is cold, is ok. Why? This is because of pores. Yes, pores. A dish may suck up all the grease and oil and such whilst the food is hot (as heat causes the dish to open up it's pores) and is then released when the dish is re-heated, thereby polluting one's cheesy pizza, with one's last-night's heated saussages, thereby contravening the biblical rule not to cook meat and milk together. If the dish is cold, however, or is impervious to heated foods (like glass), then what is in red type here does not apply at all. One may eat today's pizza on yesterday's saussage plate, as long as it's been washed.

Grape products made by non-Jews may not be eaten. Correct. Wine is the mots famous grape product. This rule does not apply if the wine has been boiled, however. Pasturised, basically. Seeing how few wines manufactured by non-Jewish establishments are boiled, a kosher wine industry sprang up, and kosher wines are now earning awards.

Now DJ what I want to know is "winged swarming things" are not on the list so why is honey Kosher???

Ahh. Well, this is a most famous question. The general rule is, anything which comes from a non-kosher animal, is not kosher. Bees are not kosher. Honey comes from bees. Honey is kosher. And Nor asks, "why?"
This is the only case which has this oddity.

If one were to open up the Talmud, they would find (well, if they opened it to the correct page. You have a 1 in 2,700 chance of opening up to the right page without knowing where it is previously) that it states:

"Why did they say that bee-honey is permitted? Because even though they bring it into their bodies, it is not a product of their bodies [it is stored there but not produced there]."

There is a little discussion between those who disagree with the above (one person) who disagrees with the reasoning of the ruling, but also states it is permitted. He claims that Leviticus 11:21 states that one may not eat a flying insect, as you so rightly quoted, but not that which comes out from it. Like honey.

Anyway. Therein lies the answer to your question, Nor: whereas milk is produced in the body of a cow and is therefore permitted, or produced in the body of a pig, and therefore forbidden, honey is not produced by the body of a bee. It goes about from flower to flower, collecting the nectar and pollen, swallows it (as this is the only way to carry large amounts of the stuff), spits it out again, mixes it about with other things (which removes liquid parts, thereby making it thicker) and BAM! You have honey. Which we then eat.
-----------------------------------

So I went to the Imax in London yesterday. 3D, y'know, absolutely brilliant. It also gave me a brilliant idea, which is so brilliant, I shall set off at once seeing if it is plausible.

Whilst I was out and about, I visited Marks and Spencers, Waitrose, and Tescos in the course of the day, to buy foodstuffs, and liquids, and other such pithy things humans rely on so to function. Whilst I was there, I saw the new Harry Potter book. It must be noted that I do like to read the HP books, have read the others, and seeing as no one has yet bought the new book in my family, I decided to take the plunge, and buy it. It so happened that it was there for an extremely good price too: £7.95 - whereas others pay £9.99 and £8.99 and such. The point is, whilst I was there, I was watching the news (they had a TV above the shelf I was looking at) and noticed that some chap from Egypt was speaking. The reporter was asking this religious leader if he condemned the London Bombings. The reporter asked him the question several times in a row, each time he avoided the question. The last time he stated he would not be drawn into such issues. It was obvious he didn't condemn the bombings - the cruel attack of one group of human beings upon another set of unsuspecting, defenceless human beings (quoted from the reporter, not quite verbatim).

The other night, I was talking about the bombings with a friend of mine. He basically said that what one needs on the situation, is perspective. If one is a muslim, and they believe in the Quran, they also believe that the infidel must believe in Allah, and therefore jihad is proclaimed in an attempt to "educate" by force of arms, the world. Accept Allah or die is the general slogan (though for Jewish folk such as myself, they just say "Itbach al Yahud!" - slaughter the Jews). It is true that secularised muslims do not hold of violence and such. But i'm speaking of your average believing muslim, who probably lives in Cairo, or even in London.

So from a muslim's perspective, what is wrong with converting the world to Islam, the true religion, the better cause, the path of hope and light, the true path? Nothing. Nothing at all! It is something to be admired, if the world were to be made a muslim state. So what if a few infidels, or backsliding muslims were killed in the process? They deserve what they got, praise Allah! In the harsh world of sin and retribution, perhaps they even alleviated the infidel's punishment in Allah's hell, by killing them in this world via a bomb.

Perspective, m'dears, perspective.
After the bombings, many muslims were calling London radio to distance their community from the action. A few days later, more muslims were doing the same thing, but also saying "but you must listen to their message. You are not listening to their point" - I shall speak only for myself, but when their message is "convert or die" I don't feel particularly inclined to listen.

POLITICS WILL BE IN RED. Those uninterested, skip to black text. 

And so the state of Israel could be destroyed shortly.

This rather dire prediction comes from me at a time when Iran is succeeding in building a nuclear device, which would effectively put it on a footing with the most powerful nations in the world. For those of you who do not know, Iran is an Islamic fundamentalist state. Israel is a Jewish state. Therefore Israel is enemy number 1 for Iran. Whilst I have slight doubts as to whether or not Iran would use a nuclear device - only slight - I have less doubt that they would give it to the likes of Hamas, or Hizbollah to use (whom they are on friendly terms with. As the saying goes, the enemy of your enemy is your friend). Have doubts? I quote verbatim from some fundamentalist in Iran:

"Islam could survive the retaliation [of a nuclear strike] but Israel would be gone forever." 

But surely they wouldn't kill all those Palestinians, who are muslims themselves? Surely they wouldn't infect Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, and other surrounding nations with nuclear poisons, as would inevitable happen, due to the small size of Israel?

Of course they would.
The Palestinians would be hailed martyrs, the rest of the arab nations surrounding Israel - well, arab nations never got on well with each other, except when they were harrassing Israel - so what does it matter if they get a bi of radioactive clouds in their lands? Would go in 100 years or so anyway.

And that is why I mourn the loss of the state of Israel.
There is one way to save the state, however. Simply, stop Iran making nuclear devices. I believe Israel will take action to do so. It's not really difficult for them to do so, to be honest. The Israeli intelligence agency, though mostly despised, is known to be one of the best in the world - they have to be, in view of general traditional anti-israel sentiment.

Conclusion:
For the safety of not just Israel, but the world (for Iran does want an Islamic world, don't forget, so the west isn't safe either): get rid of their nuclear making equiptment, I say!

I went to a newly opened restaurant today. It was a kosher one too. "Kosher" simply means "permitted" and refers to the foods which are "permitted" to eat, as per the bible.

I was unimpressed. I could have made the food myself and it would have tasted better. I am not here to tell you about the unsatisfactory main-course food, neither the excellent service, and no, not even the brilliant tasting bread and cakes (baked on site). Nor am I here to tell you that the restaurant sent us on the house cakes, due to finding the food yucky (what actually happened was, someone I was with told one of the waiters - who turned out to be the owner - that I didn't like the food. Despite my insistance it was fine (and it was fine. Just not nice lol [I didn't tell them that!]) they sent us the cakes) - no, I'm not here to tell you any of that. Instead, I am here to tell you of my observations of the wider world, where "wider world" is defined as the 20 pavement (sidewalk!) stones I could see from my table, and the people treading upon them.

Before I being, I must tell you about kosher shops, and other shops.
Kosher places generally display that they are kosher, along with a certificate saying that all food therein, has an eye kept upon it whilst it is being prepared/manufatured. It acts as a type of quality control in a way (though that is a by-product, not the main aim). The certificates are either written entirely in Hebrew, or entirely English, with a few Hebrew words dotted about. The latter was the case with this particular place of cuisine.

For the most part, kosher shops and places are not frequented by anyone who is not Jewish. This does not hold true for the bakeries, however, which are frequented by any and many. I believe I gravely underestimated the amount of non-Jewish customers kosher suppliers of food receive, when I was stopped on the street, and was asked "I can't buy anything! Why are all the Kosher shops closed? Is it a Jewish holiday?" (indeed it was. Why he wanted to buy kosher food, I really don't know. Although i'd imagine it's great for people with dietry problems, such as being lactose intolerant - the selection and quality of dairy-free items [such as ice creams] defy belief).

Anyway. This restaurant I went to had their little certificate in the window. It was, however, was [just] outside of the Jewish community, and therefore is catering for a large non-Jewish base. As I surveyed the world (see previous definition of "world") I saw how they were unsure as to what the place was, and puzzled over the English/Hebrew certificate. Some screwed up their noses and went on their way, whilst others walked away not knowing what to think at all. Others still, bravely and cautiously ventured inside. I was sitting there for the entire meal attempting not to laugh my head off.

The service was brilliant. As it was a new restaurant, they were conducting interviews for new staff inside the place itself (it wasn't busy). One lady turned up from America (I don't know why she did that, but she did) and was dressed in extremely revealing clothes. I can't help but laugh inside - no doubt it was done to give her every advantage. And good luck to her!

This brings us to the waitresses - for there were no waiters at all. I could type a long rambling paragraph about the service, before coming to the main point - that they were all pretty. Or, I could just tell you that they were all very pretty now, and be done with it. I don't do things in halves, and why take the easy option when a harder one presents itself? Useless rambling paragraph, here I come!

They -- oh, ok, I can't be bothered, and I have 3 other places to be right now, so, the point is, in case you missed it above: the waitresses were pretty, and kept smiling at me, so I was happy.  I'll probably return there for coffee and cake and such (and, to watch the pretty ladies) but never to eat.

Did I mention there were pretty ladies in there? Heeeehe.

Post Script:  I just got off the phone. I should say PHONES. I had my house line in one hand, and my mobile phone in the other - on which a conference call was taking place (not at my expense!) In short, I was speaking to a few people, ALL AT ONCE. This is insane. But it was cool. It's the most popular i've been in ages (well. Since the last conference call).

It has come to my attention pretty ladies sometimes feature heavily in a single post.
No, I am not a pervert. I just have to work hard to allay fears that I am gay. I am not gay. I AM NOT GAY!

That is all. You may go.

To hear the BBC report on Gaza, click here (by DJ productions :-D)

And so the middle east situation is not really getting any better. After just under 40 years, Israel is pulling out it's civilians from the Gaza area. The move is highly unpopular amongst Israeli's. The reason is because they have lost faith - lost faith in the ability of the PA to stop terror, lost faith in any alleged cease-fire agreement - and therefore, what good will giving land to the Palestinians do? Will it stop the bombs? Whilst the more naive of you say "it's worth a try, perhaps it will" - if one looks back in Israel's short history, when did giving land to the Palestinians stop the terror?

I'll be frank with you all.
Before Israel was under Jewish control, it was an arid desert, with swamps and marshland. It hand a population of about half a million people in total - both Arab and Jewish (Jews have maintained a continued presence in the land for over 3,000 years). A few holocaust survivors came to the land. They were hard men. They had to be. And they knew the difference between success and failure; they understood what a monumental task was at hand: it can be said it is akin to transforming part of the Sahel region (almost hostile desert) into fertile, livable land. And they succeeded. Israel is a wonderful country to go to today - but just 50 years ago, you would be insane to go there. Now, tourism is it's biggest industry.

If I offered you the choice between a maroon rover (whose engine has cloncked out, and the car is currently parked in an awkward position on a road near me [thank goodness. Otherwise i'd have had a long way to walk!] - I hope it's not towed or anything) or a Rolls-Royce, which would you take? There is no doubt that the land of Israel in it's entirety is the Rolls-Royce, and any land the Palestinians would have for themselves would remain forever the Rover, without a doubt (due to corrupt leadership who would not invest in it's people, but rather bombs, to blow up other people).  

The militant (recognised) terror organisations like Hamas and the PA - yes, they are terrorists too, they're just more subtle, and fund everyone else to do the dirty work for them (which is why there are numerous jokes about the PA stopping terrorists about) - realise that any Palestinian land just wouldn't compare to what Israel is. As I have said previously, and no one has challenged me on this point, the Palestinians do not just want a state. They want a state built on top of Israel. This is akin to the IRA wanting a state instead of England.

And now Palestinians are moaning about a Hamas "commander" being shot by who they assume was an Israeli  sniper. Does it come as a wonder that Israel wants to kill those who mastermind terrorist bombs, ambushes, and ultimately, will be the death of the state of Israel if allowed to continue it's natural course? Equally, does it come as a surprise that Hamas wants to kill people in the Israeli army (It is a despicable and cowardly thing to terrorise civilians, who cannot defend themselves. If they want a shoot out, then so be it. But suicide bombers are the lowest of the low. These people do not deserve to have a war fought based on the Geneva convention rules - as the USA and UK is finding now to their discomfort). "One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist" is something often quoted at me. I am therefore highly familiar with this saying. And as I always reply: Guess what? He's my terrorist, and I will stop him.

That's right folks. When I get to Israel, Hamas are out to kill me, they want to see me dead. Therefore, I will take whatever measure necessary to ensure they do not succeed in taking my life, or that of anyone else, as it happens.

I dislike this veil of namby-pamby "political correctness" which is blinding so many to the realities of the world. Be PC, that's admirable - but not when it starts to result in the persecution of the majority by the minority. Let us not pretend that there are no sides to be taken on the middle east conflict - because there are. Let us not pretend that when speaking about the middle east, people (especially the media) are unbiased. They are highly biased. And that's ok - just don't expect me to agree with opposing views.

So yes, there ARE sides to take.

I reject the false notion that the Palestinians are fighting Zionism and not Judaism, just as I reject the view that the Israeli's are fighting for Judaism or any religious matter, but rather for their very existance as Israelis. In short, the Palestinians are fighting for religious reasons, and the Israeli's for their lives. There is no other way to explain it. Which "nation" rejects the offer of another stronger country, to give them 97% of their demands, and make up the other 3% in other concessions (when that 3% was the demand for Israel to give up Jerusalem, their current capitol)? I'll tell you who does that. A "nation" who doesn't want peace, and who doesn't want land, but who simply wants all the Israeli's out, as Judaism just does not fit with their ideology.

 I say the Israeli's aren't fighting for religious reasons. No doubt, some are. But on the whole, they are not. Regretable, perhaps, to the religious. But the sad fact is, the country where Judaism, Christianity and Islam meets (albeit sometimes violently), is one of the only nations in the world not to make mention of God/gods in it's national anthem. Many Zionists are not only non-religious, but anti-religious. It is doubtful, therefore, that the average Israeli (who is most probably secular, and has about the same inkling of what Judaism is, as anyone currently reading this. Although the likes of sara may know a little more) is fighting for anything other than their own country. I am not criticizing this. Indeed, if I join the army, it is not because I dislike Muslims, but because I dislike Palestinians who attempt to kill me, and others. That's putting it mildly. There is no religious motivation in my decision to join the army, thought I am a practising Jew.

I can catagorically say that the problem in the middle east is not the settlements. It is not this piece of land, or that piece. It is not the Golan Heights, or East Jerusalem, or the Temple mount. It is not oil, or land, or water, or geography or metaphysics. The problem of the middle east is in plain sight. You know what the problem is, and so do I. The problem is that the middle east hates the Jews.

Fine. I don't care. Hate me. Afterall, I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not. Fine, Palestinians War with me. Just don't expect to go unscathed yourself.

Call them cookies, biscuits, biskuite, biscotto, galleta...they're known all over the world, and loved by one and all. I doubt, however, that anyone loves them more than this person here. She happens to be a new convert to blogspirit, so do go to her blog!

What better way to welcome her to blogspirit, than a cookie welcome? Exactly. So, there we go. Take a look at my cookie advertising!

Cookies01 - the very first attempt. No music, no theme music, nothing. Not finished, basically. I ditched this in favour of the next one.

Radio - Radio Cookie! Very funny, if I may say so myself.

Disclaimer.

Happy cookie eatings!

And in an attempt to calm myself, I shall type some words. Pull up a chair and listen. I fear it may be wise, and if you think it through properly, you should be suitably depressed. If you feel inspired, you haven't thought of all the implications, and may classify yourself as an optimist. As for me, i'm just a realist.

Life throws a million oppertunities at you. All you have to do, is grab one.

The below is a news article lifted directly from the BBC, and can be found here, if you so have the inclination to read it. It was placed on the web today (Thursday, 14 July, 2005, 23:07).

Soon after the barrage, Palestinian police, reportedly acting on orders to stop further rocket fire, clashed with Hamas members in northern Gaza.

The barrage being terrorists firing rockets from Gaza, into Israel.

Five militants were wounded when police fired at their car, Hamas said.

Surely a good thing? If the London bombers were not suicide bombers and had been caught, wouldn't everyone be extatic? If they were killed during arrest, wouldn't that be some sort of justice? And just why is the press giving publicity to terrorists?

The Palestinian Authority says large numbers of Hamas activists then poured into the area, attacking a security force post and setting fire to two jeeps.

"We will not keep silent," Mushir al-Masri, a Hamas spokesman, told Reuters, calling the police's action "unacceptable".

This is laughable. Nowhere else in the world do terrorists call the actions of police "unacceptable" for merely enforcing the law. I laugh in the face of Israel for tolerating such things. I salute Hamas for their sheer audacity. And lastly, I weep at the world which so lacks justice.

I have decided to create a new Politics section. All posts being about Politics, will have the word "politics" inside the title, and placed in this section of my blog. This way, all those who don't particularly care about politics, won't have to read half the post to find out that half the post they've just read is about a subject they couldn't care less about.

And so, my politically aware, children, without further ado, I present to you the subject of today's political rant. The middle east conflict. Yay! Passions tend to flare at discussions like these, and I generally refuse to engage in political discussion on this subject with people, due to this fact. But, this day, I am making an exception.

This particular post will revolve around something I saw recently (well, today, in fact) in the news. It is the fist fight which erupted between Christian clerics in Jerusalem. The Jerusalem Greek Orthodox patron, Irineos I, has been struck off by the Church as patron. This, apparantly, has no legal effect whatsoever. A patron may only be removed from his post, if Israel, Jordan, and the Palestinian Authority all agree to his removal. "Jordan?" I hear you say, "whatever for? Surely they have no jurisdiction over Jerusalem, much less over Christians within Jerusalem!" But the anomaly is quickly solved when we realise that the cleric shepherds around 100,000 Christians in the city, most of which are Palestinian, and seeing how all Palestinians are from Jordan originally, the PA and Jordan's involvement are quickly understood.

This leads us to several other things. If the Palestinians are from Jordan, why on earth are they getting a seperate state of their own? Indeed, WHERE on earth do they want this state, as if they were from Jordan, then no Palestinian state ever existed in the first place (we must note here that "Palestine" was the name given to Israel under the Roman occupation about 2,000 years ago, in an attempt to make the natives less at home with their land, a useful tactic employed by the Romans to stop cultural differences in a vast empire, for the younger generations. The name was re-used by the British when Turkey was forced to hand Israel over to the British after they lost WW1).

But ok. I can live with a Palestinian state is it will bring peace.
I cannot, however, live IN a Palestinian state, as it will not result in anything like peace.

And this is the aim of the PA, and all their cronies.
No doubt, the vast majority of the world have not read the PA mission statement, which effectively states they wish to create a "Palestinian" state on top of the Israeli one. This effectively means there will never, ever be peace in the middle east between Israel and the Palestinians, unless one (or all) of three things happen:

1) The Israeli state is removed
2) The Palestinian people are absorbed back into Jordan, or intergrated into Israel (the latter of which they rejected back in the '70s - or, more like, told to reject by their alleged leaders. The former was rejected by all Arab states. Apparantly the vast Arab dominions have no room for about a million other Arabs.)
3) The Palestinians are actually educated and governed by a pro-democratic, peace-loving, educated man.

Unfortunately, what with the dissolution of the "occupied areas" we are closer to the first option than the other two.

I do so enjoy the rediculous perspective of people who incredulously reject the idea that the Palestinians would be better of either as Israeli citizens, or re-establishing their Jordanian citizenship, and yet propose that Israelis should find themselves without a homeland, by dissolving the Israeli state. A sad, misguided attempt to bring peace.

Furthermore, I am continually astounded that the people to break the cease-fires are never the Israelis, but invariably the Palestinians. It is always the sound of another suicide bomb which shatters the silence of peace. For years, Israel's representation have been telling the world "terrorism isn't just a phenomina here. It will one day happen world-wide, unless we are successful in stopping it here." Some call it karma. Some call it justice. Some call it "sods law." But guess what? The countries who have continually repremanded Israel for attempting to deal with it's own terrorists have been struck by terrorists themselves. The USA, and now London have had a taste of terrorism recently, and it is now widely agreed that the London bombings were indeed suicide bombings, making it the first of their kind to happen on English soil.

G8. That recent "glorious" meeting between the 8 richest nations in the world, in an attempt to partially solve the problem of poverty in Africa. 3 billion is going to be given to the Palestinians in form of aid. This is simply 3 billion more which is going to be spent on bombs to blow up Israeli civilians. The same holds true for all african nations: the money is being given to corrupt officials, who will use most of the money for their own ends. Whilst it is a noble gesture by the G8, it is also a foolish policy, especially when aid could be given in other forms (such as pens, notebooks, etc. in an attempt to increase education, or bread, well-making tools, and the like, to decrease hunger and water shortages. Actual materials, not money).

But back to the Palestinians. It is my belief that Israel's critics are governed by what is called "the 3D's" which are:

1) Double-standards

 Just why is a suicide bombing called "terrorism" in London and not in Israel? If the world is to learn a lesson, it should be now, and it should be that a) terrorism can happen to you as well, (b) perhaps they should look at places like Israel with a new perspective, rather than what they have been doing up until now.

I was proud, but outraged, to learn that Israel continues to send in ground troops to Palestinian settlements when attempting to oust terrorists. Outraged, because it risks the lives of the men, and proud because it spares the lives of Palestinian civilians, who will have little risk of getting killed, compared to carpet bombing tactics employed by the USA in Afghanistan. It is interesting that people shout "helicopters against guns, guns against stones!" in relation to Israel's conflict with groups like Hamas, but utter a word or two of mild objection to America's indiscriminate killing in Afghanistan. I suppose having the largest economy in the world helps.

Other such examples of double standards exist, they are not hard to see, and the disctinction of double standards was made by a 10 years old Jewish girl, who featured in this blog not long ago, with the verbatim quote, which I have used previously, which I have used here, and which I will continue to use in the future: "Why is it called terrorism in London, and not Israel?" 

2) Distortion

"4 Palestinians were brutally murdered following a suicide attack where 5 Israelis were killed, and several more injured."

Zipping over to the Israeli press, I quickly find that 2 of the "4 Palestinians brutally murdered" were suicide bombers themselves. Yes. Did you know suicide bobmers are included in the Palestinian death count? "Brutally murdered" generally means Israeli security forces were patrolling an area, when some Palestinians jumped out behind bushes and began engaging the forces in gun fights.

"5 Israelis killed" - what mild terming, in relation to the former part of the new report. This number never includes those who die in hospital of course, only those who die outright. "several more injured" can mean anything from "he has a slight cut" to "his head fell off, and his brains are currently oozing out in front of him" and can be any amount of people between 2-10.

This is a pretty basic example of distortion. If the media distorts information, then the people who read the newspapers will have no idea what is actually happening.

A few people will recall the female BBC reported who reported how "I was moved to tears to watch the body of Yassir Arafat (the late Palestinian leader, ironically born in Cairo, Egypt) be taken upon a helicopter....." and who was repremanded for not remaining impartial - that is to say, being blatantly biased in an attempt to affect the way in which the readers perceive the story. In her case, she was being pro-Palestinian in her reporting.

Again, other examples exist, they are not  hard to find.

3) Demonisation 

Perhaps  the greatest tool in the kit of bias, depicting one side as the bad-guys over the other, is a sure way to engage public wrath upon the "bad-guys." This has been done over and over again, in many contexts. Today, we see it happening with radical muslims: they are the bad guys, it is them we must hate, and whatever bad happens to them, they deserve - because they're bad, right? Perspective is skewed, and eventually lost entirely, before being forever more forgotten. Something i'm sure most readers of this blog will appreciate.

 Summary

 Bias reporting creates a hostile public towards a certain entity. In the case of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, that entity is Israel. In relation to other middle eastern and Asian countries (such as Iraq, and Nuclear-Korea) that entity are those same said countries, when put up against the Allied forces, they being predominentaly theUSA and UK.

I read today about "Iraq insurgents" who bombed some people the other day. A few weeks ago, I read about other "Iraq insurgents" who bombed another place, and coming to think of it, every protest staged against the UK and USA is by "Iraqi insurgents" - well just who are the insurgents in Iraq? The Iraqi's who do not wish to be occupied by the West, and our form of government imposed on them, or the Allies themselves? I'm hedging my bets at the moment, for I believe it may have been wrong to enter Iraq in the first place, but now we have, we should support our respective governments and leaders and make sure we do a good job of restoring order there, before hastily pulling out military personnel, and all the while supporting the new state in place.

Of crouse, what's happening now is different. The people do not want a democracy, much less a western imposed one. Why? Perhaps for the same reasons as Weimar Germany didn't last. The people have no respect for a wishy-wahy, namby-pamby democracy, and in short, WANT a dictator. Fine. Give them a dictator then. But make darn sure he isn't evil first (where "evil" is defined as killing their own people in any context, except that which is to maintain order).

Now here is an acid test for hypocracy:

All those that agree with me in the above for the most part, remove "Iraqi" and "USA/UK/West" and replace with "Palestinian" and "Israel" respectively. Still agree? Ha. Thought as much. Darned hypocrites ;-)

Conclusion 

I have never seen a conflict where on the eve of a battle, the vanquished (the Palestinians) demand unconditional surrender, and the victors (Israel) sue for peace.

In short, the Israelis have all the disadvantages of being technologically advanced, and the Palestinians have all the advantages of being the underdog.

I just lost my original post. So. Erm. I can't be bothered to repeat it.

I will therefore keep this one short as possible. Let me just reassure you all, this post here is making fun of all Scottish people.

Ok, I lie.
It doesn't make fun of people like scottishfrog. Or anyone else Scottish. Just one person in particular.  

This person in particular is known as "cat" (I will not publish full names, only partial names) - and lives on top of some hill somewhere in Scotland. This is not a good place to live, as I pointed out to her once. Firstly, when has living on a hill ever been a good thing? Exactly. Open any child's story book, and you quickly find lines like:

"This monster lived on top of a hill....."
"This dragon lived on top of a hill...."
"This witch lived on top of a hill......"
"....and then s/he was banished to live on top of the hill forevermore."

Of course, this is not the only consideration to take into account. There is not much to DO on top of hills.

And my favourite consideration is the greenhouse effect one. As we all know, hot air rises, as does pollution. Though pollution comes from all parts of the earth, there is a gaping great hole at the top of the earth's ozone layer. That's on top of Scotland and such. The fact that this person lives in Scotland, and on top of a hill, therefore, means that her brains will most likely turn into mulch much before I expect mine to (i'm estimating 25 years of age, for myself).

The fact of the matter is, dear children, she lives in Scotland (this should speak for itself. If not, see above) . Not only does she live in Scotland, but SHE CAN'T DRIVE! This is not significant, except for the fact that I CAN drive. Placing this next to the fact she can't....well. I'm sure you get what I'm working towards. Bahahahahaha.

Here are locations of people who are not able to drive whilst they are not. I BEAT YOU ALL! HA!