Surviving … (inspired by Kanye West)

looking ill

Ill. Horrible belly ache and sweating, with sick dreams swirling around …  while I ached all over I ached all the more because of my new incredible physique, there’s so much more to ache, so all this weights stuff has created a rod for my own back … but now my back is so broad and strong to cope with it, so that’s good! 🙂

I’m also all the more handsome for my illness, I must have that terminal Hollywood disease that makes you all the more good looking as you near death, as seen in Love Story and Mr November. And also cos I’ve not eaten, I look pretty ripped!

Being ill gives you sick dreams because of a high temp, which also makes me talk bollocks. Quite witty bollocks, tho. Helped by a bottle of Lucozade and a bag of pretzels thanks to the wife. But not Lucozade with the orange cellophane wrap, so I couldn’t fold it over and over to make ever darker orange filters to look through and compare with my dehydrated ill piss. There’s always a downside …

jobs

Picked up clothes … worked in a chemist’s … sold house portraits … sold ice-cream … made Big Macs … worked in a post room … data input … opened envelopes … taught English … been a language examiner … written articles … written books … proof read … acted … shook charity boxes … sub-edited … sold photographs … drawn maps … booked hotels … led tours of North Korea … processed parking ticket payments … been a driver’s mate … worked nights in a distribution depot … delivered hire cars … presented radio shows … waitered at posh parties …

If only this had been playing as the backing song for the whole show …

Freddy Martin plays Warsaw Concerto https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=26&v=TwpYDAsj6rU

Fishy Fee-fa F*** and the War Criminal

robintudge

Bastards

Blatter gets re-elected then quits, only to then not go until DECEMBER?? To lay down all those precious reforms he so palpably failed to enact in the previous 17 years???

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/33073906

Notwithstanding some vague suspicion he stood for re-election out of vanity and/or to score some better multi-trillion Rouble offshore handshake, WTF that he’s not replaced ’til December? One week for every year served, 12 weeks max, that’s a semi-standard notice period, should be gone in September at the latest.

Just like Tony the war criminal Blair, who stood for re-election in 2005 on the promise he’d leave within a few minutes of victory (??! – stone me, it worked), then he quit in 2006 and spent A YEAR on his swan-song. It was beyond Alan B’stad, or even Alan Partridge, swanning and songing as Bliar ultimately did down in the depths of Norfolk’s finest motels or anywhere else…

View original post 600 more words

Fishy Fee-fa F*** and the War Criminal

Bastards

Blatter gets re-elected then quits, only to then not go until DECEMBER?? To lay down all those precious reforms he so palpably failed to enact in the previous 17 years???

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/33073906

Notwithstanding some vague suspicion he stood for re-election out of vanity and/or to score some better multi-trillion Rouble offshore handshake, WTF that he’s not replaced ’til December? One week for every year served, 12 weeks max, that’s a semi-standard notice period, should be gone in September at the latest.

Just like Tony the war criminal Blair, who stood for re-election in 2005 on the promise he’d leave within a few minutes of victory (??! – stone me, it worked), then he quit in 2006 and spent A YEAR on his swan-song. It was beyond Alan B’stad, or even Alan Partridge, swanning and songing as Bliar ultimately did down in the depths of Norfolk’s finest motels or anywhere else with a carvery and juiced up Nazis to give him a cheer.

I went to one of his farewell speeches, at some trade union hall in London, the exact venue was kept incredibly hush-hush until 24 hours beforehand and we were all suddenly informed (and I told my whole office if they wanted to have a crack at TB he’d be at X a X oclock the next day). I was a member of the Labour party at the time, I joined while it haemorrhaged members because I wanted to see who the crazies were that stayed in, and also the chance to see Blair live, I had this fascination with the ‘touch of the King’, the carry of charisma of one person in the room … how could he, after so much, yet still hold so many in thrall? Was it pheremonal? Did he smell of power? I was also at the time in love with this Spanish girl who worked in Greenwich market and I had the idea if I went to this show and managed to hit him she’d be so impressed she’d dump her fiance and go out with me (it was a fleeting idea, honest Mssrs NSA/MI5 men). Anyway in the event at this top secret venue with thousands of attendees and police choppers overhead and scores of TV crews, I’m there in the audience, and Blair comes in, goons front and behind, and he looks old – he’d only recently been told in as uncertain terms as a maniac like him can finally understand, ‘look, just get out. GET OUT’, and it’d taken its toll on him. I was only four seats from the aisle, not close enough to strike nor smell him, but in any case I confess I was overwhelmed by the sheer intimidation of the enthusiasm of the Nuremburg Rally lot in the hall there to see him, it was like a cult, on the way to Jonestown. I’m sitting next to this Middle Eastern chap and neither of us can bring ourselves to heckle, but we both pointedly stayed in our seats while all the others stood and whooped and wept and wotnot. Then he spoke, or rather HE passed down his message, for about 90 minutes, and as those minutes passed, as he mentioned again and again the peace process he’d set up in Northern Ireland, again, and again, and again, peace, peace, peace, and rippling murmurs of approval ebbed and flowed across the hall, he was indeed a man of peace. The Peacemaker.

A peaceful man, who didn’t go looking for trouble.

Mmm, mmmmm, yes, mmmm, murmured the minions.

A decade of peace.

This man whose wars had killed more foreigners than any other PM since WWII, when Churchill was fighting the Nazis, mind, was a man of peace.

And not one mention of Iraq. Not one. From him, or any of the pre-loaded questioners in the audience. Nope. Not one mention. When I realised that, that was chilling.

And when it was all over and I began to feel I was truly in a room of lunatics, wide-eyed believers and arch self-serving cynics, as I desperately sought the exit and barrelled outside into the sunshine (almost tripping over Hazel Blears), and around the numerous barricades of TV crews with pundits pontificating to camera, from not one person, journalists included, did I hear ‘Iraq’.

Not.

One.

I disappeared … ended up in a pub off Leicester Square, down a side street, empty save me and the dust dancing in the spotlights of sunshine beaming through the windows. Me in a darkened corner with a pint of Guinness, wondering, ‘what the fuck was that?’

Negotiating with a tarantula

The number of deaths of Palestinian children from the war on Gaza in summer 2014 was somewhere between 495 and 578, not civilians of dubious origin, but children, with the OCHA going for 551. Five hundred and fifty-one. Why can’t we count all of the dead children? Maybe because they’re children and are more easily evaporated by heavy ordnance, but that’s just one theory. But … we just don’t seem to hear about this, indeed, we don’t even think about this. If you read, say, the threads on The Economist’s FB page, this wholesale slaughter just doesn’t come up. There’s all mention of Israel as a beacon of democracy in the Middle East, or the intricacies of how Netanyahu must negotiate hardliners and moderates in the Knesset, all this armchair, arm’s length wankery. Just a few days ago The Economist (respected, intellectual international journal, wrote up about the feted Israeli press coming under some sinister attention from Netty … but in the article, pasted in full under the Wiki box, doesn’t mention the wholesale slaughter of children from just last year. No mention. I can see from an editorial perspective maybe the mass murder of children isn’t actually relevant to an article about Netty having Orwellian designs on Israel’s free press. But my point is, such a concern surely is already moot, because the threat’s already materialised in this truly frightening ability for all these commentators and observers to just self-censor, to not mention it, it’s simply not part of their analyses or thinking. I get the impression that it’s beyond inconceivable, for them, the matter of associating Netty with mass infanticide simply just does not exist as a concept. It’s like trying to have a discussion about morals and ethics with a tarantula, it simply stares at you, not because it doesn’t understand what you’re saying or it lacks the capacity to understand as such, it just doesn’t engage with such values at all. It’s all just noise.

Untitled

From The Economist, May 30 2015:

Binyamin Netanyahu is taking an unhealthy interest in media regulation

JERUSALEM | From the print edition

ONE of Israel’s proudest claims—and one that has helped shore up support in Western capitals—is that it is a beacon of democratic politics in a region with precious little of the stuff. Although its democracy is not flawless, Israel has a fiercely free and irreverent press. The media have brought down ministers and generals, including forcing the resignation of Yitzhak Rabin as prime minister in 1977, when Haaretz revealed that his wife had an illegal bank account. Yet this proud tradition of holding leaders to account is under threat. Even as Binyamin Netanyahu worked against the clock to assemble a governing coalition in May, he ensured that the leaders of parties who joined it committed themselves to supporting unspecified “sweeping reforms” in the media sector that would be brought in by the communications minister. This clause in the coalition agreement was made non-negotiable. Not made clear at the time, however, was that Mr Netanyahu had no plans to appoint a communication minister—since he has kept the portfolio for himself. In this section Neither a sprint nor a marathon Problems at the pump Dark days ahead The fortunes of war A country apart Cross channels Reprints Related topics Consumer Cyclicals Media industry Consumer products Arts, entertainment and media Media The implications of this are now becoming clear. Relations within Mr Netanyahu’s previous cabinet were poisoned by a proposed law that might have reduced the circulation of Yisrael Hayom, a daily freesheet owned by Sheldon Adelson, an American casino mogul. It slavishly supports the prime minister and his policies and was seen as so partisan and influential that some Knesset members want to force it to charge a minimal price. Mr Netanyahu has since ensured that members of his new coalition are barred from voting in favour of such a law. But the new communications minister has even grander designs. Channel 10, an independent and financially strapped broadcaster which screened critical documentaries on Mr Netanyahu’s financial affairs, said that he had hiked its licensing fee to about $4.3m, four times the sum recommended by his bureaucrats and maybe enough to force it off the air. Two prospective investors whose support was crucial to saving the channel from bankruptcy have bowed out, citing “changes in the regulatory climate.” Further steps are now being mooted. These include cancelling the state-owned Israel Broadcasting Authority’s right to charge a fee from the viewing public, forcing another struggling terrestrial channel to break up into two and allowing cable and satellite channels to broadcast news. Mr Netanyahu believes that the local press is dominated by the left and out to get him. In private he has expressed his desire to “even the picture.” He is not totally wrong. Most Israeli journalists are of a more liberal bent than the Likud government, and the largest media group, Yediot Ahronot, has relentlessly criticised the prime minister. The opposition leader, Yitzhak Herzog, last week accused Mr Netanyahu of “learning the tricks of [Turkey’s president] Erdogan.” This is an unfair comparison: unlike Turkey, Israel hasn’t imprisoned dozens of journalists. A more useful comparison might be to Italy under Silvio Berlusconi. Mr Netanyahu does not have il cavaliere’s deep pockets, but some of his patrons do. The prime minister’s office insists that his sole motive is to open the media industry to competition. Yet small independent media companies tread a precarious path and criticise the prime minister, who is also their chief regulator, at their peril.