CrazyBlue's View Of Life...

Iran

2009-07-05T17:30:00.001+01:00

Last night I watched a very interesting series on BBC Four called Iran and the West, this was all about Iran from the lead up to the revolution to just after Obama’s inauguration. I was fascinated by it as for me it put the whole situation around Iran into greater context, especially considering the recent events in the country.

In this entry I am going to talk about some of the key events in Iran’s history and express my personal opinion upon the matter.

First I need to talk abut the Shah, now this was essentially the King of Iran up until around 1979. Now whilst I am a supporter of any monarchy style government (primarily the Britain early to mid 20th century) the Shah was abusing his power, democracy was severely undermined meaning the people were not free despite the rise of western and American culture seeping into the country, enraging religious leaders. These instances were mostly responsible for the uprisings that followed, although we have to also consider the expulsion of Ruhollah Khomeini who was the prominent critic of the Shah and called for change. During the majority of the uprisings against the military Khomeini remained in France, much to the anger of the French President. Facing pressure and stress the Shah left Iran for a holiday, although never to return. Khomeini used this to return and with the support of the people assumed command of Iran and lead to the creation of the Islamic Republic of Iran. But it was the events that followed that resulted in the formation of the Ayatollah. In November of 1979 students seized the US embassy and took hostage of all those inside. This caused disagreement in the cabinet and lead to the resignation of the moderates, leaving the hardliners full control and with this Khomeini could now assume the role of the supreme leader of Iran, the Ayatollah.

However by standing by and not helping the Americans in gaining the release of the hostages Iran felt some of the force of the US and had strict sanctions imposed, the reality of this meant that it was near impossible for Iran to purchase military supplies. This would be detrimental in the coming months. Although eventually the American hostages were released 13 months after they were first captured, but not until Carter was replaced by Reagan as President for less than 5 minutes!

On 22 September 1980 Saddam Hussein ordered the Iraqi army to invade Iraq! And guess whose help he got (although indirectly) America and the UK! Oh how times change! The war between Iran and Iraq went on for 8 years with over 1 million people being killed! During this time the UN did arrange a cease fire with the support of Iraq, however it did not explicitly call for the withdrawal of Iraqi soldiers. But even though Iran was suffering heavy losses the Ayatollah declined the peace offer which meant the war continued… Eventually President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani was able to convince the Ayatollah to admit defeat.

In 1997 the moderate reformist Mohammad Khatami became the new Iranian President. This was great news as for one he was not the choice of the Ayatollah and was also the main choice of the educated of Tehran. More importantly though was that he wanted to open up relations with America and the West. This was the most significant positive development to occur in Iran since before the revolution. However, the President only has so much power, as the Ayatollah is after all the supreme leader, then there is the cabinet and the various other divisions of power. Khatami allowed more freedom in Iran as well as opening it to the world, in an interview with CNN he made a statement saying that whilst he could not officially promise co-operation directly with the American government (as he knew that if doing so he would find himself out of power very quickly) but by the exchange of culture, business and tourism. Now as there are many restraints due to the overly powerful Ayatollah this was an extremely positive step forward. the first example of this was an Iran v US match of wrestling, despite Iran winning the outcome worked well for both countries and America for once looking good in the eyes of many Iranians. On top of this Khatami had a sense of humour, which helped him seem more amenable to others, such as the Americans. For example during one discussion between him and the Americans the issue that on Iranian missiles the phrase “death to America” was printed upon them, his response was “at least they no longer say death to Khatami”. To me this is a genius move, as it outlines the trouble he faces within his own country from the other divisions of power as well as staying on good terms with America.

However the 21st century changed things. First was the appointment of the then new President George W Bush. What was shocking for me to discover was that during the early days of the Afghanistan conflict Iran was actually giving America intelligence on Afghanistan! Of which was actually useful and helped lead to the installation of a new government (although the success of this as we all know has not been good). But then 9/11 happened, this was when suddenly W Bush became a war time President and his whole attitude and actions changed. This as we all know lead to the invasion of Iraq. Why Iraq? We all know the “facts” but none the less the coalition went ahead, but did you know that Iran was willing to help! Considering Iraq caused considerable damage to Iran in the 80’s they wanted to get revenge, but America turned them down, not due to the fact that revenge acts can be detrimental, just simply because they felt they didn’t need Iran, even though they were calling for all countries to help? Then Bush made his classic Axis of Evil speech, which included Iran. Now for years this required no second thought, but considering when Bush came into power Iran currently had its most moderate President it had had since the revolution. So why include Iran in the list?

This was only the beginning though as now Iran wanted to produce nuclear power, but the west feared that this was just a cover so that they could create nuclear weapons. As a result the world put its foot down and did all it could to prevent Iran from producing nuclear power. This defiance lead to the election of the hard liner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Ahmadinejad continually expressed his discontent of America and Western ideals as well as flaunting their increasing armoury, oh and not forgetting that he denies the holocaust and wants to bomb Israel into the ground! So whilst this crazy lunatic is in power there is no co-operating with Iran!

But of course there was the hope that he would be replaced during the election 3 weeks ago in which many hoped Hossein Mousavi would be victorious. Hossein Mousavi the moderate who wants to open up negotiations with the West as well as being supported by the educated middle class (feels like I’m repeating myself…), but apparently he did not win, well that’s what the official sources are still standing by, and as you all know lead to the protests that are still going on. These protests though are different to any other previously, this is because the internet has been a big part, especially social networking sites although mostly Twitter. So important has the use of Twitter been in the protests that they actually delayed the scheduled maintenance so as to help the protestors! Now that’s commitment. On top of that thousands of Twitter users around the world (including myself) have changed their Twitter icon green in support of the protestors. Usually I would tell protestors to go home and get on with day to day life, but the situation in Iran is very different. This is because the Ayatollah has too much power as well as the fact he is a religious leader! Religion and politics should not meet, it never works, if a country like Turkey can realise this, why not Iran? On top of this under Ahmadinejad personal freedom has diminished, stricter rules have been put in place with co inside with religious beliefs. So the hope was to remove Ahmadinejad and allow more freedom to the people so that they can prosper in a free society not bound by religious beliefs! That is not to say that they should all give up their beliefs, even the Iranian people do not want this, but the difference is how strict people can follow their religion, if woman do not want to cover themselves up, then why can’t they? Or if someone dislikes what the government is doing, then why can’t they Tweet about it? Now to close with a popular statment from the Bush administraion " The options are always on the table!"

Freedom

2009-04-13T21:10:00.002+01:00

First things first, again it has been too long since my last post. The usual reasons apply; coursework, college, other blogs, social and video games. Oh yeah as well as that week in New York. Which was awesome by the way. Now the post…

Whilst I was doing some Politics revision on my eee pc (the best Netbook there is in my opinion) I suddenly basked in the freedom that it gave me. The ability for one to do my work anywhere in the house, then I remembered all the Photography work I have done on the train. It’s not that I have suffered memory loss, but it is the concept that suddenly became all so apparent. This lead me to thinking of something I could right about here for this very blog.

Freedom, something that here in the West we consider we have, whereas elsewhere it is thought of as not being the case. But what is freedom? Whilst I was on a tour in the United Nations in New York (although technically it is international territory) the Chinese person giving the tour kept on pointing out how important self-determination is. This person knowing we were British liked to point out how we were behind all of this. Does self-determination necessarily mean freedom though? One of the main countries that many people feel should govern itself is Tibet. People often complain that the Tibetan people do not have enough freedom. What people forget is that the ruling country China does not give freedom to its main inhabitants. After all China is still communist. Surely China aren’t going to give Tibet more freedom than it will give its own people. So what people really need to campaign for is more freedom for Chinese citizens, then more freedom can flow down to Tibet. Then again the likely hood of either happening is quite slim.

Then again people complain about the lack of freedom in countries like China, but what about here in the UK? We currently have one of the most paranoid governments since WW2, at least back then they actually had a reason to be suspicious. Yes there is the “constant threat of terrorism” but there are boundaries. And Jacqui Smith just loves to cross them. She is the one who wants to watch every single British resident. That means monitoring our every movements, reading ever text, email, Instant Message and listening to every phone call that we make. Our internet privacy is more under threat from our own government than cyber criminals. I thought we lived in a free democracy, some left wing Authoritarian state.

I know the classic argument that if you know you’re not doing anything wrong then you should have nothing to worry about. I can’t really agree with that, as it conflicts with my love for freedom of speech. What if I want to make a joke heavily condemning the government? And then linking them to terrorists? Like I am doing now…

Conformity/Trends

2009-01-05T20:00:00.001Z

First I would like to start by apologising for not writing an entry for quite some time. This is mostly due to not having the time, and when I did I had nothing to write about... (Yes that is quite a lame excuse) Oh yes, and my other blog as well Thoughts of a British Gamer.

Anyway time the blog. And for this entry it is about something which has been annoying me for quite some time, but also recently doing analysis somewhat for my Communication and Culture coursework. And as the title suggests is about Conformity. But I will be going about it slightly differently. Now conformity in recent times when coming from my generation is often about the stereotypes that are chavs, emos, goths etc. But for this specific time I am using it to apply to the "normal person" the kind of person that wears jeans and a t-shirt kind and for the other sex, um well the non whorish kind... Anyway I have found there is a recent phenomenon (well down here at least), which is the sudden mass uptake of wearing Superdry clothes. Now originally they were being sold in one of the shops in Plymouth, which meant that the people who wore it was more diverse and spread out due to the catchment area that Plymouth is to shoppers. But I was unaware this "brand" existed until I noticed that a quarter of my Economics class were all wearing similar Superdry jackets. But I dismissed this as they are mostly stereotypical jocks that do law/business. But then I noticed so many more people around college wearing similar Superdry jackets, the reason why I am saying similar so much is because they are all practically the same!! I mean does this company not know how to make different styles? Now, the reason why Superdry has exploded at my college, because they opened a whole Superdry store in Truro! Right in the very centre of the city. Now to me this is very reminisant of a recent South Park episode in which everyone becomes "vamp" which is essentially emo. And why, because a Hot Topic opened up, so they all conformed and dressed the same just because it was cool and "in". And I expect everyone got Superdry because they thought it was cool and expresses who they are. No! Just no, you are all wearing it because you know someone else who has, and you just want to be like them and fit in. Well you can all go ahead and look the same and be lame. Whilst the rest of us will wear clothes. Yes clothes that yes another person somewhere in the college probably owns, but that is one or two out of 4000, so it doesn't matter, and we can live our lives ij the comfort that we are an individual!

Right, that's enough about stupid Superdry, now onto those bloody Palestinian/Hamas style scarves. Now this is not a rant about the Palestinians or Hamas, and due to the current situation with Israel practically invading, I don't feel it is appropriate either. Then again I did go against Tibet, but oh well.
But it is the English people who wear these scarves that annoy me. Why? Because the scarves have a symbolic message associated to them. Which is the fact that they are pro Islam, Palestine, Gaza, Hamas and anti Jewish and Israeli. And I really doubt that any of the English people who wear them are supporting this idea, or even have any idea what they are actually saying by wearing a scarf which in this country has absolutely no benefits attached to wearing it! Oh sure "it's cool and stylish", well so is a normal scarf!

Now after essentially having finished this entry it has become apparent that this is more about stupid trends than simple conformity, hence the dual title. Now do i think all trends are bad? No, as after all the 90's were full of them, and i am proud to say I followed most of them, such as Pokemon (which is still awesome), Yo-Yo's pogs etc. Yes there is hypocrisy in what I am saying, but isn't there always. But it is the context that is always different.

So remember, if you are feeling the cold this winter, and need to buy some new clothes to keep you warm here's some advice, stay away from Superdry and Palestinian scarves!

US Elections 2008 (The Results)

2008-11-05T17:50:00.002Z

Here I am as promised, 5th November (although coursework almost prevented this). The majority of the results have been released and Barrack Obama has won! There was a sigh of relief around the world after hearing this superb news. There are only a few nations in the world which aren’t exactly happy about this result, Israel to a degree, Georgia as they got on well with the Republican and feel they are more likely to defend them and the Philippines who are being helped by US forces to combat Islamic rebels. But apart from that the world got the US President it wanted. What more can I say? If the lection didn't go Obama's way global opinion of America would have plummeted to an all time low, and minority citizens will be outraged feeling that their one hope had been taken way from them.

But thankfully none of this has happened. So what does this mean? Well it does prove that anyone can be President of the United States of America (as long as you were born in the country, fair enough). And it also vindicates the battle black Americans have been fighting for over many, many years. In terms of policy, well we all know there will be no social conservatism. Good, as this was a plague upon America, I saw too many clips on TV of McCain supporters calling Obama a baby killer just because he wasn't pro life... But on the other hand he is not a socialist! I repeat he is NOT a socialist. Yes I will admit he will probably be the most "left wing" President America has had for a long time. But simply all that means is he will either be of the Centre or just right of centre. And in the global economic times, I see no problem at all with this, and so it seems America as well.

I managed to watch Obama's victory speech on the BBC and it was an inspiring speech. It was whilst watching this that it finally sunk in that Barrack Obama was President of the USA. He wasn't promising teh world, but what he did promise was change. Yes We Can!

Lets just hope he isn't assassinated...

Over Reaction Much...

2008-10-31T21:40:00.000Z

Now I was going to write about the current economic climate, what has been taking place, how Iceland is sinking (economically that is) and how apparently if you support partial state ownership then you are either a socialist or a borderline communist...

But alas I like I expect many others are sick of hearing about the recession, wait, can I call it that yet? Well I'll just call it the "Credit Crunch". It's just got a bit crunchier is all... See it is things like that which aren’t helping my view towards the situation. Besides I talk about it enough during college anyway.

So you might be asking yourself, "If he isn't going to talk about the credit crunch, what is he going to talk about?" Well to answer that hypothetical question, I am going to talk about the current situation involving the BBC and its "Presenters" Russell Brand and Jonathon Ross (just like any other British news platform).

But I won’t necessarily be attacking the presenters, no they have been mentioned enough, and their actions have not surprised me at all. No it is in fact how the media has delt with it. For almost the whole week now it has been non stop talk about said "crisis for the BBC"... And I for one and sick of it. Yes I realise the hypocrisy of also talking about it, but I want to point out what only a few others are.

Now as you might know the whole situation is about how the two presenters on the radio show left a unpleasant message on former Faulty Towers actor Andrew Sachs answer phone. Now this message was left after the presenters tried to speak to him as part of the show. But having been answered by the machine and not the actor himself, they were a bit annoyed by this, and so thought it would be funny to leave a message, of which referring to his granddaughter. Now most people are thinking, "oh no, poor him and his lovely little granddaughter". Well I'm going to have to stop you there. His "little granddaughter" is not "lovely" in the slightest. In fact she is part of "Satanic Sluts"... And after seeing a picture of her on 8 out of 10 cats, I can only see why. And that leads me to what Russell Brand said, about how for the sake of the message had sexual relations (to put it politely) with Sachs granddaughter. Well looking at the facts, I would not have been surprised if it was true. We all know that Brand is that way inclined, and the granddaughter obviously is. However though, I would like to point out that I am actually a supporter of Russell Brand, as despite what he says and may have done in the past, he is actually a nice person. A while back on GMTV (sigh...) they decided to do a test to see how kind the British public are. So they had a woman pretend to fall over and drop her shopping. No one came to help. Now I have no idea where this was (and no I’m not going to speculate). But guess who in the end did come to her aid, yes, Russell Brand! Click Here to see the video of this noble act.

Now to Jonathon Ross.
This time I can't think of anything nice to say. He is an arrogant self loving fool. His tv shows are dull and self opinionated. But did deserve to be suspended?
And it is now that i move to my main point of this entry. Yes boundaries were crossed, even I think so. But did the BBC go about fixing it correctly. No. What I have always respected the BBC for is the fact that you will find the most uncensored, out there and over the top comedy. And elsewhere this is particularly rare on British TV. It should be up to the presenters/actors/comics and producers of individual shows to decide what is too much, not the people at top. If you leave it to them they will censor to prevent getting negative press. Now whilst doing so may prevent events like this one occurring, is it worth it. If the BBC did so, great comedies like "Mock the Week", "Have I Got News For You" and "Never Mind The Buzzcocks" will be ruined. And the integrity of British comedy and free speech will be ruined! And it is this that I most fear will result if the BBC are put under too much pressure.

What is really annoying me is how the situation spiralled out. Initially there were only a couple of complaints from the people who listened to the show. Ok, fair enough. But then one newspaper picks up on the scenario, oh who was it, oh yes the all knowing and righteous Daily Mail... And of course after hearing that such a travesty has occurred more and more people complain, despite not listening to the show, and are only doing so because their beloved Daily Mail tells them to. Yes again you can point out my hypocrisy that they are using their free speech. But I don’t care, there is using free speech to prove a point and there is free speech for the sake of it. Just like uneducated racism, oh just like the Daily mail support. But after the Daily Mails "findings" suddenly all other news institutions learn of it and start reporting it. Now everyone knows and more people complain. And so the BBC had no choice but to take more destructive measures, which include firings, resignations and suspensions. Sure, that’s going to fix the non-existent problem isn't it... The Presenters apologised and do honestly regret what they did. What more do you want? Their blood?

But it is not just the action that has taken place. But the sheer amount of coverage it is getting. It has even infected my blog! Why is a story about two presenters going a bit too far with a joke suddenly front page national news. More so even than the bland credit crunch. When you have the PM taking about it over the economy you know there is BS in the air. And so i will know agree with the good old (The) Times newspaper and professors from the University of Westminster. As for the last two days they have been pointing how it is both over the top and the threat to freedom of speech within the BBC that it could bring.

And so I finish like usual with today’s cartoon by Peter Brookes from The Times. As it always clarifies what I am trying to say.

Next week I will be talking about the results of the US election, hopefully I will find some free time on the 5th.

US Elections 2008 (So Far...)

2008-09-05T19:45:00.007+01:00

So both the Democrat and Republican conventions are over. So just the election left to go. On November 4th history will be made (and no I'm not talking about the fact that Fall Out Boy release their 4th studio album, despite the supposedly political links in the album). But will it be the history we all want. Of course what ever happens no one will be happy, as you will be either for or against the winner. However the impact will vary greatly between the candidates. Now if Barrack Obama wins then that shows to the world that America is ready for change, that it can accept a black man as President. Now this would gain America so much global approval. After all just look at how his appearance went down in Germany. The years of hate towards America would start to fade away. Now of course there are the critics who say he is too young. But he is only in his forties! Since when was that young? Although I'm not saying he is old either. But in their opinion it means he is inexperienced. But he is very well educated, and after all here in Britain Tony Blair was in his thirties when he was elected (although he did create an awful mess but that had nothing to do with his age.)

However we have option 2, and which is unfortunately becoming more likely as time goes on... And that is John McCain winning, good old homeboy McCain sitting there with a good slice of home apple pie (God I hate the American stereotype...) Now McCain, Republican white male. Have we not had that before? Oh yeah Bush, who McCain lost to 8 years ago! Now why is this such a problem is he wins? Well if it was any other election, probably not too much apart from America being right wing bible bashing idiots that the world has come to expect, but now that impression will be worst than ever. People will just simply assume that all Americans are racist and so voted white. Now I don't think the Americans are quite that shallow anymore. As to be fair he does represent a large number of the American people. And of course he is a war "hero", as he was captured in Vietnam and spent years in a jail. Now whilst that is a terrible thing to have endured, that does not make you a hero! I'm sorry but sitting on your arse for years doing nothing is not hero material! And another thing, just because you are a war "hero" doesn't automatically make you grade A material for President.

With that out of the way I can focus on why Barrack Obama is much better suited to be president than McCain, and not simply because he's the "cool black guy"...
Now you're probably getting the feeling that I support Obama and not McCain, and by that observation you are correct (have a cookie). Now of course being British means that my opinion is not as important than the average Americans, however I can make a more informed decision. Now first off my political ideology is British Conservatism, and by that I mean essentially Thatcher’s politics, such as free markets, little government involvement (despite everything being controlled from the top, eg Westminster). So you might think it's odd that I support the member from the "liberal" Democrat party. And to that I say this; first the whole liberal thing is created by the right wing republic loving media like Fox News (See my previous blog entry). Also that you have to remember that the left doesn't really exist in America as both parties are actually of the right. It's just that the republicans are more right than the democrats. Another thing is that the Republican party is blinded by religion. So many of their views are based on the bible and are also backwards such as their "pro-life" stance and their obsession with guns and oil!

Now onto the individuals. As I mentioned critics say Obama is too young, however what about McCain? He looks like he is about to "hit the bucket" any day now! Besides being old does not always mean experience, for one he was locked up for a number of years doing nothing. And the other is that with age people can often become more disconnected with society. Now by that I don't mean he should be "down with the kids" but just in terms of technology I doubt he knows what goes on with it. Besides with Obam even if he does have problems, at the end of the day he has advisors to advise him, that is their job and he is allowed to use that tool. Another thing is he is well educated, he has a degree. Whereas McCain did not, in fact he struggled at school. On that basis Obam already looks better. Another reason, which is slightly closer to home is the fact that he seems to be going for the middle class voters (low, middle and high) which to me shows that he is going for the knowledgeable voters. But as a result it also makes him a role model to black Americans. After all he has made himself successful without being overly wealthy, just with hard work. This is something hopefully people can aspire to and help bring real change to America.

Now of course a while ago we had the whole Clinton versus Obama, female vs black effectively. But thankfully that ended relatively well without destroying the democrat party. But now another female enters the fray, and that is Sarah Palin...
Now what can I say about Palin apart from she is the stereotypical republican. And by that I mean a gun loving nut who enjoys killing the local wildlife and smiling as the price of oil rises and sees the money poor in from her husband who just happens to work for an oil company. Oh what a surprise I thought when I heard all of this. As soon as I initially heard she was from Alaska it wasn't hard to guess what she would be like, and my assumption was spot on! Now I had to suffer through watching her acceptance speech at the Republican convention for being the new VP candidate. Which I have to say was cringe-worthy. Especially her terrible joke "You know the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull? Lipstick"... Oh dear god! Now it is very hard for me to not describe Sarah Palin without using vulgar language or just general derogatory comments. Now this has nothing to do with the fact that she is female, it is just her attitude and arrogance! But as I feel I keep this blog fairly clean to give it a better educated feel. However other people thankfully by-pass that and say what is really on their mind. Such as God of War Designer David Jaffe who simply said she was a milf (no I am not explaining it, although the rest of the internet should help) anyway here is the link for reading...

But hey I guess if you like her and not McCain you can always vote for him anyway and hope he dies soon... Or that she uses one of her many guns on him...

Right I think that is enough about Sarah Palin... But what I find interesting about the election is the how support for the two parties varies between the media. The news networks seem to support republican, the newspapers are split, but it is the music industry that is very pro democrat. Such as Fall Out Boy (yet it doesn't feel right mentioning the two together...) as I mentioned earlier are releasing their new album on election day. And this is not just some coincidence. This is planned. Heck they even released a mix tape (well download mix album type) which showed their love (as well as that of other bands on their label) of Barrack Obama, heck even one of the songs is called "We Believe in Barrack Obama". Although they did advertise their new album a lot at the same time...

But at the same time Microsoft has joined the "Rock the Vote" campaign and so now you can register to vote via their Xbox Live Service. And you even have online machinima shows like Red Vs Blue urging people to use this opportunity to vote and using a parody of what can happen even when you don't vote on simple things. I think people have woken up to the fact that every vote counts, and this election it will be very close. So we will have to wait and hope for the best outcome.

Censorship

2008-08-12T18:00:00.007+01:00

This is something which has really been getting on my nerves recently. Now many (usually government officials or organisations linked with it) say that censorship is for our own good, to save us from ourselves. As they have been ellected to deal with our welfare. But I think this completely contradicts the idea of freedom. Isn't the idea of living in a free democracy to do what we please without being told what we can and can't do. And censorship is the complete contradiction to this. Now of course there are some exceptions to this, mainly said laws of not killing others, not committing theft, violence etc etc... Now those are all well and good, and when mixed with free markets and general rights is essentially traditional British Conservatism. However we are not governed by a conservative party (this doesn't necessarily mean the Conservative Party, although I really don't know what the other choice would be), instead we are governed by (despite the non-existent mandate)a social democracy/democratic socialism party (Labour or New Labour as they like to be known when under Blair). Now the key word is Socialism. Socialists don't believe in the idea of "the people know best". No they infact believe by interfering with our daily lives that they can improve the lives of everyone. And this is exactly the problem. Now the main form of censorship in 21st century Britain is that of the media (films and games), and this is by BBFC (British Board of Film Classification).

Now the BBFC is is technically independent, but is highly influenced by political agendas. Now this obviously goes against the idea of being independent. However when it comes to films (which is their main job) censorship in recent years has not been too bad. However when it comes to video games they love throwing around some of their weight. But the stupid thing about this is that it was created to rate movies! Yes times have changed and along with it a new media, but there is a perfectly good self regulating industry backed organisation that deals with all video games in the Europe region known as Pegi (Pan European Game Information). Now this is how things should be assessed, by experts that have little to no interest of political agendas. However the BBFC does not. Now the main one was Manhunt 2. Now many people did not care too much for this game (myself included). However the simple fact that it was banned by an organisation that shouldn't even be involved in the process. Now this is all down to pressure by the government because it worries that it will lead to increased violence in children. But excuse me, this game is meant to be for people over the age of 18, so surely this should not be taken into consideration. Why should they be able to ban something because it is for our own good. Surely it should be up to us what we buy, and more importantly decide whether something is good or bad for us. Instead of banning it they could have just focused on advising parents more about the ratings system, which is fairly self explanatory. I think you would have to be retarded not to understand what they mean!

But enough with the problems in the UK. Lets move to the problems with Europe, more specifically Germany. We all know Germany, that big country in the middle of Europe, had a bit of a thing for engaging in wars and taking over its neighbours. But that was all a long time ago, and we're all friends now. But here's the thing, Germany are a bit confused what year they are in when it comes to games ratings. On the one side they want to censor the hell out of anything with either violence (because otherwise it could lead to another Hitler?) and anything with references to the Nazi party (again because it could lead to another Hitler?). Now I can understand why they wouldn't want another Hitler, I think most of the world would agree. So obviously Germany doesn't want to get a bad reputation again, which is fair enough. But here is the irony. In trying not be like the Nazi party they are acting like the very party they don't want to be! This is because they are censoring the media, remind you of anything? Oh yeah, Hitler and the Nazi party.

But now to those yanks across the pond. They have really been pissing me off recently. Game scandal after game scandal. First it was Jack Thompson to the rescue warning us all of the "murder” simulator" GTA (Grand Theft Auto). Now again like Manhunt (which is made by the same company...) is meant for adults, and so shouldn't be in the hands of minors anyway! And so he has dedicated his life to trying to get the game banned. But what we have to remember is, he is a crazy bible basher! Before you all start hating me and call me a hater of Christianity, you're wrong. I do not hate Christianity despite being an atheist. What I hate is when people are blinded by religion and become so ignorant of anything they may as well be dead! And this leads me to Fox News...

Now many when thinking of the Fox network think they are fairly liberal, with shows like American Dad which pokes fun at the Republicans and conservatives (American Conservatives, there is a difference e.g. religion...). Now whilst you are fairly correct, Fox News on the other hand is as bible bashing conservative as you can get! Heck they make the Daily Mail look tame in the ignorance. This is the News channel that joked about Barrack Obama being assassinated! So you get an idea of what we're dealing with here. But what has annoyed me most about them is there ignorance towards games and ignoring respected knowledgeable individuals. Now a while ago a game called Mass Effect was released which is a sci-fi 3rd person RPG/shooter game. A fairly harmless game and was rated mature (I know that doesn't sound too harmless, but then again the BBFC rated it 12, yes it goes against what I said earlier but it's different...). But a few weeks later Fox News learnt of a new game that contained Hardcore Pornography that can warp the minds of the precious American youth. And they were talking about Mass Effect... Now the game does contain a "sex" scene, however this scene is no worse than what you would see in any James Bond film, plus not everyone who plays the game will see this scene. However despite this Fox News saw this as gold material and plastered this headline everywhere! So when they discussed the game for the first time they all hammered the game for its sexual content. But here's the catch, not one of them had ever played the game! But a gaming journalist was interviewed (some neutrality you may think) and of course he had played the game. However despite his very valid and true argument, he was completely ignored and was rewarded with hate and ignorance. But what made things worse was that people actually listened to what Fox News said! The next day Wal-Mart removed the game from their shelves!

But Wal-Mart annoys me as it is an institution with a lot of power, and this also leads to censorship of music. This mainly is the edited (or clean) editions of CD's, where all naughty words and suggestive lyrics have been removed or changed. Why? Is it so bad to contain music with words that little Johnny may have never heard or ideas that he doesn't understand. Well that’s why you stop him from buying the things instead of censoring it so the rest of us suffer! I just don't see the point in censoring music; it goes against the whole idea that you express yourself through your music. Now of course censoring for music videos is fair enough, but that only counts for the lyrics, as I am sick of seeing the video for Oxford Comma censored because people are waving around guns!!. But for an album censoring lyrics is absurd. I mean American Idiot sounds ridiculous censored, it sounds like someone with some kind of mental condition is singing it! "The subliminal mind... America." "Maybe I am the...America" No, just no!!

And lastly lets not forget our friends down under, the Aussies. Now they are screwed over when it comes to game releases, but more so by the oppressive censorship that takes place there. Now they have no certificate above 15, so any 18 cert game is either banned on the spot or requires editing heavily. Recently to much well deserved controversy Fallout 3 was banned for certification because of it's inclusion of drug use, more specifically the use of a real drug morphine. This caused outrage amongst the worlds gaming community and obviously Australian gamers. Thankfully though for them Bethesda (the creators of Fallout 3) has announced they will release an edited version of the game so it can be released in Australia. But this still doesn't solve the problem of the terrible censorship that takes place in Australia.

Overall censorship as I think you can guess by now is bad to put it simply. It is something that should have been removed from the Western world, but it seems to be making a come back. Of course China is a whole other story, and so I won’t divulge into that, but of course we all know that their internet is filtered heavily...

We will just have to wait and see if anything improves...

Oh and here is the video of Fox News' coverage about Mass Effect and its "Hardcore Pornography".

Food

2008-07-13T15:00:00.006+01:00

Ah yes, food, the basic necessity of life (well, along with water). Recently this has been a very hot topic around the world, specifically with politicians. At the G8 they announced that we are wasting too much food. Now whilst most of the G8 leaders wouldn't give a toss about this (or many other things), Brown has taken this very much to heart. Now there are many different reasons as to why this is the case. One reason could be simply because Brown wants us to be greener. Another is on a moral level, that it is wrong for us to waste food whilst there are people in Africa starving (which will lead me to another similar point later), another from an economic point being that we are wasting money and we could save millions if we didn't waste food. However it has been worked out that in reality per person we only waste 4p on food, yes 4p! So on an individual level, it is meaningless. Of course overall it does amount to a lot, but surely it is our right to be able to make these decisions. But finally, Brown might just want more food available for him and his fellow large co-workers... But as we know, no one wastes food like Prescott.

Now going back to the point about people starving in Africa while we leave piles of food to rot. Many people say "oh why don't we just send it to Africa instead of letting it go to waste?" Oh because that works doesn't it. Oh come on, how ignorant do you have to be to think that would work? Firstly, it will cost a fortune to send all that food over there, with costs for packaging and just sending the damn stuff! Plus with the price of oil rising still... Plus by the time it gets there, how much of it will still be edible? And on a more important economic point, it would do more damage to African economies than us not doing so. This is because if we are just giving away food, then it means they are not spending their money on food. Meaning that African food producers will instantly go out of business. But also just general business, because most people in Africa who work, are linked with food production, so if people arn't buying food, then there is no money going into businesses, and with no money businesses can't pay people, so money doesn't circulate between people and businesses. Meaning aggregate demand and supply both fall as a result, causing the economy to fail! This is basic economics that Keynes pointed out, and is 100% correct. So please don't come up to me and say that these pathetic hand outs are a good idea. And while i think about it, just general aid donations are hindering Africa. This is because they have become reliant on these donations and so have not felt the full force of impending doom that they otherwise would have, and so are not trying there hardest to do anything about it!

Another thing that has annoyed me recently is down to the usual group of people that I so loathe, and that is the damn hippies. Recently on the news there was an article about people raiding through bins behind supermarkets where there is still "edible" food available, such as "bread which only goes off today" says some dim witted hippy! Now why the hell would you do such a thing? Now one reason could be that they are bums and have no money and so do so to survive, perhaps. Or that they actually have enough money to buy a loaf of bread, but choose not to as this is the "environmental way to get bread." If you say so, but it is also the least hygienic way to do so!

However there has been another view in the British political landscape. And that is from Tory leader David Cameron. And his view was very much different to that of Gordon Brown. Instead of just saying we should all eat less, he blamed the fat and the poor. Now whilst this comment is pure genius, he does actually have a point. And here's why. Firstly fat people, case closed. I don't think I really need to explain that one. But with the poor, they shop very differently to the middle and upper classes. This is because the poor do most of their shopping at the cheaper supermarkets like Lidel and Aldi, now despite the fact that they sell complete rubbish, it is on the other hand very cheap, and surrounded by special offers like "buy one get 2 thrown in as well!" As a result they get much more than they need. Whereas the middle and upper class will go to more reparable stores like Waitrose where for the same amount of money spent in Aldi/Lidel you would get much less food, however it will be of a much better quality and in reality the amount of food you actually require. Meaning whilst money has been spent, it has not been wasted, this unfortunately is a concept lost on many... This I think was what Cameron was possibly on about.

And in my closing statement I would like to congratulate all those thin middle - upper class people who are helping make this world a better place. ;)
And here is another cartoon from The Times for the road...

*Disclaimer (this is starting to become too regular... sigh...)*

A lot of what is mentioned in this post is meant to be satirical, although there might be a meaningful underlined message underneath. Now excuse me while I do something else constructive and forget about food again.

Africa

2008-06-24T21:00:00.006+01:00

Recently the news has been focusing on the situation that is taking place in Zimbabwe, so I doubt you are unaware of at least the basics. But if however you are, here is the summary. Zimbabwe is experiencing hyper –inflation where the value of money has sky-rocketed causing prices to rise to a stupid degree. But that’s only the economic problem; there is then the more important issue of the huge violence that is taking place over the general election. Now there was an election a month or so ago. However this failed miserably as the current leader Mugabe technically won the election, much to the scrutiny of the wider world who think that the opposition party won. Now I cannot say who won, I can’t even go on superstitions as for this I actually don’t have any… But now the time has come for another election to try and get the real result once and for all. But of course it being Africa, this wasn’t going to be the case. Mass violence followed with Mugabe and his army/supporters going out to opposition rallies, events etc and breaking them up by beating up any supporter of the opposition they can find. This is in the attempt to discourage anyone who thought of voting of the opposition to change their mind. Oh how democratic. Especially considering how Zimbabwe was at one time the freest country in all of Africa, the success story that all of Africa strived to live up to. Oh how times change. But now the elections have got closer and closer the violence obviously increases. So much so that the leader of the opposition has stood down! But this was for a good reason, as it was an attempt to reduce the violence taking place in the country, and a good way to make a loud statement. However, it does effectively make the election absolutely pointless. And of course mean that Mugabe has already one. I think the cartoon in The Times sums up the election very well.

In my opinion the main turning point for Zimbabwe was when Mugabe expelled all the white farmers. Of course soon after the farms were in disarray and the economy soon followed. I find this highly amusing. The arrogance that they can do better despite having no experience, they were doomed to failure. Of course they did take up a socialist government, not that all socialist governments fail, but a lot of them do. And of course can lead to a dictatorship, and oh look, that’s exactly what happened.

But what really gets me is how you have Europe and America saying how wrong it is, what Mugabe is doing, but do nothing about it. However, this is still better than what the African nations are doing, which is absolutely nothing! Now you would have thought they would be opposed to what is going on in Zimbabwe, especially considering how Mugabe would probably listen to them. But no they sit around idle, and trade with them and act like the best of buddies. But in reality they are not standing up to Mugabe because of two reasons. The first is the classic, “stick with the strong bully and not get on their bad side” reason. Now whilst this is rational to a degree, it is also very stupid as they obviously outnumber them, but they seem not to realise this obvious fact! And the other reason, which I think is so shallow and backward which reflects their countries too well, is the fact that if they are seen to side with Europe it gives the impression that colonialism will return with Africa being carved up again between the European nations. Now despite the fact that I do love the principle of having an empire, even I know that this is absurd! It would cost too much money to do so, plus so many complications like human rights etc, etc…

However as of writing this, South Africa (the most developed country in Africa, but also with the highest proportion of white people, hint, hint. And no that is not meant to be racist but it is a trend and all economists have recognised it and refer it to rational racism.) . Anyway South Africa has stood out amongst the crowd and has admitted that what is happening in Zimbabwe is wrong and needs to be stopped. Thank you S Africa, it’s about time someone in Africa made a stand. This hopefully means that other African nations will also publicly announce disapproval of Mugabe’s regime.

Now we just need Africa co-operating more on other issues and try and get peace in the individual countries and maybe we can one day see an Africa that doesn’t constantly rely on the Western world to survive.

*Disclaimer… Many of you may call this racist, now while it does to a degree imply racism; it is done so to prove a point. And I would love to see a stronger Africa. However currently I find it very hard to praise Africa as it constantly lets me, the world and itself down. *

Ignorance and Hippies

2008-06-13T17:13:00.005+01:00

In my last entry I did briefly cover this, and this was mainly directed at hippies, and they will always deserve the critism. And today I will still be criticising them for this, but on a different topic.

So hippies, the brain-dead lay abouts that were meant to have been thing of the past. But unfortunately are still very much around. Now the thing is they are always in their own little world, where they are "at peace with nature" and all that other nonsense, now whether it is because they are stoned or just retarded is to be determined. It is almost sickening though how ignorant they are to the real world. They think the wider world controlled by "the man" is all grey. Well they are very wrong. They can never see the simple principles of economics, they see money as being evil and corruptive. Sounds kind of like a communist would say... Would explain why the American media hates them so much, and right so! Not because I despise communism, I just don't see how a complete state controlled economy can be efficient enough, however some socialist ideas can work.

Anyway, back to hippies. Yesterday I went to see a question and answer season down in Truro by none other than David Cameron, which was very informative. But of course there was one ignorant hippie youth there, but thankfully she wasn't doing some pathetic "peace protest". She questioned Cameron about whether Britain would still exploit third world labour. And he rightly said that it is not exploitation, and besides without it they would have nothing. Besides just because it is from a developing nation does not make it exploitation. Yes there working conditions might be bad, but then again, so was ours 200 years ago! They're only just catching up with us, eventually better working conditions will follow. I mean look at China, the success story when it comes to developing countries.

But I just don't see what hippies hope to achieve? Oh yes by just sitting around in circles smoking pot and listening to music is certainly going to achieve a lot. I mean look at Live Earth, it has down nothing! Then again what did you expect, it was started by Al Gore. It's like the wanabe Communists in Britain who sit around saying "the revolution is coming!" and doing nothing about, and when you question them about it, they will just give you the same delusional response. But if South Park is to be believed then we should always be careful when there is a large gavering of hippies, or if they want to host a large hippie music festival. But it is this stupid delusion that this will change things is what particularly makes them so ignorant.

However though, I will point out that we are all ignorant, but to a much different degree. For example most of us are ignorant to the inner workings of a car, but this is perfectly acceptable, but when you can not grasp the simple concept of society then you know too little and are deluded.

But hey, soon enough economics will prove hippies how wrong they are, and they will end up smoking away in some little cave so that they will never face reality again, and leave us in peace. But until then we thankfully have South Park and various other American shows to mock them constantly and make us feel better about ourselves and the world.

China

2008-06-01T15:50:00.003+01:00

I'd just like to point out that this is not an attack at China, most likely unlike most blogs out there. Yes it does involve Tibet, but not the pathetic mainstream approach taken on by celebrities and hippies, which is quite ironic considering the link. Anyway, recently of course there was the earthquake in the Sichuan province of China. It is a horrible act of nature; I wish all the best to the families involved. Plus I also greatly respect the quick actions of the Chinese government/military, as they have helped save hundreds of lives, despite the horribly inaccurate popular belief that they are all evil, and love nothing more then having a nice Sunday trip to Tibet and beating the odd Tibetan. This is what I don't get, why is it that so many people want a free Tibet? China own Tibet. End of, but unfortunately not. What most people don't realise is that China has gone to great lengths to improve the Tibetan economy. Yet for some reason the hippie population of the world thought that Tibet would be a great place to show their stupid free love theories and attack China in the process. But it is only recently with the upcoming Chinese Olympics that this stupid movement has gotten some momentum. Such as when the torch went through London and was being constantly attacked by a hippie every other mile. Oh yes doing this will surely free Tibet wont it! But the ignorance does not stop there unfortunately. The other day "celebrity" Sharon Stone announced that the horrible earthquake was a form of karma due to the occupation of Tibet by China? Now yes I can admit (which will surprise you) that China hasn't got the best record of Human rights in terms of how they treat the Tibetans. But her stupid ignorant little brain went way too far! An earthquake that killed thousands of people is not a form of karma! It is the kind of event that makes you doubt god, not praise the existence of karma. Especially considering the amount of people who might of been killed as a result of Chinese brutality probably isn't even in double digits! However we might soon enough see a form of karma when it hits her!

Also recently the Dalai Lama shocked me, not because he wants all of China to burn so that his Tibet can be free. No, quite the opposite. He infact said that he approves of the Olympics, but also the occupation of Tibet by China!! Finally, this guy actually knows what he is talking about! So we have the spiritual leader saying the right things, we just need the mindless hippies to follow!

So for my closing statement I have this to say. Hippies and celebrities are both horribly ignorant, especially hippies, who are a complete waste in the grand scheme of society! But here is a funny little linking fact, the global super brand that is Starbucks, guess who started it, yep, Hippies! Oh the irony!

Public Transport is a Joke!

2008-05-14T17:20:00.007+01:00

First off, today was a miserable day! I got out of bed all cheerful and ready to start another great day of this game we call life. I got changed into the most 'summery' clothes that I own, walked outside and, oh, look, it's cloudy and miserable! The sun has turned its back on me! And the clouds and the wind have all decided to conspire against me! Great, I thought as I quickly run back inside to grab a hoodie and still make the train on time. I expect you might be thinking this is another rant about the weather, well in essence it is, but my focus is about to become clear. After setting off, I did reach the station with time to spare, one problem though;
the train had a different plan. 10 minutes later, no train! Great! Then of course the next train arrives in the mean time, of course this is no good to me as it does not get me to Truro! None the less I disgruntly get this train to the next major stop. Whilst on the train I’m patronisingly reminded that I need to change trains, but of course I know all this as I have to do this every single month!! Anyway once departing I wait the extra 15 minutes to catch the initial train that I planned to catch half an hour ago! 50 minuets later I finally make it into Truro, but of course 30 minuets later than planned! Luckily I was able to get a bus reasonably quickly to college. Once there though, it looked like some sort of ghost town, everyone had abandoned the luscious grass patches for the warmth of the inside. Great welcome to college. So my day had not been to the best of starts. Of course today is a very meaningless day for me really, considering I only come in for one lesson! This is due to the colleges pathetic timetabling! But I went to my lesson, and what fun I was greeted with, a practise paper, oh joy!

Considering my rather dull and disappointing morning, I was hoping for some contrast. And initially this seemed to be the case, the sun came out and it was starting to warm up. I then went to get the bus to the train station. But now the damn buses decided to be a pain in the hole and be late! I don't know how late it was in the end, as I was forced to catch a Truronian bus, of course there is no difference between the shameful weakness of the service that is First, and of course First have recently bought out Truronian, yay a transport monopoly, just what we need! But the Truronian bus, or coach should I say, was in fact a First coach, only with a Truronian driver? But I had not realised this until he started to have a go at me that my First pass wasn't accepted! As he is a Truronian driver, I of course did not enjoy this patronising pointing out, especially as the ticket he gave me even said First on it! Which I pointed out to him to gain some sort of pride. This I shouldn't have done as this obnoxious driver then goes on a tangent of how this situation came about! This I did not need to know, and was delaying my progress to the train station even more! The coach eventually set off, of course this has to be the one that goes all through the damn hospital, which adds so much wasted time to the journey! After the painfully slow journey I get to the station, only to see the train I am meant to catch pulling away from the station! Great! Thank you public transport! And this then unfortunately meant I had to wait in Truro for 2 hours until the next train to where I live!! So I had to make my way into the city centre to waste some more time. But my dear old friend the weather decided to be cruel and rain. So I had to walk around in the again miserable rain, a complete contrast to the day before. An hour and a half later I make my way back to the station and was thankfully able to get the train. But it was a rickety old piece of junk and was freezing! And I was in flip-flops, boardies and a shirt, the only other piece of clothing I had left was my small hoodie, which just did the job. I eventually made it home at 4:38, two and a half hours later than I was initially meant to be home!

So thank you First, again you have inconvenienced me! And I can't wait to when I never have to use your service again!!

However on the bright side, it's about time, there was a new Zero Punctuation out today, and this time about GTA IV, which was very funny like usual, but also completely true. So thank you Zahtzee, you helped cheer me up a bit despite a bad day.

The Pros and Cons of Warm Sunny Weather

2008-05-12T18:45:00.002+01:00

The sun was out in full force today, and the people of England rejoiced. But it despite being all sunshine, it wasn't necessarily all smiles. And before you automatically judge me for that and think I’m some sort of manically depressive emo who longs for nothing more than a lifetime of grey skies. Well you'd be wrong. I do enjoy the sunshine. But as the title suggests, it is not all good. Why so you ask? Well for one, it's too hot! Yes us English are never happy, we can't wait for warm sunshine, but when we get that, we realise that we just aren’t suited for it. Many of us complain whilst either stuck inside whilst at work/school/college etc. But when we lay outside during our deserved brake, we then complain how we're now too hot! And if it's not you, I bet you know someone who did! And yes, I am one of those people! As for me being blonde and very pale the sun is not kind, trying its best to burn me, and others in the same predicament. But that is not the only problem with this kind of weather. As we all become like Mexicans (No offence to the Mexicans though). And we match this stereotype, because as soon as we get hot, we give up trying, suddenly everything takes too much effort. We'll go to do something, and then stop just after we start, and moan that it's just to much work to do right now. I'm surprised productivity doesn't plummet. Also another interesting thing I noticed today was the different attitudes towards this weather between the sexes. When the sun comes out and the clouds take that well needed break, males automatically grab the first pair of shorts they can find, throw on a t-shirt and wear either trainers or flip-flops/sandals and the process is complete, although some of us males may do something a little different and where a shirt. But with the females it's a very different story. They suddenly have so many more combinations at their disposal. No this isn't just some rant about how I wish I could have such choice, although my friend did start discussing how he wished he could wear a dress? But the main thing is that they put so much effort into it, in contrast it makes us look considerably lazy. But another thing I noticed was how they become much more critical of other members of their sex. And no it's not simply to do with their body like you would expect, although that will always be a big part. But it is what they wear; walking around campus I would often hear females complaining about someone in front of them, how their skirt is too pretentious or that their dress is too much? Now obviously this is something that will go over most males’ heads, and something we will never quite understand...

I know such a big discussion on this kind of weather, but considering this was the first proper day with very warm sunny weather, I had to get it off my chest. Also on hindsight I did focus a little bit too much on the cons. Oh well, maybe another day I will talk about them. Well I’m off to listen to some Jack Johnson, tis the season to...

Change

2008-05-10T22:30:00.006+01:00

Change, it's a funny thing really. It affects people quite differently. But I overheard an interesting conversation between some of my friends about this very topic. But what interested me about it was their conclusion that these days people of our age (16-18) prefer change, that it makes life more interesting, but also more livable... Now while I do agree with them, and I personally even live by this to a sense. This is deffinitly not the case for our whole age group. As there are some people who hate change, and do all they can to avoid it. What amuses me about this is how my friend reacts to change. Now my main example for his resiliance to change is pretty minor in the grand scheme of life, but it is quite a good view point into it. And this is his view on bands, and how they change between albums. Now my view is that it is great when bands change their musical style, it means you don't get bored with that sound you onced loved so much. But my friend believes quite the opposite, if he likes a band, he likes them for that sound, and will never take on a new one. The Feeling, changed their sound, they were his second favourite band,, now he hates them! Panic at the Disco, the dropping of the ! freaked him out, but when he heard their first single, he disowned them like a car (I know, weird simile, but in the sense that whilst still great, needs change). But what really made me see what his views are with change was with the arrival of the new Kooks album. Now he loves this album, do you know why? Well, it's because it's pratically teh same as the first album! Critics have slated this album for it's huge similarities to its predecessor, and how they have made very little effort to change. Well I think that just shows how he is with change doesn't it. Yes, it might not be the strongest analogy in the world, but in todays society I think it's quite justifiable.