Handjobs!

Look close enough, it says the BEST HAND JOB IN TOWN


... Just one of the many wonders of Stoke-on-Trent.

Need to get a picture of the Cock Inn in Leek next!...





-- Post From My iPhone

The next Terminator!

Arnie, now Governer of California!







Doug. If Terminator drinks, that is...


-- Post From My iPhone

I'm a Sven Lookalike

Sven-Goran Eriksson, former England Football manager, now Mexico Football Manager





Me. I look like Sven with a hat of course...

-- Post From My iPhone

Coachmakers Arms - Old Raby Ale

Village Brewer - Old Raby Ale - 4.8%ABV






***/5. creamy!

-- Post From My iPhone

Illegitimate Presidency

The talking points surrounding the Inauguration meant that Barack Obama was NOT officially POTUS after taking the oath, as the wording was wrong. Now rectified, the agenda to close Guantanamo Bay has been ordered and the top US official post of Secretary of State has been confirmed : Hilary Rodham Clinton


Guantanamo Bay has been the main talking point, where Obama has ordered the closure of Guantanamo Bay, the "gulag of our times".

It seems pretty clear that there were some forces behind the Bush Administration's inability to close Guantanamo - the stubborness of one Dick Cheny (suprise, suprise), and the fact that the Bush administration started the operation in the first place. John Bellinger, an advisor to Condeleezza Rice, shares his regret and frustrations over Guantanamo.

It would appear, I would expect, that Obama has retook the oath before signing the executive decision to close the detention centre. Though the era of change has begun, I fear that this is all a little more than symbolism by the Obama Administration.

If a 'perfectly logical' plan to set up the centre in the first place descended into such controversy where torture was used and accepted, if Bellinger's words are to be beleived, then we cannot ignore this possibility again. I can't fathom personally how the religious neo-conservatives can resort to such violence and inhumane nature - surely God judges at the end of the day.

The infamous legacy that this leaves behind will remain with Bush administration though I do not feel that the anti-Americans out there will see it that way. There is a history of US interventionism and dare I say 'imperalism' over the course of the twentieth century.

Having argued for a new era of openness from his administration and the closure of Guantanamo Bay, this is a good start by the Obama administration. Torture is indefensible - there are moral imperatives and all humans have rights - not simply those kept to and enshrined by national constitutions, bills of rights. The BBC is even asking readers, "Do you agree that Guantanamo prison should be closed?"

The bottom line is, people would say anything under torture to make someone stop. Its an involuntary human reflex, like jerking your hand away from something that's too hot. How anyone can ever justify something like this is beyond me.

Coachmakers Arms - Lionheart

Milestone - Lionheart - 4.4%ABV





***/5. I enjoyed this beer so much I had it twice over!

-- Post From My iPhone

Bring Home the Revolution: Obama, Hope, Progress, Change

5,000 tickets sold in less than a minute for the Obama Inauguration. Barack Hussein Obama, legally president at noon on January 20th before he took the Presidential Oath of Office, has now ushered in a new era of 'remaking America', an era of change.

Gone is George W. Bush and the neo-cons - now...

"On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord.

On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics."

There is an international appeal to the Obama presidency and the powerful role of the United States plays in our world. It is, a notion that we here can share at home in the United Kingdom of failed politics.




As a member of Republic, I received an email from Republic: Campaign for an Elected Head of State, an organisation that I have been a member of for the past year and attended their annual conference back in October. Graham Smith, campaign manager of Republic is calling for increased membership and the launch of 55 in 5 campaign - a drive to establish a elected British head of State within the next 5 years. This is all very optimistic, and the state of the Monarchy in Britain is pretty low after the recent revelations of Harry making racist remarks on a video and Prince Charles (heir apparent) stating he wants to play a more hands-on role.

It reminds me of the old joke about the optimist and the pessimist:

Pessimist says: "It can't get any worse."

But the optimist says:

"Oh yes it can!"

American politics, British politics, democracy in general is as I can see it: Broken. There is discontent in UK political circles over the question of Scottish Independence (for one), and the political apathy as of late puts the major parties in a dead heat. In the latest opinion polls, (9th January in the Sun/YouGov), Conservaties are 41% to Labour's 34% and Liberal Democrats at 15%. The 7 point gap is not too massive, and I would argue that the polls taken in the Sun has arguably a right wing bias anyway. There is a reality, I feel that there could well be a 'hung parliament' at election time. What does this mean for UK Politics?

It means that no party can command a majority and so it is to the Monarch's discretion who to ask to form a government. The Monarch, currently Queen Elizabeth II, an unelected official could decide the legislative destiny and direction of the UK Parliament in the 21st century. Though the monarchy, some might argue has little importance (all she ever does is wave, see video below...) This threat is very real and very damaging to the notion of democracy.



Barack Obama spoke in his inaugral address of "remaking America". America is a country founded on the back of a bill of rights, on democracy, freedom from religious and political tyranny with liberty and justice for all. With the inaugration of a African-American as president, it is a sign that the social attitudes of even a country like America are shifting. They have elected a liberal as a President. With a Muslim middle name. Who is also mixed race. If America can see the error of their ways after the Bush years then I would argue there is hope for humanity yet. The notion of 'remaking America' has a personal touch to the Americans but it has a wider and global appeal. It is not Americentric. Instead. it is about the ideals for which the United States stands for, and exporting that to the world. Freedom for all people, the French have done it (5 times), the Germans, the Italians... and it is about being able for the people to govern themselves - either by proxy in a centralist government with representatives or small communities of direct democracy.

Of all the systems of government, as Winston Churchill once remarked "Democracy is the best of the worst" (or something to that effect). The system we have in the United Kingdom is not, if there is a hung parliament, a democracy at all. If no majority is found in a general election and the Queen chooses of her own accord who to form a government, then this is clearly going against democratic principle that the people have freedom. Freedom means choice.

We do not have that, here at home, with the realities of the British Constitution.

In 'remaking America' - 'America' being a system of ideals rather than a singular identity (see Jonathon Freedland - "Bring Home the Revolution") - we can take the inspiring message of hope, of change, of progress, of Obama, to the United Kingdom, and the rest of the world.

Coachmakers Arms - Black Pearl

Milestone - Black Pearl - 4.3% ABV





Epic Stout ***/5

-- Post From My iPhone

Cast Lead

The Arab-Israeli conflict has been well documented, most recently in a 22-day conflict on what the Israeli's called "Operation Cast Lead", in order to give more security to the south.

The conflict in the Gaza and the dispute over the Holy Land (Israel) has been one of the big pressing issues since the Second World War.

The solution, as I see it, is something similar to the UN Partition Plan drawn up and approved in 1947 (see wiki entry here)

The UN Resolution is mentioned in the Israeli declaration of independence. I would argue though, if the Israeli's could do that, then why can't the Palestinians do the same? It is not a straightforward matter I admit, and something that hopefully will be addressed by Barack Obama. There are still fundamental problems in the region, and as one blogger argues, I'm sure come 21st January the phones in the White House will be ringing and an 'era of change' can begin.

The US, if it wishes to see itself as a higher moral authority and a beacon to the world, should look no further than their own constitution as a guide for their foreign policy. The continued supply of weapons and goods to Israel in a volatile region, does not agree with what the country was founded upon: freedom from tyranny, religious persecution and equality among men, including others. The failure to provide the Palestinians with a safe haven to live in only serves to cause further violence if they are not allowed to govern themselves as they wish to do so. Who is to say that the State of Israel will do a better job? The state is only state in the world that is Jewish, but there is no reason why religious tolerance, secularism and people from all other walks of life cannot live in harmony with one another.

It is time, I feel, to give the Palestinian people what they wish: a safe haven. I do not beleive that they are a terrorist group, though some of their actions are certainlly questionable and morally suspect. Perhaps history has taught us that the best form of revolution is passive resistance - the civil rights movement, Ghandi, among others - the sectarian violence in Ireland is still a big problem.

I am not arguing here that religion is a cause for violence, just an excuse. There is no reason why religious tolerance and freedom to worship whatever religion we wish (or not) cannot be practised. Permanent revolutions on this scale are never realised without some degree of bloodshed.

If as Josh Lyman in the West Wing argues:

"Islamic extremist is to Islam as the KKK is to Christianity"....

then the State of Israel is the equivalent to Judaism.

Controversial, maybe? But fighting never solved anything. The UN too, needs to get its act together as well because failure to follow through such resolutions as I mentioned makes the point of a global diplomatic institution meaningless. A state for a religious people is a noble idea, but there are examples around the world - the UK, US, among others - why religions cannot be tolerated in a secular state. And I would like to pose the following question:

If the Israeli declaration of independence justifies itself on the UN resolution in 1947, the failure to realise the terms of the resolution makes the state of Israel illegal, surely?

In an ideal world, there would be one country, one state, governing the whole of Israel and Palestine and accepting Jews, Muslims, Christians as equals and there would be no violence. Something that the Tony Blair Fath Foundation hopes to acheive. It seems an impossibility considering the history. but I think it is change that we can beleive in.

Port Vale v Shrewsbury

Piling on the pressure in the first 15 minutes!





1-0 to Vale, Steve Thompson!






1-1! They already one fan escorted from the ground!

Second half, two players sent off, one per side. Kyle Perry for Vale and subsitute Marc Pugh for Shrewsbury.

Exciting game, but Vale stopped playing the good football after 20 minutes and Shrewsbury looked deadly on the counter and on the right wing. Still Vale never looked like losing. Steve Thompson was MOM for a cracking 20 yard goal into top right hand corner. A deserved point.


-- Post From My iPhone

Bush: Smart, Articulate, Successful

So said Bob Tuttle, US Ambassador to the United Kingdom in the Telegraph.

What successes, I wonder? The Iraq debacle will always be his 'legacy', in my mind, and the global crisis that has soured the end of his second term.

Not to mention he is the most unpopular outgoing President (ever). The sooner Obama is sworn in, just a few more days come Jan 20th, the better.






Can't say I blame Connecticut, to be honest.

One thing, if anything I agree with Tuttle on, is that we should keep close ties with our American cousins. It is important for them, and important for us. I wouldn't have thought Sarkozy and France, Merkel and Germany would be too comfortable with us having a major role in European Politics, particularly as we weren't one of the founders of the Rome Treaty in 1957.

That is not to say I am a Euro-skeptic, far from it. Recent events in the financial crisis have shown that we do have an important role to play in International Affairs. Even though it was a big gaffe for Brown saying he 'saved the world' regarding the financial crisis... Even though he seems to be leading the way.

The only thing is... I'm not so sure if Obama and Brown will be best of friends, even if Obama thinks Cameron is a 'lightweight'.

It will be interesting to see how relations and UK impact on the foreign stage will play out in the next decade.


-- Post From My iPhone

Blogs versus Essays

I got an essay back today for French Politics and I passed this time doing much much better than what I did in my failed essay I reported on a few weeks ago.


It would appear my style in essay writing lacks a certain, clarity of expression.

My essay, though received a far better mark, still to this criticism.

And it came to my mind that my form in blog writing is much better according to some observers so its something to learn from.

Perhaps then I can do better when it comes to my next essay and also my project on Republicanism, a research project of 5,000 words that I need done. Need a question though. Hopefully I can go full steam with this soon, get something going. I mighht well write some features as items in the news comes up.

Also thinking of some ideas and perspectives to give this blog a bit of direction and readership. Stayed tuned on that one...

Little's Disease goes Dancing on Ice!

A True Story:


Anyway. This morning I need to get to Manchester to get books. I got outside and it felt like I was on ice. I thought about turning around and forgetting the whole ordeal, but instead I called for a taxi.

I have Cerebral Palsy, which affects my mobility. To my extent, I have zero balance so it can get quite entertaining.

The taxi came but even though it was just a few steps away, I knew I'd have a job on my hands getting in. This proved to be the.case, as I skated my way to the car but fell, nearly ripping off the guys mirror in the process. Fun!

He was convinced I was drunk, which reminds me of a certain Josh Blue joke about the drunk tank.

"Nobody is on the road. They all gone home! Black ice!" He says in his Asian accent.

"Yeah it's like dancing on ice out there. I gotta get to Manchester. Hope I don't fall over again." I replied.

"Well I don't know you nearly broke my mirror. It's loose!"

"Im sorry" I said, nearly pissing myself laughing.

"I always tell people not to drink, I don't know." says the driver.

I nearly burst out in more laughter, but I didn't bother explaining I have Little's Disease (CP).... It seems my Stevie Wonder 'blind man' shades didn't serve as a warning either... Shame.

To make matters worse, it feels like I've wet myself. Turns out my can of relentless exploded on impact when I fell over! So I smell of energy.

I'm glad there was no one around to see it. Though it certain was worth paying to see!





EDIT: Also, after getting to University Library, I discover that my glasses are broken (again), presumably by the fall from getting into the taxi.

FUN!


-- Post From My iPhone

Privacy: The biggest, most fundamental issue of our time

Privacy, or the need for it, has come to light to me lately. My brother gave me some very good advice a few weeks ago:

"Don't worry about what you can't control"

This is very true, of course and very good advice.

Not long ago I posted a blog focusing mainly on Facebook: Social Networking or Spy Networking?

One of the main things Facebook does unbeknown to you if you are a computer novice is it will send out information to your friends - things like what you post to other people in the public domains (or their, "walls").

Targeted advertising is another one - if you are a university student you will get adverts offering student discounts and the like. Its a scary thought what information you can give out on the internet.

Targeted advertising is something that we cannot control at our own will. But I would not be surprise if one day this issue comes up in the media one way or another.

So back to the first point: Don't worry about what you can't control. We have the rights to report photos if we do not give our prior consent to publication, or report people posting or discussing our lives as a form of gossip that may be damaging to our reputation.

Facebook does indeed provide this facility, and people can be excluded from even the most minute of details - whether you are single, in a relationship, whether when you break up with your girlfriend it becomes public knowledge or not. It is not at all uncommon for people, even if it is friends out of curiosity, to "comment" on an issue, but then everybody else on the host;'s friend list can see this. With Facebook privacy settings you can do this. You can limit your friends to being able to do nothing but message you if you so wish.

It is, I believe, within our rights to know whats going on in our surroundings and to know what people may know about us which we might wish to withhold from them for whatever reason (be it job, personal privacy, dislike of nosiness, etc).

It is therefore, reasonable to expect to know what we might encounter at any given time. Living in a somewhat public residence (private bedrooms/communal ground floor), it has becoming increasingly familiar to me and important to me to understand and know that people could be in close proximity at any given time and I may not expect this to be the case if I were living in a private home elsewhere where I could expect privacy.

When in the public domain - whether Facebook or in the real world - we deserve to know what to expect and be respected with a certain level of privacy. Facebook, though it provides the possibility for this, is not so outgoing with its privacy policies and I think that they could do more to educate current and new users on privacy control. In the real world, reality, it is unfortunately, sadly a different matter. The most scariest of things is that even living in the most public of places, people are in such close quarters that they could, unwittingly, unknowingly, or God forbid intentionally invade privacy or violate their privileges of use of such a communal area.

Anybody could be walking around. Anybody could turn their back. It's not paranoia. We live in the 21st century and the information age, people just don't leave their doors unlocked anymore out of a sense of naievety. It is about protection, being safe. Knowledge is power.

I'm just glad I have a lock on my door.

Unholy Urine?

Having downloaded a great app on my iPhone - ukPolitics - I have gained access to as handy set of political news items by party and blogs on the bologsphere.

One such blog, from Liberal Conspiracy attacks the Vatican statement that women's urine is unholy and contributes to male infertility.




"The contraceptive pill was polluting the environment and was in part responsible for male infertility, a report in the Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano said on Saturday.

The president of the International Federation of Catholic Medical Associations, Pedro Jose Maria Simon Castellvi, said the pill ''has for some years had devastating effects on the environment by releasing tonnes of hormones into nature'' through female urine.

''We have sufficient evidence to state that a non-negligible cause of male infertility in the West is the environmental pollution caused by the pill,'' he said, without elaborating further."

Laurie Penny, a feminist liberal blogger at LiberalConspiracy.org, attacks the Vatican on grounds of being sexist, and being incorrect in their assertions:

"I don’t see the Pope asking us to stop eating so much junk in order to protect some sacred ideation of male potency. I don’t see that increasingly unfunny former Hitler Youth member and his friends asking blokes everywhere to wear looser trousers and stop smoking. Why would they, when they’ve already decided that by daring to decide for ourselves whether we want to have kids, we’ve symbolically castrated men?The contraceptive pill is one of the most important inventions of the last three centuries, and doesn’t damage the environment so much as the status quo. I’m not a Christian, but if I were I’d get down on my knees every night to thank Ratzinger’s God for the miracle of contraception."

"Oestrogens are present in drinking water from a host of sources, most notably from the by-products of plastics production, and studies have shown that most oestrogens in drinking water are natural – not the synthetic oestrogens present in oral contraception."

You can read Laurie's blog here.


My personal opinion is not something I am going to argue here (just yet)... but I would argue that Laurie is missing crucial points of the Vatican's statement. Short of reading the actual statement (I can't read Italian, I will assume she can't either), I would like to suggest that she took the Australian article at face value and believed every word of it.

What is more likely, is that the Vatican are not disputing the science that there are natural oestrogens in various water sources, but are merely making the logical point that the substances contained in the contraceptive pill may constitute, in part, of women's urine.

It is not a sexist attack, and I'm sure the Pope would also argue that it is best that men do not smoke either - though I am sure he is not so conservative as to outlaw smoking and drinking.

Smoking may damage the sperm given consistent usage and abuse, but it does not interfere with the direct act of sexual intercourse with marriage, as does a contraceptive pill or a condom.

This here is the crucial difference I see. It is not sexist of the Pope, the media spin has twisted it that way and Laurie has obviously been unduly offended. She says she is not Catholic, so I'm wondering why she bothers to take note of supposed Vatican directives if they have no bearing on her life. People will consider the facts for themselves, I believe that we can reach through reason the right decisions on whether to use contraceptives or not, irrespective of religious doctrine or scientific evidence that increased usage of the morning after pill or the use of Thalidomide can be harmful (certainly in the case of Thalidomide, anyway).

The Pope is merely making the point as part of traditional Catholic doctrine that it is wrong to use any artificial means to interfere with the natural act of procreation. Always the Catholic church has been against contraceptives and this has caused controversy in AIDs-stricken countries. Thus I do not believe the statement is saying that women's urine is unholy (or at least the ones that take contraceptives, anyhow), but is merely adding the Catholic church's medical findings (correct or otherwise) into the scientific sphere.

That is how I see the other side of the coin anyway and I value the arguments on both sides over the issue of contraception. Sex is a loving act, and should, where possible be open to the possibility of pregnancy. But there are so many variables, unforseen circumstances where contraception is necessary (in cases to prevent STIs), or where the entire Catholic doctrine, I feel should be called into question when it opposes procedures such as IVF which allow women to fulfill their natural biological instinct to procreate. That, however is another story. But women's wee as unholy? I doubt that is the Catholic position. And even if it were, I would like to ask what Laurie is supposing by highlighting the Pope's Hitler Youth past. What does this have to do with the price of bacon?

Football Manager Live

My gameworld (Blisset) for Football Manager Live, has opened.

Created a team, Valiants, playing in Vale's colours!

Joined the WCA (Weekend Casual Association)... games played over weekends and I can decide not to play most games if I don't want to (or if I'm just plain busy as I do have a life....!)

They call me Luke! That's not my name!

Like the song... Shame it doesn't rhyme....

Some people, well most I know call me Luke.

But, since 2007 in June I legally changed my name to Lucas by deed poll, as I didn't quite like Luke and it just reminded me of bad things. Out of respect, I kept my middle name, Peter, because I did realise some people might be upset. For the same reason, I changed it to Lucas as it is essentially the same name but in it's Latin form.

Some people have never really quite accepted this but a few things come to mind when I think about justifying why those of you should refer to me as Lucas rather than Luke. One family member, upon learning of the name change, asked me in a phone conversation whether I would eventually go back to it or not.

Considering the hassle in changing my name - including a problem with registering at my university because of it - I won't. Changing my my name may only be cosmetic, but it certainly makes me feel better about myself. Changing it via deed poll carries the same legal status of changing your name due to a sex change, or more commonly through marraige. I wouldn't think of calling a male-to-female transexual by their male given name because that is not how they identify themselves. By the same token, I wouldn't call my sisters or my mother by their maiden names, because that is not who they are.

Direct examples of people changing their names for cosmetic purposes include Paul Gascoigne - to G8 before changing it back if I remember rightly - and also one of the people I admire, Alistair Cooke. Now Paul Gascoigne, or Gazza, aside you wouldn't think of calling Alistair Cooke by his birthname.

So I wonder why do the same with me?

I'm no different. I'm Lucas now, so get used to it.






There's a picture of me from 1st September, 2005 in Ruby Tuesdays.

I miss the hair.

And I love the red.

One of the things I've realized lately.

And above all, I'm Lucas, not Luke.

-- Post From My iPhone

Coachmakers Arms - Hound Dog

Cottage Whippet Series - Hound Dog - 4.6% ABV





Ain't nothing but a Hound Dog!... ****/5
-- Post From My iPhone

Coachmakers Arms - Stokers Stout

Oakfield - Stokers Stout - 5.0%ABV





Bit Bitter, but nice. Shame it's not local!

***/5

-- Post From My iPhone

Era of Change

There are just 10 days until President-elect Barack Obama takes office.

Tickets have been sold for a parade too. 5,000 of them.

Obama tickets 'sell in a minute'

Obama already faces an economic crisis and foreign policy challenges

Reserved seats for the US presidential inauguration parade have sold out within one minute of being put on sale, the ticket company has said.

More than 90% of the 5,000 seats available along the parade route in Washington were sold online.

The tickets cost $25 (£16) each - but some went on to reappear on internet sites at much higher prices.

Two million people are expected to crowd the National Mall as Barack Obama takes the oath of office on 20 January.

Most of the seats for the swearing-in ceremony are set aside for lawmakers, VIPs and diplomats.

The tickets that went on sale on Friday were for stands that line the route Mr Obama and his vice-president, Joe Biden, will take between the US Capitol and the White House.

Sales began at 1300 (1800 GMT) and went "blazingly fast", Albert Lopez, a spokesman for sales company Ticketmaster, said.

Linda Douglass, the chief spokeswoman for the inaugural committee, said the selling time was startling.

Work is already well underway for the event, set to draw huge crowds

"You just have to assume there must have been people sitting there at their computers ready to go when the clock struck one," she said.

Inauguration officials strongly disapproved of anyone seeking to profit from the sale of the ticket, she said - as tickets appeared at 10 times their original price on auction site eBay.

The committee says it wants to make Barack Obama's inauguration one of the most accessible in US history.

---

All I can say is.... Gone in Sixty Seconds. I'm sure the inaugural address is live on television, I'll post more when I find it. :)