What England is saying about playing team USA

Well it only took a second before fans of the US soccer team felt a twinge of pain today. Once we found out that were were playing England in the first match of the World Cup group play the plan became who else might we have a chance against in the group.

But there was huge commentary across the world. Well likely not about the US or our chances to win (though 66-1 is the best odds I ever recall for a World Cup), but about all the various match-ups. One thing I noticed was how British sports commentators were reacting to the news (I don't pay attention to American sportscasters when it comes to soccer).

It seems that Team USA is giving some in England a pause, if only momentarily. Which might be the 2nd best result that could have happened. The best of course being an overly confident boasting - which there is still time for.

There just isn't anything better than hearing anyone consider the American futbol team and use terms like tough and out-muscling. It's not as good as over-powering and strategic, but I take what I can get.

But is this fear they are speaking of, or just a low scoring match?

(Video contains the pre-group odds as well as commentary and dates of play times)

2010 World Cup groups and odds

Well the time for idle speculation is over. The groups for the World Cup starting in June 2010 in South Africa have been determined. And this will be interesting.

I will have a video with the odds of several of the favorites, and commentary about the USA vs. England match shortly.

But starting with Group A - South Africa, France, Mexico, Uruguay - I expect South Africa to make history. Never before has a host country lost in group play. But I'm pretty sure that's what's going to happen here. The probable winners in this group: France and Mexico.

In Group B - Argentina, Greece, Nigeria, South Korea - This should be a cake walk for Argentina. I expect them to win every match. The real questio in my mind is if Nigeria or South Korea also advance. I'd have to nudge over and say Nigeria.

Group C - Algeria, England, Slovenia, United States - Now this is a challenging group. There is a big question on what will happen. The fact that the US will be playing England first really sucks for the US, though the British commentators seem to think this might be a tough match. So assuming that we lose the first match, which is likely, our hope is to win against slovenia and tie Algeria. My bet, England and Algeria advance.

Group D - Australia, Germany, Ghana, Serbia - An easy group for Germany. Sadly Australia will be out quickly. But I'm not sure about Ghana and Serbia. My guess is that Ghana will pull it out due to the homefeild advantage. Germany and Ghana advance.

Group E - Cameroon, Denmark, Japan, Netherlands - I'm looking for an upset out of this group. Of course the Netherlands will win the group. Japan is the big loser. Again the question is Cameroon and Denmark. And I expect Cameroon to pull it out. I don't think many will pick that. Netherlands and Cameroon move on.

Group F - Italy, Paraguay, New Zealand, Slovakia - Wow Italy got lucky. This may the easiest group in the World Cup. Italy wins easy, and New Zealand will be on the same plane home as Australia. The choice left is pretty easy. Paraguay takes the group after italy.

Group G - Brazil, Ivory Coast, Portugal, North Korea - Well let me think. Brazil moves on, that's a no brainer. But I think that Ivory Coast will surprise some people. I think that they go to the next round after soundly beating Portugal and North Korea. My call, Ivory Coast and Brazil.

Group H - Chile, Honduras, Spain, Switzerland - This may be the most exciting Group out of all the group play. There will be battles in this group. Spain will take it, but I think they will have more trouble than most expect. Chile will make a good try but Honduras will pull out the big win in the group. Switzerland will give it a good try but I think they are the loser of that group.

Ultimately, I think the final match will come down to Germany vs Brazil or Argentina vs England. In either option I would go with the South American teams to win.

Look for my video shortly.

The Doctor...I mean lawyer is in

What if The Doctor was American? I know, many of my readers don't get the reference. I'm talking about Doctor Who. Specifically, the man who was the latest Doctor and one of the most popular in the 46 year history of the television program. David Tennant.

Tenant is not a big name in the U.S., outside of sci-fi geeks and those that watch BBC America. But in Britain he is huge. Because playing the Doctor isn't something just anyone can do (normally). In fact, it's kind of like being picked as the next James Bond.

David Tennant did a wonderful job as The Doctor (no the character doesn't have a name that is known). he was spunky, fun, intelligent in an absent-minded manner, and had a very strong dark vicious streak in him. The kind of character you can enjoy and find incredible depth in.

After playing Dr. Who, the sky was pretty much the limit to what Tennant could have done next. Anything being done in England would have been extremely happy to even have him as a cameo just because he is that popular. But Tenant is a stage and television actor, so he seems to have stuck to his roots. he found a television show to star in.

That may be the end of the good news.

The television show that Tennant has picked is Rex Is Not Your Lawyer. Right off the bat a problem exists. The name is far too long. Never a good sign for 99% of television shows in America.

Add to that the fact that this television show idea is a brainchild of NBC (they haven't been doing so well since Seinfeld and Fraiser went off the air). Plus the news that this idea has been sitting on a shelf for 2 years waiting to get somebody who is capable and willing to take on the project. Not exactly inspirational news.

The concept is basically that a high-end lawyer has a breakdown. So he decides to coach witnesses instead of defending them. I'm laughing already. Yes, that core idea is the key to this comedy show. Since this is not a rip-off of an British comedy, I'm even less enthused.

Overall I am excited to see how David Tennant will do in America. I have no doubt that he is getting paid extremely well for this first shot. I'm equally sure that some Hollywood exec is dreaming of selling rights to the show back to England for a nice profit. And that's all the good news I can get from this concept.

There is no way of figuring out if this idea will work, or if it was put on a shelf for good reason. Tennant may be able to float the show alone, he might get a capable cast that can make it work with him. It might turn out to be an Ally McBeal. Or it could be the American version of Coupling.

At least if it doesn't work, Tennant can still jump in the TARDIS and go back across the pond. I'm sure the Brits will not hold his attempt to raise the standards of American entertainment, and getting paid handsomely well, against him.

**Don't forget to support this blog by checking out Alchemy at World of Vass, and the t-shirts at World of Vass. Your support helps keep this all going. Thank you, and do tell a friend.**

Hitler paintings sell for $143,000

I’ve heard it all now. In England paintings supposedly made by Adolph Hitler were sold at an auction for $143,000.

Why?

I am amazed that anyone would want the art of a dictator and the mastermind of one of the greatest attempted genocides in the history of the world. Morbid fascination might lead one to view such work, but to own it?

One of the purchasers of the questionable art – there are disputes of the authenticity – is John Ratledge. His plan is to hang the self-portrait of Hitler in either his home or office. Honestly I can say that were I to be going to his office for a meeting, and saw that picture with Hitler’s signature, I would end the deal and leave. This is not a trophy worthy of anything beyond burning or perhaps a museum.

I just don’t get it. I realize that even the most evil person in the world has a humane side, as little it might be. But to have this art is not an investigation into the depths of evil and hatred that a human can sink to. I feel it’s a glorification of the man. An excuse that takes away from the atrocities this wretch did.

History has well recorded Hitler in its books. He will be remembered in 100 years as the equal of only the bubonic plague. He, and his warped dreams of superiority, died the cowardly deaths they deserved. If anything I can hope his eternity in hell is as painful as all the deaths he caused.

This disturbs me. Just as disturbing is the knowledge that in Germany another auction of the works of this madman will happen shortly. To think that these works might bring inspiration to some youth chills me to the bone.

Sherlock Holmes - the action movie

Sherlock Holmes is renown for may things. He is an addict, an intellectual, a musician, the foremost detective in the world, and by some accounts the inspiration of Batman. He is even the comic foil of his smarter brother Sigerson Holmes (Gene Wilder).

That's a lot for the creation of author Sir Arthur Conan Doyle in over a century. This one character has been portrayed in numerous ways by over 71 actors in 201 films, and most have been widely accepted. Perhaps his best portrayals to date are some of the oldest, done by Basil Rathbone. But in modern times we have the ability to 'revision' classics and as they say in Hollywood "get it done the right way".

Thus Sherlock Holmes, friend of Scotland Yard is now an action hero. Yes, an action hero. Forget deductive reasoning, deep thought, and immense knowledge. This time Holmes is a womanizing brawny man. Move over Die Hard, a new era has begun.

I know the people of England are bitter and twisted.

The good news in all of this is that Robert Downey Jr. is the person playing the British master sleuth. The bad news is that the director is Guy Ritchie, and we will see Holmes naked and handcuffed to a bed. The film will be a departure of extreme from the novels and every other portrayal of the character on screen or in the theater.

Can Downey pull this off? I have to say that if there is any actor that could do this it has to be Downey can. I believe that he has the ability to make this departure work. in fact he has stated

"Past screen adaptations of Holmes stories "just never had the money to do it right," Downey said"

At the very least we all will have until Christmas to figure out if this 'revisioned' Sherlock Holmes is more Pinky or the Brain.

Angelina Jolie banned in England - sort of

In news that is not so sad, there is the announcement from Britain that Angelina Jolie has been banned. Well not her directly (only British-friendly entertainers like Snoop Dogg get that treatment) but rather the ads for the film WANTED.

The situation goes like this. Gun violence is bad. Movies with gun violence are even worse as they make it sexy and glorified. So the ads that show Jolie blasting baddies with shotguns, and pistols, and so on is on the top of the hit list. Which I would respect except for one thing.

The movie came to Britain some time ago and the DVD has been actively on sale for about 6 months.

So this is a waste of time and mere polispeak for some politician or political group that wants to look good to constituents. It's hypocritical and there are few things that are worse. It makes me bitter and twisted.

I understand that England looks at guns very differently than America. We are the land of cowboys and action movies of course. So I can see how this might upset some of the English sensibilities. But to bellyache after the fact is just stupid and insulting.

If this ad is so bad, so instrumental in magnifying gun violence in England, why the hell did they let the movie and DVD get released? Which says nothing of the fact that all of 59 murders were committed in all of 2007 in England. What gun violence do they have? Binghamton NY has probably half that number in 2007, and there are only 150,000 people here.

Look, the second multi-stage bullets are recovered from a crime scene I'll understand the hysteria. But until then I think the British government needs to get a grip. Besides, I would think the impression that Amy Winehouse is giving the young women of Britain is far more detrimental and immediately more urgent than Angelina Jolie in an action movie.

Who Are You Betting for in the World Cup

From its inauguration in 1930 the World Cup has grown to become the biggest football (soccer) competitiion in the world. The chance to call your country the world champions attracts a huge audience round the globe and is one of the most watched events on the planet. Yet the World Cup itself grew from more modest beginnings. The driving force behind the competition was FIFA president Jules Rimet and the trophy awarded to the winners was named after Rimet. The first competition saw Uruguay crowned the first world champions. They beat Argentina 4-2 in the final in Montivideo, however even back then the crowd for the match was 93,000, which probably even then gave some indication of how much the futbol (soccer) supporters of the world wanted this kind of competition.

The next competition in 1934 and also in 1938 contained very few South American teams due to the difficulties and long journeys required in that era. The Second World War meant that competitive soccer was temporarily suspended, and the 1942 and 1946 competitions did not take place.

In 1950 the competition returned and was won for the second time by Uruguay. The Competition comprised sixteen teams. Not until 1982 did the competition expand to 24 teams and was then expanded again in 1998 to 32 teams. This allowed more teams from Africa, Asia and North America to take part. The 2010 tournament will see a massive 204 countries trying to qualify, up from the previous record of 198 in 2006.

Brazil holds the record of the most tournament wins, wining the Cup five times. After the third win, Brazil was allowed to keep the Jules Rimet trophy and a new trophy was introduced. Brazil; is also the only country to have appeared at all of the World Cup final competitions. The 2014 competition will be held in Brazil

Perhaps unsurprisingly, Brazil have already been installed as the favourites for the 2010 World Cup in South Africa. They are followed by Argentina, Spain - the European champions - and Italy, the current champions who have won the competition four times. England have been named fourth favourites following their recent run of form under Fabio Capello. Germany, Holland, France, Portugal, and Russia make up the remaining places in the top ten favourites for the World Cup.

Brazil are currently being quoted at 9-2 and Argentina at 5-1. European champions Spain will also expect to do well riding on the back of a wave of confidence following their Euro win. They are quoted at 15-2. Surprisingly England have been made fourth favourites at 8-1 above Italy and Germany who both hold the most winners titles after Brazil. England`s regular failure to progress much past the quarter final stage may well make them a difficult option, but their fans will be hoping that the success of British clubs in Europe can be reflected at the biggest competition in world futbol. To keep up with the best betting information, go to Free Bet Offers

Anna Nicole Smith: The Opera

Of the many things in the world I could expect an opera to be made about, Anna Nicole Smith is not among them. In fact if I had made a bet with Las Vegas yesterday about the chances of such an event happening, the odds would have been astronomical I would guess. The difference one day makes.

Because in the face of crazy odds, good taste and profiting off the back of the dead there will be an opera based on Anna Nicole Smith.

Who would bring such an atrocity to the stage? Who would think that anyone of sound mind would part with their hard-earned cash in this economic blast furnace to watch such a travesty of the arts? Richard Thomas.

If you are wondering who in the world this is think back to another great occurrence in the world of opera. He is the man responsible from presenting Jerry Springer: The Opera to the masses. And that collective look of dumbfoundment and trepidation you likely have is answer enough about the quality I expect from this venture.

Of course to propose an opera is one thing, but you need to stage it somewhere. Considering the reputations of opera houses across the world you might think that this could be found in the Timbuktu Opera House (no offense to them if one exists). But in fact it will be at the Royal Opera in Britain. I had no idea they were that starved for cash.

Opera loves tragedy, and the life of Smith is one fraught with just that. But it is also a life that was self-inflicted. Without merit. And without cause of celebration, re-enactment, or glorification.

I suppose that those fans of the Jerry Springer Show, who likely saw the film and play, are likely to see this play as well. But as I consider most people that would view such tripe as just as likely to appear on the program, the rest of the human race will undoubtedly avoid this near inarguable refuse.

Still I could be wrong. It is probable that Anna Nicole Smith: The Opera could be an endearing testament of the pressure and pitfalls of success and fame. On the same order of probability that I can produce diamonds out of my rectum. It’s probable, but that does not mean it is a practical reality in this universe.

But by all means, if you are in the mood to smack your face with a ball-peen hammer, go see this performance for yourself. If after viewing this you have more brains left than drinking a Pan-Galactic Gargle Blaster, and you are still imbued with the ability to flail your limbs enough to respond, please do let me know if I was wrong.

And for those wondering about the Pan-Galactic Gargle Blaster, it is/was created by Zaphod Beeblebrox and the effect of one is like having your brain smashed out by a slice of lemon wrapped round a large gold brick.

BBC makes questionable choice for Doctor Who

Matt Smith is the new Doctor. Who is he? Good question. He was nowhere on my radar screens, nor those of any Brit I have read about.

For those not familiar I'm talking about the 11th actor to play the titular role of Dr. Who. The show has been on the BBC for 45 years, and has been on American television (and BBC America) for decades. It is probably as popular and well-followed as Star Trek and/or Star Wars. It is definitely one of the top programs in the world, and likely the longest running non-news program (not including soap operas) ever.

Currently David Tennant is the Doctor. His appearance was debated long and hard, but he quickly won over fans with his quirky, witty, fast-paced portrayal of the Doctor. His version is brash, playful, and perhaps one of the most violent of all the Doctors. When he stated he was leaving the program after 3 years - which is a shame really - there was no end to guesses of who might replace him.

I too joined in on that game with a list of possibles, plus the insane postulation of a couple of Americans. And since that post I have had several friends debate the likelyhood of the first female Doctor (never going to happen), the first Black Doctor, and my insanity about an American Doctor. Suffice to say the debate over this role has been vigorous, especially in England.

But now the answer is before us. I present to you the new Doctor as of 2010



They have seriously lost their minds at the BBC.

Yes the Doctor is a geek. He is the ultimate nerd, given. But he is also cool and powerful and a hundred other quirks. He has been relatively plain (or ugly depending on your preferences), tall, short, old, young, and now he seems prepubescent.

Honestly, with no insult intended, Matt Smith looks ugly, way too young, and completely immature. I cannot for the life of me envision what makes him seem like the Doctor to anyone at the BBC. And I must admit that I say this without ever having heard his voice, nor seen his acting. Such is the difficulty of being in America.

Still I am a fan. And I am sure I will still watch the program. But with a great big cringe. Hopefully they will at least give the Doctor a companion of ample assets and beauty suffice to distract viewers from his visage. But that is more an American trick than British. [Seriously, like Baywatch had any substance beyond the cloth for the swimsuits]

From what I gathered there are a few things we can hope to expect from a Matt Smith Doctor. An new hairstyle - bald is preferred to what he has in the photo. Far less wit, delivered at far slower speeds.

Matt Smith is no Tom Baker, and decisively no David Tennant. He is young and these days on either side of the pond that is worth a lot to television and movie executives. Sadly that does not often equate to zealous or even moderate approval of the viewing audience.

But I am a fan of the Doctor. I have been for decades. I will watch and cringe, and hope to be amazed - or just not overly disappointed. I will hope for a buxom, brilliant, assistant. I will read the tea leaves for clues to the major villian. I will be a fan. Just that much more reluctantly, and far more willing to see the re-run than the first run.

[Patterson Joseph would still have been the best choice I think.]

AC/DC proves rock and roll is a train on the tracks

AC/DC. Are they a metal band, or rock n roll? It’s a question many wonder about, but honestly who cares. They are just good and that’s all that really matters.

The band is one of the few that can state they cover 3 decades of performance and solid hits. They have gone from Australia (their home) to England, America and the world. They have sold over 200 million records, cleared the 2004 Greatest 100 Artists All -Time List of Rolling Stone, and they just released another album – Black Ice and the single Rock n Roll Train.

The band has survived the loss and replacement of several members. They have outlasted changes in world music fads. They have cleared the hurdle of time. So it’s no surprise that their current tour is filling stadiums.

One of their recent performances gives you a taste of the showmanship of AC/DC, and the quality of their music. This is the single Rock N Roll Train, live.



In an era of music that is sampled, oversampled, and infusing nearly every genre with rap, it’s refreshing to see a band do original work again. Some bands change with the times, some fad over time, and AC/DC is among those that just pass time doing what they do best.

And just to compare here is a view of AC/DC in the past



and one more



Yeah they still got it.

Who to be Dr. Who?

Now that we know David Tennant will be regenerating into another Doctor at the end of 2009, the big question is who will become the new Dr. Who?

We can be sure of one thing, the actor will be British. So that narrows the field slightly. Going beyond that I feel pretty secure in also stating that the Doctor will be a man – though I’d put the chance of it being a woman at 1%. If such a thing were to happen it would end the series. Not because an actress is not capable, but because of the incredible lore that has been created up to this date.

So the Doctor will be a man, British, not ugly, about 30 – 35. The actor will have to be able to give credibility to being 900 some odd years old, wise, stupendously smart, a loner, and more than likely straight. These are all things we can be sure of as things the Doctor must convey.

Well here are some of the favorites from England via the Telegraph

David Morrissey - not a shot in the world. While the Doctor does not need, and often shouldn’t be famous (internationally at least) he does need a flair about him. I just don’t see the flair here. Plus he looks to effeminate (though initially the same might have been said about Tennant).

Robert Carlyle - a far better choice. I recall him in the movie Formula 51, with Samuel Jackson. Not the best movie but he does have a fun and vibrant style to him. He’s energetic and moderately charismatic. And he displays more than just a bit of darkness in him. A definite bonus in being the Doctor. Definitely in the running, in my opinion.

Patterson Joseph - a bold choice. Nothing says that the Doctor can’t be Black. It would definitely be a first, and ground breaking. Considering it’s the 21st century it’s not a terrible choice. And it opens up a host of new storylines that have yet to be covered. New ground is always interesting. Sadly, I don’t think the BBC is that strong willed though. Odds out, but worth a bet.

Catherine Tate - did I just mention the odds of a woman? Won’t happen. Again, not because of her talent. It just doesn’t fit the lore that has been created. Though it really throws up questions about what a Time Lord is, and about the children of the Doctor. But then again, she is human.

Rhys Ifans - Americans will recognize this guy as the field goal kicker in the movie The Replacements. I put him on the same level as Morrissey. He just doesn’t have the look. Not that there haven’t been lanky Doctors, but this guy just looks like he’d drop the first time a Dalek landed near him.

John Simm - hello! Well the British are known for being quirky, and having an unusual humor. I can’t see this. He was the Master after all. Does that mean that all Time Lords could have (or did) look exactly the same, just rotating through the different bodies at different times? I don’t buy it. Simm is a great choice, and had he not already been a Time Lord I’d think he could pull off the Doctor. But some changes are too bizarre even in the Doctor’s universe.

Though there is the possibility that the Master planned for the escape of the Doctor in Last of the Time Lords and did not die as he appeared to. He might have been the woman/wife that accompanied him (or at least his mind was) and thus escaped death and is now a woman. That might allow the Doctor to take his form – as a tribute to the only other Time Lord to survive the last great Time War. But I admit this is reaching a bit.

But if The Master can be The Doctor, then so can an American. And since this is impossible, I would love to see Robert Downey Jr. be the Doctor. He can be dark, does drama exceptionally well, isn’t bad at comedy, does accents better than average, and has the looks. And he’s done scifi well enough to have a blockbuster international hit. He’s just not British, nor available.

Another impossible choice would be Jamie Foxx. Ok, stop laughing. Yes I know Foxx is best known for more comedic roles. But as the up-coming The Soloist (with Downey) is yet another film in a string of far more dramatic and powerful roles for this talented actor. He has the bonus of being Black and thus the same new storylines as Joseph. So he can hit a balance on several levels. I don’t think he can do accents though. And again he is unavailable.

But for an American choice that is available, though still impossible I call on Terrence Howard. Having just been ejected from the Iron Man 2 movie he has time to fill. He can do a range of roles, though I don’t recall outright comedic ones. He has great looks – women will love him on the television every week. He also can fulfill the Joseph storylines. And he too has done scifi to exuberant levels (also with Downey).

So my 3 American choices won’t happen, without a Paradox Machine if you have one handy, so I have to say that of the above choices it will likely be Robert Carlyle. The BBC is just not bold enough for it to be any other choice, and Carlyle isn’t bad in any consideration anyway.

Felix Dennis - multimillionaire, poet and killer?

You know what you don’t see very often? Poetry and modern advertising being combined.

Then again I’m in America and the poet that I am thinking of is in Britian. That may be the reason why the combination works. Or it could just be the wine. It’s free did I mention that.

Felix Dennis may not be a household name, and even less so in America, but he is popular in his circle. And with a promotion like Did I Mention the Free Wine? You have to believe that he is looking to expand his horizon far beyond.

Now I imagine you are thinking 2 things. Who is Felix Dennis, and is the wine really free or just a gimmick. Well to answer the second question first, yes the wine is free. So if you can travel back in time and cross the Atlantic you can get you buzz going along with a glass of the house red.

As for whom he is well that is the interesting bit. It is reported that he is a multi-millionaire, thus there is no problem with getting the drinks on him. He is also reported to be a philanthropist (not because of all the free drinks that he purchases at his readings), and a magazine magnate – where did you think the money came from? Poetry?

Yet, like all artists there is a bit of darkness that follows Dennis, maybe. It’s not his poetry tour for his collection Homeless In The Heart, but an admission that he made. Now the claim is that he was pissed at the time, bitter and twisted as it were, but who knows. All that can be said is that in April he stated to a journalist that he killed a man, and later recanted.

This is unusual fare for a poet, but so is being rich. Did he really kill someone? Is it just another publicity gimmick like buying your wine at his tour stops? Only Dennis knows for sure. But I bet you are more interested in his poetry now.

And there is the magazine magnate sticking out.

British chaplin wants to use tattoos like Nazi stars

I was considering taking a look at some news on tattoos and happened to do a search on what has been happening. There of course was news on Angelina Jolie getting tattoos for her twins, and that was kind of interesting. I considered speaking on that until I saw something that really made me stop.

In a flash I read the title of this article and saw the Nazi’s forcing Jew’s to wear yellow stars and gays to wear pink triangles. I was reminded of the horror of small minds acting in the most horrific manner to eliminate anyone that was not just like them.

The title was

Homosexuals should carry warning tattoos, says chaplain

Upon reading the article I found that Rev Dr Peter Mullen, who is titled as chaplin to the London Stock Exchange (a hobnorary title it seems as the LSE claims), wrote in a blog interview

“Let us make it obligatory for homosexuals to have their backsides tattooed with the slogan SODOMY CAN SERIOUSLY DAMAGE YOUR HEALTH and their chins with FELLATIO KILLS."

The blog was uncreditied and it seems that the entire post was removed. Still that does not change the fact that the comments were made. Rev. Mullen defends himself essentially stating that this was just English humor, and if readers were smart enough they would recognize this and get a chiuckle.

I’m sorry Rev. Mullen, I am familiar with and enjoy English humor. I love the bawdy nature of it, and the often dry delivery. I have lived overseas and had many friends from Britian. I understand British satire well, and those statements are not humorous.

Rev. mullen has also written in that blog post on homosexuals

“clearly unnatural, a perversion and corruption of natural instincts and affections, and because it is a cause of fatal disease.”

So that comment coupled with his wish for branding is supposed to be a joke? I suppose that a KKK member in a white hood burning a cross on my lawn and calling me the N-word in the middle of the night would be a belly-aching raucous laugh riot.

Bollocks!

Tattoos are meant to be an expression of the person with the tattoo. A piece of body art that highlights the essence of the person tattooed. They are NOT a means of branding, discrimination, or persecution.

The outright evil that statement embodies is almost unmentionable. It is difficult to accuately convey in words the anger this evokes in me. And I have to wonder who else is on the list of greatest jokes Rev. Mullen might have. Short people, those of different races, different religions?

Humor is a fine line in many cases. Some jokes don’t translate countries or other demographics. That being a given there is an obvious and dramatic point at which you know you have gone so far as to be just vile. And I often find those who go that far are more expressing their own personal bile and miniscule thoughts than anything else.

In Britian there are calls for the Rev. Mullen to resign or be fired. That is at least what should happen. I would love to see Rev. Mullen explain the humor and “satire” of his comment to Holocaust survivors on British television live.

This is not the light or popular post on tattoos I intended. But I think it is far more, it is vital and potent. Because if this were taken by anyone as a joke, as something of a trifle, then we all start on the road that leads to Auschwitz for any number of people that don’t meet the racist, bigoted, small-minded, irrational, fearful, disgusting standard of some twisted gene pool reject.

Heinz – For love or money?

I have just seen the latest Heinz mayonnaise commercial. This commercial was made for England, where it has aired. That is important because either Heinz thought this would appeal to the aptly named British dry wit or it was afraid of letting the American public see this.

Some find it funny, some see a political statement. I see the political statement.

What do you see? What do you think?

Legally marked for Ridicule

Oh the injustice, if only we could have seen it coming.

Seriously, there is an injustice and it is unexpected. In fact, psychics here in the U.S. should keep an eye out. The problem is not an astral or paranormal one but is a concern of law.

In the U.K. a law has been passed that required mediums, psychics and others in the paranormal pursuits that enhance or earn a living via this arena to have to label their communications with the public as 'only entertainment'.

There are millions if not billions that believe in some form of the paranormal. There have been documentations of mediums, psychics, fortune tellers and so on since before recorded time, and mentioned in tomes as revered as The Bible. Given all that, it is still looked upon with suspicious eyes and mistrust. This law is the next step on that path.

Even worse is the thought that if any one industry can be labeled for chastisement and ridicule then where does it end? Especially in an industry where the main purpose is the benefit and comfort of the general public?

Some would say, well that’s the U.K. America is different, we’re free. Of course that does not resolve one thing. England is free too.

Toddler power beats drug ring

Criminals these days must deal with many factors, especially if they are involved in drugs. Sniffing dogs, DEA, INTERPOL, detectives, narcotics officers, informants and more are just a few of the hurdles they must outwit or avoid. But for those that can clear all these hurdles, there is one more defender of the law that they have to be prepared for. Toddlers.

Yes toddlers. To be more specific, in England there is 3 year old Kian Parlour, who recently cause an international drug ring to be found and closed. In a somewhat Clouseu-ish act, little Kian was able to do what no one else was.

As it turns out, Kian’s parents were holding onto several packages for their neighbors who were away on a vacation. This is nothing strange as like many neighbors the Parlour’s were doing this and had had it done for them while they were away. But Kian saw the packages stacked in the hallway and decided he needed to see what was inside. Once the packages were opened he presented the prize to his mother, who realized they were drugs and not candy. A quick call to the police and the neighbors’ holiday was at an end.

In total 640,000 pills of diazepam were found, all shipped from Sri Lanka. The neighbors were sentenced to 3 ½ and 2 ½ years individually. And roughly $57,000 worth of drugs were removed from the streets of England. All due to perhaps the youngest sleuth of all.

What if they took away Black History Month? - 2.29.2008.1

What if Black History Month was removed? Would anyone have noticed? Would anyone complain?

It seems not.

Why would I say this? Because I just learned that the school system in Endicott New York has removed all Black studies in the curriculum. There was nothing discussed in this past month about Black History, not even Dr. Martin Luther King, because the entire subject was deemed unimportant.

Hello, stop and read that again. Unimportant and having no place in the minds of any of the children, including those that are African American. And this was all done without a single word to the parents, a single complaint from ANY of the students. It was just wiped out without a concern as if it was no more than a piece of errant string found on a piece of clothing.

Why am I upset? What if the school decided not to discuss the Holocaust, or Native American history? What if all the history about England was removed, or France, or Ancient Rome? What if history in schools forgot about President George Washington, just not ever mentioning what he did, or the Constitution?

People would be up in arms. Parents would be inflamed. Jewish communities would claim its anti-Semitic, Native American Indians would say it’s a slap in the face. Whole communities would demand a reason why their rich pasts were being denied their children. Cries that the fundamental based of what is America was being corrupted.

And I ask, in what way is this different? How are the lives and blood of the African Americans that helped build and shape this nation any less important than anyone else? I am not just talking about the Slaves that literally built the foundations of the nation, but the inventors that created thousands of items we use every day, like the stoplight, or save millions of lives, like blood transfusions. How can we value the lives of soldiers like the Tuskegee Airmen, or those that fought in the Civil War, or the American Revolution with any less honor than every other American.

I don’t know how we can equate those lives and contributions as less, but obviously this town in Upstate New York has. I’m willing to bet that they aren’t the only ones. What are the odds that kids in Montana, or Florida, or Ohio, or any other State have no idea about these inventions or people? How many believe that being a slave, less than a dog or piece of furniture, was no different than having trouble getting a job? I know there are more than a few as I’ve read comments that insist that the trouble the Irish had in getting a job was the same as working 20 hours a day for your entire life, with no days off or concern for your health, without pay, and with the reality that at any moment your entire family may be sold away from you and that you can be killed for no more than amusement or the crime of looking at the wrong person.

If we can allow these schools to just toss away a piece of American History, a history of an essential people that helped found and defend this nation, what will go next? Dr. Martin Luther King’s Holiday? A holiday that over half the nation fought from coming into existence, and many still ignore? Maybe the laws dealing with segregation could be next. And if we get that far, why not restate Jim Crow? Hell, just bring slavery back and make it national.

It’s not that crazy. Slavery was just 5 lifetimes ago for some families. Jim Crow was just 2 or 3. Segregation was just 1. And a people without a history aren’t really a people are they?

And this was so important an issue, that not one child mentioned it. Not one parent noticed. Not one meeting was held. It was just understood that it was ok. As long as no one spoke about it, and no one asked why.

So as long as no one asks you if you are Black, or Hispanic, or whatever color, religion, or background you claim, you are nothing. And you can’t hurt nothing. You can’t defend, offend, steal from, brutalize, rape, murder or anything to nothing. And in Upstate New York, that’s what they are equating being African American with. Perhaps the Jews will be next?

Are you nothing? Is your history, your family nothing? Are you sure?

“Don’t learn Black History because of what you know, learn it because of what you don’t know” – C. Miller

I don’t have children. I’m not a teacher or involved in the school system. Maybe that’s a cop out, maybe not. But I am now aware, and so are you. Part of my responsibility is to let you know, and ask for your comments. What will you do?