bbc on Jay-Z

i must say, i am not the typical hip-hop, R'nB or Rap target market, but i do respect talent when i see it!
watched tonight on bbc1 - imagine feat. Jay-Z
and was really disappointed by the end.
usually bbc gets all the facts right, but in a way, mostly when the report is about any other than a 'proud to be British' artist in any kind or form, they always manage to leave a strange and bitter taste...
Jay-Z worked very hard to get to where he is right now, and coming from that background it is more likely to win the bloody lottery jackpot.
its hard enough, and you gotta work 10 times harder just to get half the success..
saying, he caused quite a stir at Glastonbury?? my [@$%&] spoon causes a stir in my cup!
he managed to raise the roof at an open air event! - open air! when the people jumped it was like the planet got resuscitated from a coma of ignorance and contempt.
times are changing and we should give those who really care to make a difference honest credit and gratitude, there are still only a few handfuls of those who ARE history, and if we make it seem like nothing because we can't bare the thread of acknowledging our own mediocrity then we are not worth of even becoming history ourselves.
its sad to see that the bbc seems to fear that thread.
i will keep watching, for the facts, and i think my mind is (still) clear and open enough to make up my own.
rappers are the true poets of our time and we should never underestimate or belittle the value of the message or the hard work behind it to get the message heard...
thank you..

that’s the atomic power of twitter…

take one infectious enthusiasm of an highly reputable and knowledgeable entity of showbiz on one side, sophisticated globally spread technology to unite and channel interest and affinities on the other, and well, there you have it..a bestseller enjoyed and celebrated by everyone.
if it weren’t for loved celebrities like Stephen and others, a fast growing interest of social technologies and ever developing IT geniuses, we wouldn’t be able to share the great works by brilliant writers all through the entire social community.
if the shrewd aim for profit of publishers means to cash in on the back of the hard earned popularity of publicly celebrated people, but at the same time gives everyone the chance to benefit from the content and the ability to widen their horizon and understanding of issues they were not even remotely interested in before, then – so be it.
its unfair to use quotes without the important value of authenticity.
a policy or terms of use may be suggested… to protect intellectual property, so if its not ’said’ it won’t be quoted.
but if the quote is genuine and true, it would be a shame to leave it off the book cover to prevent a sudden rise of sales.
the sudden rise of interest, and the acquired knowledge after consumption is far to valuable to the delicate scaffolding of our global society called common sense.
ref. blog entry by Stephen Fry

the importance of being mindful

Family ties had classified my 'religious background' as catholic, so in school when it came to the subject of 'religion' we were separated in catholic, evangelic and 'other'.
maybe to avoid cross-religion brainwashing.
or to maintain the brainwashing within a specific 'faith'.
or both - is my guess.
those belonging to the group - 'other' - had one hour of 'hanging out' or a so called "empty-hour".
i used to think of my lesson more as a bible-study.
as you wouldn't 'learn' about "religions", but you'd be taught whats written in the bible, and what it means - for Catholics, so you'd know what you are supposed to do as a 'proper' catholic.
well, more of what would happen to you if you don't.
it felt like, to have the questionable 'privilege' of getting to know Catholicism you HAD to be catholic, like an exclusive club where you make sure you are among same 'thinking' people, how very christian....keeping diversity strictly separate doesn't embody understanding and mutual respect for each other, now does it?
thank god that that's changing.
ok, now back to buddhism, whereas the basic principles are fairly straight forward and easy to grasp, it is an entire different task to live up to it in your everyday life, especially considering the diverse lifestyles in present times.
(..won't mention the credit crunch here, rather leave that to politicians for excuse purposes)
i used to think when you meditate you must maintain a 'thoughtless' mind.
kind of relaxing your neurons..
but knowing now, thinking like that seems really juvenile.
if you try to empty your mind, what happens is you actually contemplate 'emptiness', so you ARE still thinking.. and that is what its really all about.
you have to think things through to get a clear head.

we all can incorporate a little mindfulness to our daily stress...and make it seem less.
if we are conscious of what we create, consider others around us a bit more and just a little acknowledgment for events, even as banal as a car giving way, and the gesture of a thank-you-wave.

problem is: not everyone thinks the same, so you will always come across someone who won't be considerate and that really blows.

we all are very 'mindful' when we strike disappointment, we complain, we dwell, we blame, like there is no tomorrow...somehow everyone finds 'time' to focus their mind fully on aggravation.
the reason why being 'positive' seems such a struggle sometimes is that getting angry is just to easy, we never have to 'force' ourselves to get mad. it almost seems 'natural'.
but nevertheless we have the ability to be mindful.

to me mindfulness is just like water.
an element in your life you can utilize as lifesaving entity such as drinking water.
or comfort and pure joy as in a swimming pool or soothing bath.
though it takes effort to make it save to drink or gather enough to fill the bath.

uncontrolled however it will drag you away, and if you don't consist of the knowledge how to swim and there's no-one to help, drowning will be unavoidable.

But at the same time you can't do without it, you'd die of thirst.

thank you, and good night.

what a waste! or policy before trust?

ok, so i had the morning off today...
and when i got to my mac mini to check my mail i noticed that yet another has added me to their list of people to follow on twitter.
@milblogging or 'Military Blogs'
how intriguing i thought, as non of my interests or comments had anything to do that would even come close to anything 'military'.
well, i am aware a high number of twitters follow just about anyone - promotion - yes?
and having seen an add to interest people in becoming reservists in the RAF here in the UK, i thought, ok somebody is becoming desperate.
anyway, refusing to judge a book by its cover i thought, well then lets check the profile.
i ended up reading the blog entry on @milblogging's site.
here: Troops destroy beer in Iraq.
the entry displays a truck crushing beer cans left behind at the foreign compound, now occupied by the US Troop.
well, i get the policy about alcohol in a combat zone, but destruction?
why not give it to civilians?
or how about keeping it save until 'the fighting's over'?
i understand they should not consume alcohol, but i can't quite get the 'possess' part of the policy. Seems to me like lack of 'trust'.
making sure the beer is destroyed to even avoid temptation?
don't soldiers have the discipline and strength to withstand that kind of temptation?
i think its a question of trust, at the expense of good beer going to waste.
it just shows that policy has no room for faith, trust or consideration for the healthy level of common sense and understanding a good soldier should naturally possess...
personally i don't support fighting as a solution for any issues or differences,
but i understand a soldier has to do a job like we all have to, and as long as politics endorse conflict, somebody has to do the job to deal with the consequences.
but if even set policies seem to discount respect and belief in the people they are intended to protect and guide, than - to me - the whole idea of 'combat to protect all' doesn't seem right.
it is a job nevertheless and i respect anyone simply doing their job.
there is a compromise in everything we do - every day.
and we all have choices.
it would be a perfect world if we all would always choose the right thing to do, but in reality this world is simply not perfect, and we all learn at one point or another to deal with it.
thank you...

IQ - natural, or depending on personal inerest?

i believe i consist of a healthy level of common sense.
but in general i never thought of myself as highly intelligent.
average i thought.
i love puzzles and used to enjoy maths at school.
so maybe in some ways i have an interest in solving logical problems.
could that interest be a motivation to my intelligence?
and those considered 'less clever' or daft, might it just be the lack of interest
and motivation regarding logical solutions?
how about an IQ on flower arranging or fashion?
in my opinion a standard IQ test simply determines your ability in solving logical problems.
but it is seen as a measurement for general intelligence, which seems unfair to others who are simply not interested in logic or solving number puzzles.
for example, i am absolutely useless in gardening... it doesn't automatically reduces me to the level of utter daftness in general.
so, why do we consider people less intelligent (in general) who score a lower IQ than others?
just for the simple fact that they can't care less about numbers or logical problem solving?
just as i can't care less about flowers or plants..

i guess if there will be a balanced test for everybody consisting of questions covering
all possible levels and interests anyone could have, we would all score average.

anyway, if you like logic questions and numbers you might as well try the test i did.
my IQ score of 156 however just represents my interest and affinity for logical problems
and solving puzzles in that genre..


Free-IQTest.net - Free IQ Tests

..but please, don't ask me the name of the latest fashion designer or when to harvest apples, as those questions would make me seem rather 'unintelligent' ;-)

care conscience

as long as i can think i always thought i care.
respecting friends, family - well - more or less.
helping, yes, call it weakness, but i can't say 'no' easily.

is is easier to compromise if you want to be liked?
is 'liked' equal to 'respected'?

if i look back i only remember being taken advantage of.
which seems like a negative experience, although i helped from my heart.
i also remember being happy helping.

and when i asked for help myself, and it was refused i thought to myself:
why? don't they want to feel happy too?
i couldn't understand, or see their point of view, why they'd refuse.
i realized, helping me, wasn't really in their interest.
there was no gain or benefit in doing so.

maybe they didn't care about being liked?
or i wasn't worth it?
anyway, getting worked up about it didn't make it any different.
i wondered why i had that feeling of being happy to help.
maybe i felt useful.
and they didn't need to feel useful or needed.
i liked feeling useful and needed.
making life easier for someone, made me feel wanted.

having been criticized half my life, being given opportunities
to help others gave me some sense of purpose.
something i could do 'right' for once - helping.

taking care of things or people, it slowly became my purpose.
if you are never good at anything when you're young, at least
if someone makes you feel that way, you start thinking
that there is no purpose for you.

you feel not needed or useful to be. or live.
those thoughts were scary. what am i there for?
and your head spins round not finding any answers.

later you meet friends, a partner.
they all tell you the opposite, but somehow you don't believe.

i took me long, but understanding my purpose now,
helps me to simply get on with doing what i can do best:
help others, well - more or less.

understanding why i like to help, why i seek to be useful,
i have now - finally - come to the conclusion, that
without being treated the way i was, i would have become the
way i am.

my better half asked me - just this week - what i would do,
if i would meet my mother, that instant, would i be able to give her a hug?
my first thought was - ignore her! hug? never! she never did!
having given me so much pain through the years,
why should i spend a single moment even looking at her?

he than said that feeling was brought up entirely by my emotions.
i thought, i had been over 'her'.
so i wouldn't care anymore whether she is here or not, just like she
never cared about how i felt when she criticized my every actions.

i think i will just have to accept that i still care.
is it in my nature?
or it developed by wanting to be loved?

i always thought i tried my best, and that in her eyes it was never good enough.
and there were times i was simply to scared to do anything.
am i still scared?

should i still be scared?
if i look at my mother from a different point of view, i can't see why i should be scared at all.
when i think of the bliss she missed out on all those years, i get sad.
then i feel like i want to hug her, not for me, but because she needs a hug.
she should feel the peace and love i felt every time my nice ran up to me and gave me a hug
every day when i got back home from working the whole day.

thinking like that makes me feel sorry for her.
she never had that love from her mother, so she might not know how good it feels.
maybe now, if i would meet my mother - today. i would give her a hug.
it will be what she needs - as a woman -, even if she might not see it that way.

so, all the pain wasn't meant as an authoritative control mechanism.
she might have been more scared than me.
and that was the only way she knew how to deal with it.
every time she got cross, was she victim of her emotions?

when i think of my nice, i don't think i was ever scared.
maybe comprehensive at start, as i had never looked after
anything younger than me!
but it felt right in my heart, to help her grow up.
she had just been 1 year old when we first met,
and the most inquisitive person i had ever met!
and i loved it to tell her and show her everything she was interested in.

yes, i had to be strict sometimes, but it was never unreasonable.
authoritative strictness never brought any peace, wherever you look.
you have simple rules for everybody to stick to.
and to me, personally, punishment never made any sense.

cleaning the kitchen, for bad grades or an untidy room,
didn't teach me to keep my room tidy or how to improve my grades at school.
or being banned from watching the TV.
that didn't even teach me to clean the kitchen properly,
or see any reason why the kitchen should be clean.

it only made me to think - every time i clean the kitchen now -
of that horrible feeling of being disliked or hated.
that time i thought of it as being hated.

or if my handwriting was untidy, it couldn't have really been improved
be getting the pages torn out or books hit around my head.
i never thought i would be capable of feeling so much anger at that age.
that anger is still with me today. i can cope - most of the time - but it can
be a real pain having to deal with it every step of your way.

but there again i feel now, you can't have sunshine without the rain.
bad or difficult times makes you really appreciate the good times.

so next time - if ever! - i see my mother, and i give her a hug,
she might maybe just be able to appreciate how good it can feel, if you just let it!

so, on that note - go on! - hug somebody today!
thanks for reading...to the end!
goodnight!