James Bailey - The Articles

Macedonia - What's In A Name?

2007-10-14T21:12:00.000+09:30

I read an article in the Washington Times called “Name Dispute or Ethnic Misdeeds?” by Metodija A. Koloski, in which the case was put forward that the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia [FYROM] has every right to use the name Republic of Macedonia.

Further, Metodija proceeded to claim a sort-of Macedonian genocide by the Greek state [An independent Macedonian state is anathema to Greece because it is an embarrassing reminder of Greece’s failed attempts to wipe out the Macedonian people” in Metadojia’s own words].

What Metodija failed to mention in the article, amongst other things, is the whole issue of the name “Macedonia” and it’s origins.

Macedonia was an ancient kingdom based around the city of Pella. Alexander the Great and his people were Hellenised prior to 400BC and remainded a Greek speaking region right through to the present day. That’s a history of over 2,400 years of being Greek and part of the Greek world. Alexander the Great himself ruled from Pella, and spread the Greek civilisation throughout what is now the Balkans, Middle East, northeastern Africa and into northwestern India.

Now to the issue of FYROM and it’s desire to be called the Republic of Macedonia. Metodija claimed that FYROM has made every effort to appease the Greek government, including “mended its constitution to unequivocally disclaim any “territorial ambitions,” and it changed national symbols to remove “Greek” connections.”.

Blindness is one thing, but that comment is full of potholes wide enough for anyone to fall into. FYROM’s capital Skopje renamed its airport to “Alexander the Great” and they still use the ancient star-burst symbol [Vergina Sun] of Alexander the Great as their flag. Sure, they amended it in 1995, but only a half-wit will not notice the similarities.

If FYROM truly wanted peace with Greece over the name of the republic, then why not chose something else? The people who reside in FYROM are Slavic in origin, and have no connection with ancient Macedonia and Alexander the Great. Further, the bulk of the geographical region called Macedonia, falls within Greece’s borders. For the Greek government to allow FYROM to be called Macedonia, would not only confuse the status of the region, but will also bring it at odds with Bulgaria, who also has a region called Macedonia. To make matters worse, part of geographical Macedonia falls into the territory of Albania as well.

The Greek objection is a fair one, and one that looks not only to the present and immediate future, but also into the distant future. If FYROM is allowed to call itself the Republic of Macedonia, then what happens to not only the part of Macedonia within Greece, but also the regions in Bulgaria [who call it Vardar Macedonia] and Albania? Lets not forget that within FYROM there is a vibrant organisation called United Macedonia, which calls for the union of all lands within the geographical region named Macedonia.

By accepting the name Republic of Macedonia, Greece implies that it recognises the republic as not only by name, but by implication that it is the “true” Macedonia. These fears are held not only by the Greek Government, but also by Bulgaria where they have raised concerns over the UMO Ilinden–Pirin movement and its “united Macedonia” philosophy.

What’s in a name? In this particular case, the name Macedonia is one that is a powder keg ready to be ignited. For FYROM to be allowed to adopt the name Republic of Macedonia, it will create a lot of tension and hostility in the region, destabilising the Balkans. It is in everyone’s interests that FYROM adopt a name other than Republic of Macedonia and people like Metodija need to look beyond their own self-interests and agendas.

Greece Sees Who Their Friends & Allies Are

2007-08-30T09:09:00.000+09:30

The fires seem to be under control in Greece but the carnage caused, will take years to recover from. Greece's friends and allies sent personnel, equipment and assistance. Its times like this that a country sees who their real allies and friends truly are. Below is the list of countries that helped [notice the distinct absence of their main ally - the USA]. Worldwide, countries and the Greek communities, are raising funds to help those affected. Once again - the USA government has remained silent.

Oh well - hopefully the US will not have another Hurricane Katrina [when Greece provided assistance] and ask Greece for help in some time in the future, for Greeks have a long good memory.

Countries that have offered Greece firefighting help:

_Austria: Two army helicopters, a transport plane and 20 firefighters.

_Cyprus: 14 firefighting vehicles, 88 firefighters, 29 civil defense personnel, 22 volunteers trained in firefighting and rescue.

_Czech Republic: One helicopter with five-member crew.

_Denmark: Six firefighting all-terrain vehicles that can climb steep slopes.

_Finland: Three helicopters and 25 firefighters.

_France: Four Canadair water-tanker planes and 60 specialist helicopter firefighters.

_Germany: Three CH-53 water-carrying helicopters. Authorities have also offered firefighting units, including experts in battling forest fires, and other equipment.

_Hungary: 18 firefighters, one doctor, two fire engines, backup equipment.

_Israel: 55 firefighters.

_Italy: One Canadair water-tanker plane.

_The Netherlands: Three Cougar firefighting helicopters and 27 crew.

_Norway: One Bell 214 firefighting helicopter.

_Portugal: One Canadair tanker plane, six personnel.

_Romania: One MI-17 helicopter with a nine crew.

_Russia: Two heavy firefighting helicopters, two Mi-8 helicopters and a multifunctional amphibian plane.

_Slovenia: One water-carrying helicopter.

_Spain: Two Canadair tanker planes.

_Switzerland: Four Super Puma water-carrying helicopters.

_Turkey: One tanker plane.

Greece Burns, The Gods Weep

2007-08-26T10:42:00.000+09:30

Melodramatic the title, maybe. But one of the most beautiful countries in the world that has given so much to civilisation, is currently gripped in a plethora of fires. Many have died, lost the homes, lost loved ones and more.
I haven't seen anything in the press regarding donations to help the victims, but if you can spare some cash, contact your local Greek Embassy and see how you can help.

List of embassies are listed here: http://www.hellas-guide.com/about_greece/greek_embassies.html

Map of the fires

To see satellite photos, check out NASA's website here

View Larger Map

Greece - The New Generation Superpower

2007-05-19T11:58:00.001+09:30

Mention the word “superpower” and automatically one will think of the USA, China and a small number of other countries, each with large defence forces, large populations and economic clout.

Yet there is a new type of superpower emerging, where its population size or how large its armed forces are, are not the criteria. The new-style superpower [or New Generation Superpower, as I wish to call it] is one where its status is obtained via its economic influence on another country. One where culturally, economically and socially, the relationship is more congenial than its strength. This new style superpower does not rely on the “baseball bat” philosophy which many old style superpowers rely on.

Greece is one of these new generation superpowers.

With a population of approximately 11 million people, it is one of the smaller countries in Europe. From an international perspective, it would be considered a second world nation, relying on its alliances with NATO and membership in the EU, to protect it from hostile countries. From an economic perspective, it is one of the poorer nations within Europe, even though it has made large strides in developing itself and its economy.

The strength of Greece, and its ability to become a new generation superpower, lies in other areas.

Today, as in the 20th century, Greece has enjoyed an excellent working relationship with the Middle East. Whereas other western countries have fluctuated in their attitudes towards these countries, Greece has maintained a pro-Arabic, pro-Islamic stance in its dealings. While at the same time, maintaining a good relationship with Israel. Its impartial stance on the Middle East, has seen itself being portrayed as a “friend” of the region by both the Jews and the Muslims. It's impartiality has given Greece the ability to open discussions with countries like Iran, where the US and others have failed.

In Southeastern Europe, Greece has supported the membership of its neighbours into the European Union, including that of its arch rival Turkey. This support has been both for national interests as well as economic ones. Since the 1990s, Greek businesses have poured billions of Euros into the region, in areas where other nations and businesses have avoided due to the political instability and uncertainty. The push into Southeastern Europe has been led by the Greek banks, where today, a large percentage of their profits are originating through these investments. Greek banks are also looking beyond Southeastern Europe, into Egypt, the Middle East and the Ukraine. Greek banks currently control 16% of the banking market in Southeaster Europe, with a network of over 1,000 branches and 16,000 employees. Total assets in the banking sector in the five Balkan countries where Greek banks were present at the end of 2005 (i.e. Albania, Bulgaria, FYROM, Romania, Serbia- Montenegro), amounted to 66bn euros (53% of their GDP) while bank assets in
Greece amounted to 266bn euros, equaling 156% of the Greek GDP.

The Greek banks' move into Southeastern Europe has also been followed by the Greek telecommunication companies as well as other businesses. At present, over 3,500 businesses are investing heavily into the region, and today, they are the leading investors in Albania and FYROM, and the third largest in Bulgaria, Romania and Serbia. Since the early 90’s Greek corporations have invested 14 billion Euros in the Balkans and it is estimated that by the next decade this amount will have at least doubled.
With the opening of the Greece-Turkey natural gas pipeline, the signing of the Russia-Bulgaria-Greece oil pipeline and the proposed Greece-Italy pipeline, Greece is establishing itself as the energy hub of not only Southeastern Europe, but the energy gateway for the rest of Europe.

The presence of Greek industry and investment within Southeastern Europe has been, to a certain extent, a god-send for the recipient countries. Coming out of Communist rule, faced within internal strife and limited overseas investment, the Greeks have poured billions into the region, helping develop the countries concerned. In exchange, the Greeks are buying into the local economies and linking their dependence into the Greek economy. Further, being the only EU member in the region who is also part of the Eurozone, Greece is promoting itself outside the region as the gateway into Southeastern Europe to other nations and businesses.
And the benefits, besides the financial aspect, for Greece?
Due to the cultural and historic links with the neighbouring countries, Greece is seen by the Southeastern European countries as a friend and ally more so than other European countries. With the inter-linking of the economies and the continual support of these countries in joining the EU, Greece is setting itself up as the “superpower” in the region. Its status as a New Generation Superpower won't happen overnight. However the seeds are being planted and is steadily growing. As each Southeastern European nation joins the EU, Greece's influence within the EU will grow both on a political as well as an economic one.
Further, its investment expansion and good political relations with the Middle East, Greece is positioning itself to becoming the political intermediary between the West and Middle East.
I believe that if the continual advancement of Greek involvement within Southeastern Europe and the Middle East continues, Greece will by about 2030 become a dynamic force in the region. Much larger than its population warrants.

New OUTRadio Service

2007-01-23T20:35:00.000+10:30

I have been kind of busy lately, preparing for the launch of a second radio station. At present, OUTRadio broadcasts 24/7 with music from the 1970s through to the present, and on Sundays, was broadcasting various talk shows.

From February 3rd 2007, the shows will have their own station [OUTRadio 2] which will also run on a 24/7 basis. I’ll be also adding new ones upon launch, and gradually expanding the service. In addition to the on-air shows, there will also be GLBT TV shows to view as well as on-web articles to read. So the second site will be more of a portal than strictly a radio station.
To help expand the audience of the new station, I am looking for new shows to add as well as offering FREE ON-AIR advertising to GLBT businesses. On-site advertising is strictly by reciprocal arrangement [ie, I’ll carry your banner/button ad on the site, in exchange for one of ours]. Anyone interested, please visit www.OUTRadiomedia.com for more information.

In the meantime, stay tuned. Keep an eye out for the announcement on both www.OUTRadio.com.au and www.OUTRadiomedia.com

Anyway, that’s it. Back to work for me.

James

Enemy Propaganda on Al-Jazeera English

2007-01-03T20:00:00.000+10:30

Be afraid! Very very afraid! Al-Jazeera English is something you should not watch nor should you encourage your local cable or pay-tv provider to carry.

After reading the pros and cons of Al-Jazeera English since it’s launch in December 2006, I decided I had to make up my own mind on what the Qatar-based news service was all about. Not having it available in Australia, I subscribed to the service via JumpTV for the nominal charge of US$9.95 [or approximately $12 Australian] for a month. Not bad for enlightening one’s self, I thought. My subscription started coincidentally the same day Saddam Hussein was hung.
After some frustration in connecting, and finally realising that JumpTV is not compatible with Firefox, and then fine-tuning the stream to allow a smooth uninterrupted broadcast, I sat in front of my PC and watched. My initial reaction was that I had accidentally subscribed to the BBC, but my fear was allayed by the continual mention by the news hosts of “Al-Jazeera”.

My first viewing of Al-Jazeera English lasted nearly 3 hours of various programming, including news reports, documentaries, general entertainment shows and sports. Shows like Witness, The Fabulous Picture Show, Inside Story, Listening Post and more, were real eye openers. And of course, the endless commercials from both international organisations like Reuters, tourism ads from Cyprus and Malaysia [amongst others], and loads of Middle East-based businesses.

As this is a “self enlightening” event, I had the BBC and CNN running on my pay-TV service and comparing the reporting between them and Al-Jazeera English. The more I compared Al-Jazeera English against it’s western counterparts, the more I became worried and afraid. After 5 days of watching Al-Jazeera English, for an average of 4 hours a day, I feel myself changing, and I can “sense it” within me. Whereas CNN provided a very pro-US and US-centric look at the world in short glossed over reporting, and the BBC provided a more international but still US/UK orientated viewpoint, Al-Jazeera provided a more in-depth analysis in its reporting.

With the hanging of Saddam Hussein, they broadcast not only the Iraq Government’s and the US reaction, but also those opposed to the current Iraqi Government and other nations and people who oppose hangings regardless of who is at the end of the noose. Further, their reporting of the world was much more in-depth and thorough than either the BBC or CNN.

In addition to the news, their documentaries provided a refreshing look at the rest of the world. I am not talking about political documentaries but rather just general interest ones, like the Shao Lin temple in China, the mud volcano in Indonesia that has left thousands homeless, the Kenyan village that is populated solely by women, the poppy growers in Afghanistan and more. All of them broadcast without passing judgement, simply letting the people from all sides, voice their opinion.

So, why should one be afraid, very afraid of Al-Jazeera English?

Simple. By watching this station you slowly begin to realise that there is always more than one side to a story. But more importantly, you realise that the world consists of more than Europe, North America and Australia. There are billions of people in Latin America, Africa and Asia from whom we only hear about if there is a natural disaster or a major war breaks out. And even then, our current media only provides the ultra basic details.

But be warned. If you do decide to preview Al-Jazeera via JumpTV or your local pay-TV/Cable carrier, then be prepared for some mind-adjusting. And yes, you will change. You will be influenced by this “enemy propaganda” coming out of Qatar, as some have labelled Al-Jazeera English. And when you un-subscribe [if you manage to do that], you will then look at your existing media news services and wonder . . how much have we not been told about in the past?

How much of our news in the past has been “tailored” to suit the objectives of governments and/or news outlets?

Am I biased with my opinion of Al-Jazeera English? Yes, I am. Not because I support Al-Jazeera English or any “Arabic plot” to corrupt the west. I am biased because I have always sourced my news from all over the world via the Internet. But the biggest drawback was the TV services.

Now, until my local pay-TV carrier decides to have Al-Jazeera English as a channel for subscribing, I will continue to watch it via the internet. Just as I continue to watch CNN and the BBC on TV. But now, when the BBC/CNN broadcasts a news story, Al-Jazeera English will give me the other side of the story, thus allowing me to make my own mind up.

James
www.jebadel.com

Ignorance breeds fear

2007-01-02T16:00:00.000+10:30

Questions.Why are humans so afraid of other opinions and views? Why do we refuse to open our eyes and see someone else’s perspective? Why do we jump to defend our own opinion when someone challenges our viewpoint? What are we scared of?

These questions and more have been playing on mind for some time now, and the conclusion I have come up with is that we are all afraid of changing. Change brings instability, even though the end result may be a betterment for us as individuals. It is safer for us to be ignorant than to become enlightened, for to change one’s view implicitly implies that our original stance was wrong. And as humans, we hate to be wrong.

But, is “being wrong”, a wrong thing anyway? Does “wrong” have to equate with us making a mistake or believing in something that is not correct? Is not everything a matter of perspective?

Take for example when we believed that the world was flat. Our ancestors confined their “world” within the limits they set themselves, whether it was the distant mountain range or the neighbouring sea. Anything beyond that limit simply did not exist, nor could anything exist. To attempt to cross that self-imposed “correct” limit, would result in one falling off the face of the Earth. The question that was rarely asked was “so if we fall off the face of the Earth, where do we fall onto or into?” To think about this would result in not only realising that one could possibly be wrong [i.e. the world is not flat] but also that the world may be bigger than they actually were led to believe.

It took a few people to challenge this flat-earth belief and explore beyond the “known world”, and as a direct consequence, people’s perceptions change. Mind you, even when the Classical Greek philosophers scientifically proved that the world was actually a globe rather than flat, their ideas were ridiculed. Why? Because it went contrary to millennia of popular belief that the earth was flat, and that if the world was actually a globe, then it was likely that they were “upside down”.

The same applies today, despite our vast advancements in technology. We can place people on the moon and undertake inter-species transplants, but our ignorance in other areas are the same, if not worse than those of our ancestors.

It is easier for many to believe that gay people are a danger to society, and that gay marriage will see our civilisation collapse or that AIDS is some almighty deity’s way of cleansing humanity of a “disease called homosexuality”. It is easier to see Aljazeera as a radical islamic television station than to actually sit and watch it, and draw our own conclusions. It’s so much easier to sit silently and listen to our politicians tell us what is right than to make up our own minds on whether we find “the evil enemy”.

It is easier to conform to the [current] norm than to challenge it, for our world is then “stable and safe” within our minds, and we can sleep easily at nights knowing we are part of the majority.

And that’s the sad thing with humanity. We prefer to be ignorant of another perspective or to challenge the current viewpoint - whether that of our own or those around us - than to try and expand our personal development. Ignorance of what may be out there simply allows us to live within the fears we have enveloped ourselves in.

To discover that gays are just normal human beings, that AIDS is a disease that knows no sexual boundaries, that Aljazeera is actually more factual and more diverse in the opinions it broadcasts than CNN or the BBC, or that going to war with the “evil enemy” is actually due to us fighting because our petrol is at stake and not because of a madman running that “evil country”, will challenge our ignorance. By challenging our ignorance, it may enlighten us to the point we are no longer part of the “majority” but instead become a “minority” member ourselves.

And that is even sadder. All the great people - both in the past and the present - are those that have challenged the norm. Whether we look at Bill Gates, Alexander the Great, any major religious leader, or the guys that founded Google. They challenged the current norm and didn’t allow their ignorance and fear of the unknown inhibit them.

Where will you stand? Part of the ignorant fearful majority, or one of the few who will challenge the norm and hopefully become a more open, tolerant and enlightened person?

James
www.jebadel.com

Xmas Day Aftermath

2006-12-30T19:20:00.000+10:30

Christmas Day was mostly a non-event, like it was last year for my family. Since mum passed away just over 12 months ago, the family social events have been eased up a-bit. Not that we don’t hold them, but they aren’t the same any more.

Anyways. My brother and sister-in-law with my two nieces came over for dinner, and then did the usual opening of the presents. As I watched my nieces [aged 4 and 2] open their presents, and their expressions of excitement over what Uncle James bought them, I realised that as a gay man, this is something most of us will never experience. Watching young children of our own, full of innocence, charm and - yes - greed. I have never seen a 2-year old rip wrapping paper off a present as fast as Maria did.

After the family event, I went over to one of my closest friends’ place and together we headed to the other side of Adelaide to a party being thrown by a younger friend of mine. Simon - my 22 year friend - was out the front to greet us, as was a friend of his. Now, it’s been a while since I met anyone where I could honestly say I was “lost in their eyes”. This guy was utterly gorgeous! Imagine George Michael and this was Simon’s friend, but in his mid 20s.

I had a hard time most of the night avoiding looking at him, but when I did, well . . let’s say I wouldn’t mind knowing him better. And I did notice his sideways glances at me as well. We ended up having a chat during the night, nothing exciting, just the usual banter of two strangers. It’s when I found out he was a hairdresser, that I thought - well, one way to see what he is really like - and if he passes my “second meeting rule”. Now for those that don’t know, my “second meeting rule” is quite simple. If I meet someone for the first time and I think they are cute, I reserve judgement till the second time I meet them. It allows my over-active libido to subside. LOL. If after the second meeting I feel the same, then I make the effort of getting to know them better.

So, today Saturday December 30th, I went in and got my haircut and colour. Yes, he is a hairdresser so my urgently needed haircut has a good excuse to see him a second time.

I walked away with a brilliant haircut and colour, and knowing a bit more about him. I left with the thought that I want to know this guy better, maybe as a friend, hopefully more. I did kick myself though for not giving him my business card when I left. Mind you he has got my mobile number which I gave to the receptionist when I booked my appointment. However he asked what I was doing New Years Eve, and after telling him which pubs I would be at, he said he would try and get out as well [he was planning on going to a friend’s party].

But in one way, I am glad he didn’t get my business card, as it has my website listed and as such would read this blog. And then how embarrassed would I feel :(

Is he interested? Think so but will have to discretely ask Simon. Am I interested? Like HELLO! And if he doesn’t show up on New Years’ Eve, will I be disappointed? Well, maybe. But then, I always expect the unexpected when I go out, and regardless of how the night turns out, it definitely won’t be how I planned it.

But will keep you all posted. In the meantime, I wish you all a very very Happy New Year!

James

[This also appears on my new blog www.jebadel.com]

Christmas. Yikes!

2006-12-16T14:12:00.000+10:30

Can’t believe it but Christmas is only 9 days away! Woke up this morning after a hectic night last night, only to find a message from my sister-in-law on my mobile, reminding me. Mind you, it also included a “hope you had a good night last night” and “for your nieces, can you please …..”.

Anyway, decided to get the Christmas shopping out of the way and headed off to the local shopping mall. Three hours later, I finally walked out with the two bikies and two Dora rocking chairs for my nieces. Not that it took me that long to find them. It was the damn queues and people with screaming uncontrollable children that took me so long.

I must have spent atleast an hour in the checkout queue! What made it worse was the fact that in front of me was a young couple with two kids, both screaming and crying because they couldn’t get their “must have” DVD of The Wiggles. And behind me was a couple arguing over how much they spent on his “useless parents”.

Finally got home, unloaded the stuff, and got myself a scotch and coke! God! That really felt good. And to top it off, sent a message to my sister-in-law saying “the stuff is bought. Just bring wrapping paper and wrap them” LOL Nah, I am not that mean. I will do them later, but for the time being, the scotch tastes wonderful and the airconditioning relaxing.

James signing off.

Also at www.jebadel.com

Turkey, EU and the membership issue

2006-12-09T19:40:00.000+10:30

For those that know me, I have a fascination for what is happening in Europe and the gradual transformation the European Union into a federal state. Currently 25 countries form the EU, with another half a dozen or so waiting for their memberships to be approved. It is expected that within the next 20 years, practically every single country in Europe will be within the EU, thus creating the third largest political entity after China and India.

One of those countries wishing to become a member of the EU is Turkey, which has been a Associate Member since 1964 and recognised as a candidate for membership in 1987. As with every other country that joins the EU, Turkey is required to meet certain criteria before being admitted. Under the membership guidelines that Turkey accepted, the EU measures Turkey’s implementation of its obligations. And this is where the issue arises.

The EU does not expect anything more from Turkey than what it expected from the other countries that have joined the EU in the past. To join the EU, Turkey must meet the following Copenhagen criteria established by the European Council in 1993:

* stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities
* the existence of a functioning market economy as well as the capacity to cope with competitive pressure and market forces within the Union
* the ability to take on the obligations of membership including adherence to the aims of political, economic & monetary union

In Turkey’s defence, the Turkish government has made considerable strides in trying to bring their country in line with the Copenhagen criteria through political and economic reform. However, it has continually failed to abide by the requirement to allow trade with all other EU member states. It’s continual denial of access to its ports by Cyprus [an EU member] is contrary to its obligations under the EU agreement which it signed. Bringing into the equation of northern Cyprus is a side issue, for its only Turkey going through the official EU membership process not northern Cyprus.

True, northern Cyprus needs to resolve its differences with the internationally recognised Republic of Cyprus, but this is an issue for the two Cypriot communities. Turkey opening up the two northern Cypriot ports to Cyprus rather than Turkish ports, is contrary to their EU membership obligations.

The end result to this is quite simple. If Turkey is serious about joining the European Union, it needs to abide by the criteria that the EU has set in place and which Turkey has signed. The criteria are non-negotiable and Turkey needs to realise this. The EU will not reduce the requirements for membership for Turkey, and the sooner they realise, this the better.

Greece - Turkey’s long standing rival - has thrown its support behind Turkey’s admittance into the EU, in the hope that by having Turkey within the Union, peace and stability can be brought into the region. Further, Greece’s support is crucial to the resolution of the Cyprus issue and the eventual unification of the divided island.

For Turkey, the best option would be to focus on fulfilling its membership obligations with the EU, and leave the Cyprus issue aside. Once it fulfills its obligations, Turkey - in conjunction with Greece - can then turn their attention to resolving the Cyprus issue.

Having said that, my gravest concern with Turkey joining the EU is this. If Turkey is not willing to abide by the membership conditions that every other country had to abide by before joining, how are they going to act once they do become a member of the European Union?

Time will tell what the outcome will be, but at the present, the chest-beating by Turkey is doing no one any good, especially Turkey.

James Bailey

Gay and Lesbian Radio Stations

2006-11-14T10:06:00.000+10:30

As you may know, I own OUTRadio.com.au - Australia's only 24/7 internet-only gay and lesbian radio station. The site has been revamped in preparation for some new services launching in the near future.

One of these new features is the OUTRadio Toolbar which works with both Internet Explorer and Firefox. The OUTRadio Toolbar incorporates OUTRadio as the preset radio station, plus I have added more stations from around the world - including GayFM, QueerFM, and others.

The OUTRadio Toolbar is - to my knowledge - the ONLY one specifically aimed at the gay and lesbian community in the world.

Why not download it and try it out. You can download it at www.outradio.com.au. Full instructions are listed on the homepage. It's free, with no spyware or viruses, does not open pop-ups or hijack your searches, and no personal information is required.

Firefox and Internet Explorer

2006-11-08T22:54:00.000+10:30

I have launched a new toolbar for Firefox and Internet Explorer, which allows you to have OUTRadio playing directly from your browser.
The new OUTRadio Toolbar provides you access to not only OUTRadio, but also links to bands, shows, news and more, as well as the BBC Newsticker to keep you informed of whats happening around the world.
You can download the OUTRadio Toolbar from the station's website - www.outradio.com.au

Get yours today! It's free, with no spyware or viruses, does not open pop-ups or hijack your searches, and no personal information is required.

The United Nations

2006-10-02T15:07:00.000+09:30

I have watched the events unfolding in the United Nations over the last few weeks. With Venezuala’s President Hugo Chevaz and his outbursts against the USA, and the USA’s reaction, I have wondered what the United Nations is all about.

If the comments coming from politicians, organisations and individuals within the USA were to be taken seriously, the United Nations would appear to be nothing more than a renegade US Government agency. Comments like withdrawing funding, moving the UN headquarters to another non-US location, to vetoing every motion put before the UN till the USA gets its way, makes me wonder on what the future of the UN should be.

The United Nations was founded shortly after World War 2 as a means of bringing the nations of the world together, and hopefully prevent another world war from breaking out. Previous attempts like the League of Nations had failed. With the decolonisation of Africa and Asia, the United Nations became a more representative body of the peoples of the world, more than any other organisation. Today, the United Nations has over 180 member nations encompassing practically every single country on our small planet. Regardless of size, population and wealth, they each have an equal vote in the General Assembly, giving each and every one an equal say.

Overseeing the General Assembly is the Security Council with its five permanent members and 10 non-permanent members. The Security Council’s five permanent members[ USA, Russia, China, France and the UK] were given the right to veto any action which they deemed necessary. It was hoped that the five permanent members would be benevolant and just in their actions and vetos.

Unfortunately, and this applies to all five permanent members, they have used this right to block any action which they considered to be harmful to their own national interests, even if it meant their veto resulted in countless of deaths elsewhere on our planet.

It is true that the USA funds approximately 25% of the United Nations’ operating costs. However, this in my opinion, does not mean that the UN must agree and abide by every decision that the USA makes. Nor does it mean that other nations do not have the right to voice their opinions and views on matters before the General Assembly.

Far from it. The United Nations is the perfect body for any nation to express how they feel, whether we like what they say or they don’t.

If the USA withheld its funding to the United Nations, what would be the impact? Would it sway the rest of the world towards supporting the USA’s point of view? No. Will it become more pro-USA? No. What it would achieve is further anti-American feelings from countries which not only currently dislike the USA, but also from those that are truly non-alligned.

Further, rather than a kneejerk reaction from the USA, they should also consider what else may happen. How would the USA feel if the extra funding for the UN suddenly started pouring in from countries like Iran, which are not only oil-rich but also anti-US. Is this what the USA wants? A United Nations funded by extremist countries?

The USA unfortunately needs to do some serious internal re-assessing. Not in terms of its funding to the United Nations, but its role within the entire world community. Whilst our planet was gripped in the middle of the Cold War, it was appropriate for the USA to be the liberator and freedom fighter for the world’s enslaved nations. When the Cold War ended, and the USA emerged as the major and practically sole world power, it needed to refocus itself into becoming the world peace maker.

That unfortunately never happened, and that is the reason so many countries today are so anti-USA. Not because of its wealth, military power and influence, but because the USA has not evolved as the rest of the world has.

If the USA wants the United Nations to be more “friendly” towards them, they need to be seen to be more non-partial. The world needs to see that when a war breaks out, the USA tries to find a solution to the problem, not simply support one side against the other, as was the case with the Israeli/Hezbollah situation in Lebanon.

It is a matter of “world image”, and unfortunately the USA is seeing as a biased country which supports its selected group of friendly nations and pushing it’s own political agenda against the rest of the world. Change that image and the USA will find the United Nations more accomodating to the USA and its needs. Lest we forget, the United Nations is THE global forum for the world’s nations and not just a invitation-only organisation.

Cripple and/or destroy the United Nations and you take away the sole forum the world has to discuss issues that impact every single human being on this planet. And if that happens, where is humanity left?

Think about it.

James

For more blogs, visit www.jebadel.com
You can also hear James on his show Jeb's Viewpoint at www.outradio.com.au/

Jeb's Viewpoint - The Mice That Roared

2006-09-03T21:14:00.000+09:30

This week on Jeb's Viewpoint, the program has been called "The Mice That Roared". I pay tribute to the man who practically single-handedly changed the Australian political scene - Don Chipp.
I had the pleasure of knowing Don Chipp in the 1980s, and knowing the kind of man he was, he is a sad loss to not only his founding party - the Australian Democrats - but also to Australian Politics.
I also look at the other "mouse" - the Greek basketball team and their victory over the USA.
To listen to the show, click here.
You can catch the show every Sunday night at 9pm South Australian time on OUTRadio.com.au

Jeb's Viewpoint - European Union, Betrayal and Aljazeera

2006-08-27T09:45:00.000+09:30

The future is being created right in front of us, and many simply can not see it. Where to for Europe and the rest of humanity? Also, a look at how we allow our personal feelings destroy relationships and how sometimes it simply isn’t worth it. And, finally, a look at the world media from a personal perspective.

You can download the latest program of Jeb’s Viewpoint here.

Jeb’s Viewpoint is broadcast on outradio.com.au every Sunday night at 9pm South Australian time.

Jeb's Viewpoint - Maria, Shane and Alan

2006-08-14T22:01:00.000+09:30

No major dramas, no world politics, no issues. This episode of Jeb's Viewpoint focuses on a part of my life that caused some turmoil and heartbreak, the closure, and the opening of a new life.

Sounds complicated but it isn't really. This is the "human" side of me, the one that close friends see and most other people in the general community don't.

Hope you enjoy it. You can download the show here.

Jeb's Viewpoint is on OUTRadio.com.au every Sunday night at 9pm South Australian Time.

Jeb's Viewpoint - Commitment, Comedy and Technology

2006-08-06T21:00:00.000+09:30

This show is really a mish-mash of a bit of everything.

I look at commitment to relationships both in the straight and gay community, and the events happening in a co-worker's married life. A bit of comedy to have you laughing, and then follow it up with a look at technology and how we - as humans - seem to be left behind as it advances faster than we can learn.

This episode of Jeb's Viewpoint was broadcast on Sunday, August 6th 2006 on www.outradio.com.au. If you missed it, you can download it here.

For information on Jeb's Viewpoint and other shows, visit OUTRadio.

Jeb's Viewpoint - The Israeli/Lebanon Conflict

2006-07-30T20:44:00.000+09:30

Originally broadcasted on Sunday July 23rd 2006 on OUTRadio, this episode of “Jeb’s Viewpoint” was re-broadcasted again the following Sunday [July 30th].

Not taking sides as to who is right or wrong in the conflict, James Bailey looks at the background of the Israeli/Lebanon conflict, the human toll on those caught in the middle of it all, and a possible solution to what is quickly becoming the world’s major conflict.

If you missed the program, you can listen to this episode of “Jeb’s Viewpoint”, click here. You can also tune in to OUTRadio by visiting the station at www.outradio.com.au

Jeb's Viewpoint - Nuclear Energy, Gay Priests and Sex

2006-07-09T22:10:00.000+09:30

This week's JEB's Viewpoint, I look at the issue of Energy in Australia and whether we should go down the path of nuclear power, or follow the sustainable sources like solar, wind and hydro.

Also, the controversy of gay priests has flared up in Australia again. My views on this may cause a bit of controversy, but ... it happens. And finally, sex - everyone's favourite subject. Am I over what is called "vanilla sex", or is it just a matter of looking for the something different?

You can here a re-broadcast of this week's show here.

For schedule details, please visit www.outradio.com.au/schedule.html, where you can also tune in to the music.

OUTRadio, JEB's Viewpoint and more

2006-07-03T08:48:00.000+09:30

It’s been over a month since I wrote in my blog, not because I have lost any interest but more because OUTRadio has been keeping me occupied. OUTRadio has finally got a broadcasting license, making it Australia’s only gay and lesbian internet-only radio station. OUTRadio now runs 24/7 with Monday through to Sunday morning playing music non-stop. Sundays is PodPOUT Day where OUTRadio plays various gay and lesbian shows including Shockingly Tasty, The Magic Geek, Curve Cast, The Olive and Martini Show, and, advocacy shows from Outright Radio.

Plus, OUTRadio has produced two shows of its own. The first one [which is a first for the Australian GLBT community] is The Love Connection which is a one hour love song dedication show specifically for the gay and lesbian community.

The other show is JEB’s Viewpoint, a 30 minute show produced by myself and compliments my blogs and can be heard by clicking Here to launch Player. On this week’s show, I look at the death penalty, David Hicks, the new French airline tax and gay youth today.

OUTRadio has a number of new locally produced shows coming up, including “Showcase” which will feature up and coming new bands and singers, a gay lifestyle show tentatively called “A Gay Man’s Guide To …”, plus more. To be kept up to date and to find your local times for the shows, check out OUTRadio’s website at www.outradio.com.auJames

Gay Marriage in Australia

2006-06-13T22:08:00.000+09:30

Shame, Mr Howard, Shame!

The Federal Government has shown that it does not govern for all Australians, but for the rightwing religious groups by overturning the ACT's Civil Unions legislation. The ACT brought in legislation to provide a level of equality between homosexual and heterosexual couples, without establishing gay marriages.

Further, the ACT bent over backwards [so to speak] to ensure that it's legislation did not conflict with the Federal Government's Marriage Act. And yet, Mr Howard has simply overturned the ACT's civil union legislation with the excuse that it appeared to support gay marriages in Australia.

Mr Howard, no offence, but you are a narrow minded bigot and hypocrit. You have allowed yourself to become a pawn for the religious and rightwing elements in society, to the detriment of not only the gay and lesbian community, but to your legal obligations both under Australia's equality laws and the international conventions that Australia has signed.

Further, you have failed to remember one important thing. You are supposed to represent ALL Australians and are - as a matter of record - OUR employee. We - the citizens of Australia - elected you to govern and represent us, and you have now proven that you are not capable of doing that job.

The next election is not that far away. Gay marriages may not come into fruitition soon, but by opposing the ACT's civil unions legislation [which wasnt about gay marriages], will only bring them closer to reality.

Enjoy your time in power because the next election is not that far away Mr Howard.

James

25 Years On

2006-06-04T23:24:00.000+09:30

It’s hard to believe that June 2006 is actually the 25th anniversary of when doctors in San Francisco first reported the mysterious illness that was killing gay men. When they first announced this disease, the doctors concerned had no idea what it was, nor it’s impact on society - both gay and straight.

25 years - very hard to believe that AIDS has been around that long. That is roughly the same time span between the beginning of World War 1 [1939] and the end of World War 2 [1945]. In both time periods, millions of people have died - one by disease, the other by war..

And the music goes on ...

2006-05-13T21:51:00.000+09:30

It’s amazing how a pet project or hobby can take over one’s life. For the last few weeks what started as a side-interest, has steamrolled in taking up much of my spare time. OUTRadio - my internet radio station - has finally gone 24/7 with music and have managed to program enough songs so that if you listened continually for 60 hours, you would not hear the same song twice!

Plus, I have sourced content from overseas so that I now have a small but growing group of DJs who have graciously allowed me to broadcast their music.

Find out more ... visit www.jebadel.com/blog

Outradio - The Next Step

2006-05-01T10:12:00.000+09:30

Okay, I have been busy between work, socialising and thinking of what to do with my new "hobby". So this weekend, I took the plunge and designed an interim homepage for Outradio. Like everything in my life, it simply steamrolled from there.

Today, outradio.com.au has been launched - or the front page anyways. I am still playing around with the media player which I hope to embed into the site itself. So far, the testing of the media player has gone very well except for the colour scheme and trying to maintain a continual broadcast. The last one has been abit icky in that my broadcast hosting provider keeps changing the URL on me!

But, its all fun.

The station's call sign is "Outradio - 24/7 Music - without the dramas" and the website's front page incorporates some tasteful photos reflecting this.

It is a work in progress, but hope to have outradio.com.au on full broadcast from July 1st 2006. Did I say this was a hobby?

Oh, am thinking of also offering Foundation Membership to businesses and individuals that wish to advertise on Outradio. But will test the waters on that one. However, having said that, if you know of anyone or any business that might be interested, ask them to drop me an email at outradioaustralia at gmail dot com.

Anyways, have a look, bookmark it and give me some feedback. There will be something new added each week to keep you interested LOL

James

OutRadio is back - sort of

2006-04-26T17:55:00.000+09:30

Years ago, my lover/business partner and I used to run several businesses both offline and online. He used to look after the “real” business whilst I used to take care of our online ventures. For the last three years of our relationship, we saw our online business go from minor hobby interests into serious moneymaking ventures. Even after we broke up, we continued to run the online ventures for a further year before he moved interstate leaving me to run them all.

Juggling the online businesses with my fulltime normal job eventually took its toll on my health and something had to give. The online businesses were too big for one person to manage, yet not big enough to comfortably support employing a person fulltime and still make money. So I made the decision at the time to wind them down, bringing my online business interests to a halt. Thinking back now, I should have kept them going for they were lucrative sites and their potential to be very successful, was pretty high. But, that’s the past.

To read more on OutRadio1, visit my new blog here

I Want My Life Back!

2006-04-19T09:25:00.000+09:30

I want my life back! I have come to realise that my life is being run not by me but my browser - Firefox! No, seriously, it is. Everything I practically do on my computer is now being controlled by Firefox, and its now time for me to put my foot down and say “Enough is enough”!

Don’t get me wrong, I love Firefox and I put it on the same level as the invention of toasted bread and sex, love both but one gets to a stage where one moves on.

For more, visit my new blog here

US-EU Influence downsliding in the Middle East

2006-04-17T10:14:00.000+09:30

The news that Iran is to provide $50million in funds to the Palestinian Government comes as no surprise, nor is the fact the Russia is also financially backing the cash strapped Hamas Government. Further, it comes as no surprise that Israel has started to bomb the northern parts of the Gaza Strip, despite the fact that the Hamas has kept its word and maintained a truce with Israel for over a year now.

With both the USA and the EU withdrawing funds from the Palestinian Government, they have inadvertantly placed themselves in a situation where their influence will continue its downslide in the Middle East.

Read more at my new blog here.

The Circus Comes To Town

2006-04-14T11:10:00.000+09:30

Oh its nearly that time of year again when the circus comes to town, better known as the Eurovision Song Contest. This year, the Eurovision Song Contest will be held on May 18th to 20th in Athens [Greece] after Helena Paparizou won the 2005 event with “My Number One”.

An institution in its own right, the Eurovision Song Contest not only stretches the concept of “Europe” to include Israel, but also gives their audiences worldwide the opportunity to savour the “best and worst” that Europe has to offer.

To read more, visit my new blog here.

Google's 2020 Plan

2006-04-09T17:19:00.000+09:30

One either loves Google or one hates them, and there doesn’t appear to be a middle ground for many people. Ever since Google came onto the internet scene, they have steadily increased their search market share globally, while at the same time launching various products and services as if on an ad hoc basis.

Many have sat there wondering where Google was heading, whether they actually had a plan or whether they were simply “throwing things in the air and seeing what worked”. However, if you look at what they currently offer, their products and services fall into four main categories - entertainment [video, gmail, talk, picasa etc], education [maps, translate, earth etc], office [pack, writely, finance etc] and search [desktop, books, directory etc].

Politicians and their 19th Century views

2006-03-30T19:38:00.000+10:30

Oh, when will our politicians ever learn? When will they drag themselves out of the 19th Century and come into the 21st Century like most of the community? When will they open their eyes and realise that what they believe in does not necessarily reflect the wishes of the people, and further more, they don’t have the right to impose their will on us?

The reason I raise these issues is over recent comments by our Australian Federal Government regarding civil unions.

The Australian Capital Territory [ACT] in which our nation’s capital is located, have decided to hold a vote on what the locals want to do regarding gay/lesbian relationships. Their intent is to ask the voters of the ACT as to whether to allow gay and lesbian couples to register their relationships in civil unions.

To read more, visit my new blog here

Blame everyone else except ...

2006-03-26T14:28:00.000+10:30

As you may or may not have read, a woman in the US is complaining about Firefox causing her 5 year relationship to break up. I read the news reports with a bit of disbelief.

How can someone blame a internet browser for ruining her relationship?

Her claim that she discovered that her boyfriend was surfing adult sites because Firefox kept a log of sites [and has a good password facility], is to my way of thinking, utterly ridiculous. Personally, if I was dating someone and discovered that they were being unfaithful, I would not blame the “provider of the evidence”.

To read the rest, visit www.jebadel.com/blog

A United Nations of Religions

2006-03-22T21:34:00.000+10:30

I read an interesting article on the BBC website today entitled ” Rabbi calls for ‘UN of religions’“. At present, the International Congress of Imams and Rabbis for Peace are holding a three day conference in Spain. The Congress is comprised of both Jewish and Muslim clerical leaders, and this in its own right, is something that most of us don’t generally hear about.

Our perception through the media is that Jews and Muslims, especially from a religious aspect, don’t see eye-to-eye. Yet here is a group of religious leaders willing to meet and discuss issues not only from a religious perspective, but also a global and political one. From the news report, it appears that these Jewish and Muslim religious leaders are quite capable of putting their religious beliefs aside, and try to come up with viable solutions to problems.

To read more of this article, please visit www.jebadel.com/blog

Google Victory or Trojan Horse?

2006-03-18T20:06:00.000+10:30

The highly publicised tussle between the US Department of Justice and Google, has finally hit the courts with what appears to be a victory for Google.

The Justice Dept wanted Google to hand over search results for two months plus a million web addresses. Unlike AOL, Microsoft and Yahoo who complied with the Justice Dept’s requests, Google stood their ground and objected. Once in court, the Justice Dept’s request whittled down to only 50,000 web addresses and 5,000 search queries.

To read more, visit www.jebadel.com/blog

Keeping One's Word

2006-03-17T06:54:00.000+10:30

I sometimes wander what people are thinking when they make commitments or promises to people. Whether they intend to keep them or whether they make them simply because it suits them at that particular moment.

I was always brought up with the belief that if I gave my word to someone, I would attempt to honour it to the best of my abilities, and if I couldn’t, I would advise the person before breaking it. This belief applied to not only minor things like “doing coffee” but also to major events. Maybe its because my parents always taught me that “my word is my honour” and if I got in the habit of not keeping my word, then people would come to the conclusion that I was unreliable and untrustworthy.

More at my new blog at www.jebadel.com/blog

Much Ado About Nothing

2006-03-11T09:48:00.000+10:30

I have returned from my holidays to find very little has changed back home. Work was still there as was the continual daily dredge of customers who seem to think that the world owes them something. As some of you may know, I work in the telecommunications industry and deal with customers on a daily basis over the telephone. Some are really nice people, a pleasure to deal with and appreciate the fact that we are there to assist whether its a fault with their mobile or a simple billing enquiry.

Yet some, I simply shake me head in disbelief over their attitude and expectations. I wonder how some people actually manage to remember to breathe so as to stay alive sometimes, and how the smallest of things seems to send them into a tailspin.

visit my new blog at www.jebadel.com/blog for more on the above article.

US and Israel Don't Want Peace In The Middle East

2006-02-14T21:42:00.000+10:30

What the hell is the USA and Israel playing at with Palestine? For years they have been complaining that they wanted a democratically elected government for the Palestinians, and now that the Palestinian people have elected one, they intend overthrowing it?

Has the USA and Israel lost the plot?

Don’t get me wrong, I am neither pro Israeli nor pro Palestinian, as both sides have their good points and their bad ones. Both have committed actions which the world has condemned, so neither can claim that they are the “innocent party” in the mess that is the Middle East.

Read more at my new blog ... www.jebadel.com/blog

Sex Is Good For YOu

2006-02-12T13:21:00.000+10:30

Well. That does it. I am cancelling my gym membership, rescheduling my social gatherings for the next couple of weeks, and going out to get myself some sex! Infact, am going to look for lots of sex.

Why?

Because Sex is good for you, that’s why.

Read more on this article at my new blog.

Jerusalem - A Solution To Middle East Conflicts

2006-02-08T22:51:00.000+10:30

One of the 20th and 21st century's most volatile regions is the Middle East, and the Jewish-Arabic conflict is one that practically every day of the year, is in the headlines around the world. Attempts to bring peace has been hampered in the past by various sides both locally from within the Middle East, and internationally, either because of vested interests or retaliation for past events.

And yet, a solution is possible if only all sides step back, take a realistic look at the overall situation and seriously look at ways to bring peace in the region. We all need to realise that Israel will not disappear nor will the Palestinian issue. Both races claim the same territory, yet realise that only a full on bloodbath will see any change happen that would come near to bringing about their "ultimate objective". And that, a full on war, is the last thing anyone wants, not only because of the carnage that would emerge within the Middle East, but also because of the fact that other non-Middle East countries will be drawn into it as well.

In short, the Middle East situation is a powder keg to a possible Third World War.

Read the remainder of the article at my new blog.

Cameroon Outing

2006-02-06T17:44:00.000+10:30

The African country Cameroon has in the last couple of weeks been rocked by allegations that 50 high profile politicians, singers and business people [amongst others] are gay. The newspapers L’Anecdote and La Meteo published the list after the Roman Catholic Bishop Victor Tonye Bakot denounced homosexuality in his Christmas speech. With homosexuality being illegal in not only Cameroon but most of Africa, the outing of these so-called high profile people, is not surprising even if it is a stupid move by the press.

The accusations and denials have been flying thick and fast between the press and the alleged victims, one has to wonder where this will end. The newspapers claim to have evidence to prove that the people they outed are gay, while the victims claim that they aren’t gay. The whole situation raises the interesting question - why did the newspapers publish the list, and what are their real motives behind it?

Hamas Victory In Palestine

2006-01-31T04:50:00.000+10:30

The shock victory of the Islamic fundamentalist Hamas in the Palestinian elections has raised some very major concerns for the world. Based on the movement’s past history of suicide bombings and attacks on the Jewish state, there is indeed a fear of how Palestine will now develop in terms of its relationships with Israel and the West.

However, the Hamas victory is the direct consequence of what the West wanted - a democratically elected government in Palestine. Something which the West encouraged and nurtured, and that is one of the consequences with Democracy. Any party can win power provided enough people vote for them. As international observers noted, the Palestinian elections were a fair and “clean” election, and the Palestinian people voted in support of Hamas for various reasons.

More at my new blog.

Why Google Should Oppose The US Justice Department

2006-01-22T10:17:00.000+10:30

As you may all have heard by now, the United States Justice Department has issued subpeonas to various search engines, including Google, to release information on their users’ search patterns. To date, Yahoo, MSN and AOL have complied with this request. Google has issued a firm “No” and is preparing for a legal fight in the US Courts to stop the Justice Department from accessing their databases.

The reason the US Justice Departments wants these records is so that it can then substantiate to a US Judge, that the Child Online Protection Act should be allowed to be enacted. This Act, first raised I believe, back in 1998, was defeated in the courts, however the US Justice Department continues its efforts to provide “evidence” that it is required to “protect minors from offensive content”.

Now the question is this. Even if Google complies with the US Justice Department, and provides them with one million search items for a specified time period, what will that achieve? Will it show that under 18 year olds searched the word “porn” and “sex”? No. Will it provide them with anything that is not already publicly available? No.

So what’s the point?

Deep down, I think the motives of the US Justice Department go beyond the gathering of supporting evidence for the US Government to try and get the Child Online Protection Act passed as law. All search engines and most web sites gather information on their users to enable them to fine-tune their services to the individuals’ use.

The search engines, and Google inparticular, have vast amounts of information on their servers which todate, have been used specifically by the search engines. If the US Justice Department succeeds in convincing the search engines in initially providing the URLs they are asking for, it will then open a precedent for future requests. It is this that Google foresees happening, and thus their blatant “No”. Today, it is simply a million search items and URLs. No personal details, no other information, just this.

However, lets assume that Google buckles and provides the details to the US Justice Department. What next?

Let’s assume that the information obtained by the US Justice Department shows that 10% of all searches related to porn with phrases like “twink sex”, “girl sex” and “boy sex”, amongst others. I can then see two things happening. Firstly the US Justice Department will pursue the attempt to make the Child Online Protection Act into law.

Secondly, and more importantly, I can see them then turning around to the search engines and saying “Ok. These URLs relate to child pornography. We want details of who conducted these searches”.

If Google does buckle under or loses their court case against them, the US Justice Department will have a precedent to request this information. If Google looses via a court case, then a legal precedent is established, and then the US Justice Department will have an “open ended” authority to request and obtain additional information.

For this reason and this reason alone, Google is opposing the subpoenas. The other reasons like “revealing Google’s trade secrets” etc are extra reasons which any company should protect. The fact that it is not an investigation into Google itself, but rather a fishing expedition by the US Justice Department on online pornography [and other related “child offensive” content], is an extra reason.

Personally I hope that Google sticks to its gun, continues to say “No” to the US Justice Department, and wins its case in court. By winning it will not only say to the government “hands off on our customers”, but also maintain that faith that so many of us have in Google that our private details remain just that - private.

James

visit my new site at www.jebadel.com where my new blog is located.

www.jebadel.com is now up and running

2006-01-18T07:28:00.000+10:30

After a number of long days and some sleepless nights, the new site is [partly] up and running.

All my articles have now been copied over to www.jebadel.com/blog , where I will be posting from now on.

In addition, the Photo Gallery is also open to the public. Visit www.jebadel.com/photo for a quick look on what's there.

There are more sections coming online soon, including news, information, movie reviews and more. So keep an eye out for these. So bookmark www.jebadel.com and send me your feedback.

James

My Blog Is Moving

2006-01-15T14:41:00.000+10:30

Hi all,

Over the next 24-48 hours, I will be relocating my blog to my own domain name. You may wish to update your links to the following:

www.jebadel.com/blog

Thank you

James

Campaign: Parthenon Marbles

2006-01-14T11:40:00.000+10:30

In 1811AD, Lord Elgin removed parts of the Parthenon on the Acropolis in Athens, and moved them to the UK.

The aim of this post is to gather as many "signatures" as possible so that the so-called Elgin Marbles be returned to their rightful home.

To help in the campaign, I would appreciate it if you could do the following:

1. Post a comment supporting the return of the Parthenon Marbles back to Greece.
2. Add a link to this specific page on your blog, website, email or any format encouraging people to sign. The link you can use is http://jebadel.com/blog/?p=80

The Campaign will be run until October 18th 2006 for two reasons.

Firstly it is the birthday of one of Greece's most famous actresses and politicians - Melina Mercouri - who starred in movies like Never On A Sunday, A Dream Of Passion, Nasty Habits, The Victors and Stella.

Secondly, because as the Greek Cultural Minister, she led the most vigorous campaign to have the Parthenon Marbles returned. She is the undying symbol of the international campaign with the Melina Mercouri Foundation being supported by the likes of Jacques-Yves Cousteau, Sir Peter Ustinov, Paul Newman, Sir Sean Connery and Francois Mitterrand, just to name a few. [For more information on the Melina Mercouri Foundation, click here]

How many "signatures" am I hoping for? Well, wishfully thinking, I would hope we could together collect a million during that time. It isn't impossible if we all band together. Once collected, I will forward them on to the Melina Mercuri Foundation for them to use as extra support for the return of the Parthenon Marbles.

So please, if you can post a supporting comment and if possible, add a link to your online sites or on your email's auto signature, it would be greatly appreciated. Please post all your comments here..

James

The Day After Tomorrow

2006-01-14T09:10:00.000+10:30

A few days ago I was bored, so I decided to watch the movie "The Day After Tomorrow" for the second time. The interest in the movie was two fold - firstly because of one of the actors who I have come to like [Jake Gyllenhaal] and secondly for the closing 15 minutes or so which got my curiosity going the first time I saw the movie.

Jake is cute, the kind of guy I could easily fall for. For those that don't know who he is, he is the co-star of the new movie "Brokeheart Mountain", the badly nicknamed "gay cowboy movie". But I am getting sidetracked again.

For those that haven't seen the movie, "The Day After Tomorrow" is about how the world is hit by a sudden ice age, causing the entire northern hemisphere to be covered by snow within a matter of days. What I found interesting with the whole movie was the repercussions that flowed on from a such a global natural disaster. The survivors from rich countries were forced to migrate south of the equator in what is southern Asia, Africa and Latin America.

In the movie, the tables were turned on the rich countries, and the US President had to waive the entire Latin American nations' debts before Mexico would allow the survivors of North America to cross the border. Seeing the survivors crossing over the river border, tearing down fences, and heading south with the only possessions being the clothes on their backs, reminded me of the news reports of Mexicans heading north in reality.

That particular scene in the movie got me thinking.

The Third World has been for quite a few decades, barely surviving due to the massive debts they have. Money they owe to the rich countries and institutions of the world. In some Third World countries, the interest payments are so high that they are barely able to cover them, let alone pay off any of the principle that they owe. The direct consequence of this is that money they could spend on infrastructure and improving the livelihood of their people, is being used to cover these loans. The rich get richer, the poor get poorer with no real chance of reversing the trend.

We, in the rich nations of the world, tend to forget about the poor countries and their plight until something major happens - whether its a natural event like the tsunami in southeast Asia in 2004, or a huge famine in Africa. When such events hits our TV screens, we orchestrate fundraising events and poor millions [and in some cases, billions] of dollars into the affected areas to help out. And then return to our normal lives feeling good, thinking "we have done our humanitarian bit". Within a matter of weeks, we have all but forgotten about it.

These are temporary solutions to an ongoing problem, and will remain temporary until the rich nations of the world take up the courage to try and solve the problem on a permanent basis.

In the past, various governments from the USA and EU have promised to cancel the debts owed by Third World nations. Few of these have eventuated, and one wonders why the respective governments even bother offering this solution and then not implementing it. Being a cynic sometimes, one could say its to boost their own popularity on the international and domestic scene, especially if there's an election coming up.

The World Bank and the International Monetary Fund are the biggest lenders to the Third World nations. These two institutions are apparently going to cancel debts for various Third World nations commencing from July 1st 2006, while the rich nations will ensure that these two institutions are compensated so as to not be financially disadvantaged by this generosity. Hopefully, this will not be another empty promise.

What concerns me with this though, is that if the World Bank and the IMF do cancel the debts, what happens then? Are there going to be conditions set on these Third World nations, stating that the money they used to use on paying off the debts, be used on improving the infrastructure and wellbeing of their own people? And if so, who is going to monitor it to ensure it is implemented? Further, are they going to clear the debts and then turn around and offer further loans, thus helping put these poor nations into a vicious cycle of debt once again?

Maybe cancelling the debts themselves is not the right solution. An alternative is for the rich nations to use the interest payments to pay for developing these nations. For example, if a country pays US$100 million a year in loan payments, why don't the rich countries then invest $100 million into these countries to build hospitals, roads, schools etc. That way, even though the poor countries are still paying off their debts, the money is in reality being used to develop them.

The reason this would be a more beneficial way of helping, is that the rich nations can gaurantee the money is actually used for improving these poor countries. Clearing debts gives the poor countries a lot of spare cash which can be used to buy non-beneficial items like armaments. The last thing we need to see is a large number of debt free Third World nations with some pretty modern military hardware.

Anyway, that's my five cents on the subject. I am now going to sit back and watch "Jarhead" with the cute Jake Gyllenhaal. Apparently he has quite a few scenes in the movie without his top on. :-)

James

What You See Is What You Get

2006-01-11T19:06:00.000+10:30

How many times to do we see someone and come up with a perception or conclusion about the person? How many times, based on those conclusions, do we discover that we were right or wrong?

A couple of days ago I was having coffee with a friend of mine - and yes I do love my coffee sessions - and happened to cover the issue of perceptions. I must admit that on that particular day I was on a downer, not for any particular reason though. Mark raised the issue of maybe I should go out and find a local boyfriend, something which most of my friends are adamant I should do.

As those who know me either in real life or through my articles, I have been single for a while now. I mentioned to Mark that there were few guys that I had met that I would consider "marriage material", and those that were, seemed to be not interested. It was at this stage that Mark made his comment that had me thinking.

Mark made the comment that a lot of guys on the scene that he knew, found me to be unapproachable and were afraid of coming up and saying "hi". His comments shocked me as I consider myself to be a very friendly and approachable guy. I asked him for clarification. At first he was a bit unsure as to how to respond, and after some persistent "Tell Me!!!" from me, he gave me his reasons.

Apparently a lot of guys out there find me unapproachable for a number of reasons. The fact that I am friendly is not the problem. However the fact that I tend to know a lot of guys on the scene and socialise with them, plus the fact that am always surrounded by a lot of people; some guys see this as a barrier. Plus the fact that whenever I am out, I am always in a happy jovial mood.

One of Mark's own friends made the comment to him that he thought I was a rather attractive guy and would have liked to get to know me, but was afraid of coming up and saying hello. Afraid that I would not be interested and that he would have to somehow compete with the others around me.

His comments really threw me as I believe that I am a pretty open guy, and what you see is what you really get - a very down to earth guy with few hang-ups. I am friendly to everyone as long as they don't try to do me wrong, and will talk to anyone regardless of age or looks. That is me, it what makes me - me! I don't sit there and judge people by who they are. I don't believe in creating a "public persona" for when I am out so as to hide the "real me". There is no point, in my books anyways.

But what worries me now is that if this is a common perception about me, how do I change that? And further to the point, do I really want to? By changing I am also changing who I am, and that is something I will not do. Mark's comments have been confirmed with some of my other friends as well. There are things I could possibly do to make myself more "approachable" without changing who I am. Things like sometimes standing away from the others, being less "social" with my friends and the like.

But do I want to do that? Is it me that needs to change or should those that are interested show some courage and come up and say hello? It isn't that hard to do. A lot of people I know I have met at the bar, simply by making a "bee line" and standing next to them even though the bar might be closer to where I was originally standing.

If someone is interested then a casual "how's your night" or a simple "hi" is a nice ice breaker to start a conversation. If the other person is interested then they will show it.

So to those out there who MIGHT be interested, well with me, what you see is what you get. I am who I am, and if you are interested then come up and say hello. I won't bite, not unless you ask me to :-)

James

Google's Announcement

2006-01-08T11:25:00.000+10:30

I simply can not believe that some people are still not seeing where Google is heading. Google announced on Friday the launch of Google Pack and an expanded Google Video service, and yet people still are trying to work out on "what is Google up to?".

As per my previous posts on Google [here, here and here], Google is moving away from its primary role of a search engine. Their primary - or more specific, practically sole - income source todate has been advertising. Their foray into the partnership with AOL, their launching of various programs and services, are to allow Google to diverse its income source.

Let's look at Google Pack. It's nothing extraordinary, however it is a seed. Download Google Pack and you not only receive anti-virus and spam programs, but also other third party [and generally non-proprietory] programs, PLUS, a myriad of Google products. So, many are asking "why bother" and "what's it going to achieve for Google"?

Simply this. By people using Google Pack, it will have the following repurcusions. Firstly, people will become more "loyal" to Google as they will start to rely on Google to provide them with not only new products, but also automatic updates on the products they are using. Further, as Google Pack becomes more popular, Google will then have the ability to charge these third-party program providers for the ability to include their products in the Google Pack.

End result? Additional source of income for Google plus more customers.

As for the other announcement - Google Video. Nothing major here from the critics' perspective, except once again, they fail to see the direction Google is heading. Google's motto is "is to build products that organize the world's information and make it accessible to our users". Nowhere has Google ever claimed that this is purely searching and organising only what's on the internet! By allowing third party providers - this time studios, TV stations etc - to add their content and [if they wish] charge for it, is allowing Google to not only expand Google Video in line with their motto, but also generate additional income.

Think about it. Why spend hours illegally downloading an episode of CSI when for a couple of dollars, you can have it in a matter of minutes? Why complain that because of traffic, you missed the latest NBA game when you can download it for a couple of dollars and watch it at your leisure? Further, making the downloads compatible with various media players, Google is opening up the industry. So whether you use Windows Media, Real Player, VLC or iPods, you can view your downloads.

Google is creating the environment where regardless of whether you use Windows, Linux or some other system, whether you use Windows Media or an iPod, Google's offerings will work. Further, its programs [via Google Pack] will provide the user - in other words, you - an easier internet experience, where your programs are kept uptodate by Google.

The one thing everyone seemed to miss at the CES show was Larry Page's comment ""Why can't I plug a TV into any outlet, whether it's Wi-Fi, Ethernet or whatever?", and why were products being released that were not compatible with other products and/or services?. These comments underly where Google is heading, and everyone seemed to have missed it.

I am still sticking to my predictions in my previous articles. We are in for interesting times.

James

Being Gay

2006-01-06T22:19:00.000+10:30

Over the last couple of days I have been in training for my new role within my employer. As part of a group of 25, we are becoming part of a new section within the company, focusing on a more indepth support for our large customer base. Having been in the communications industry - and the same employer - for over six years, I found the training session a tad boring.

What I found interesting was the group's composition. Out of the entire group, half were female, and most were under 35. In the entire group, four [including myself] were gay.

The part that I found sad was that I was the oldest gay person present. The other three guys were in their early to mid 20s, two of which I would describe as goodlooking musculine guys. The sad thing though was that out of the four of us, I was probably the most "butchest" one out of the lot. That's pretty sad as I consider myself to be somewhere in the middle of camp and straight acting.

During the presentations we each had to undertake, I sat back and watched with interest. I nearly choked when one of the gay guys got up, and begun their presentation - arms flying all over, wrists flapping, and the girlie infliction in the voice made even the real girls look ... well ... butch! Now this guy, who could be taken for a younger version of Kevin Spacey, would normally have me thinking of how to win him over. But, seeing him standing in front of 24 coworkers and being so feminine, put me off totally. The other two were no different. One could be easily picked out as a "sister" from a kilometre away, mainly from his walk, hand movement and voice mannerisms.

What I found sad, and in some ways disappointing, was the fact that they re-inforced the straight community's perception of what being gay is all about. Don't get me wrong. I am not saying I act like John Wayne, but by god, I don't run around at work flapping my wrists screaming "Darrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrling" and "oh! that's so gorgeous". To me, my homosexuality is the sex orientation I have.

Sure, I camp it up when I am around my gay friends or at a gay venue. But when at work or straight venues, its pretty hard to pick that I am gay. For the record, I am not a closet homosexual. Most people who have been around for a while at work know I am gay, and those that don't know, find out soon enough. I don't hide my sexual orientation in any manner, as I believe that if someone asks me, I am honest with them.

Which raises an interesting question. Why is it that most of the younger gay generation are so feminine in their mannerisms? Is it because they equate "being gay" as "having to advertise I am gay"? Is it in the water? Is it their sign of rebellion against the rest of the community? Further, by them acting the way they do, are they encouraging the stereotypical perception of what gay is, and thus, putting the rest of us on an ever increasing upwards battle for equality?

I honestly don't know. What I do know is that although one of them did interest me sexually, their mannerisms have put me off them totally. All three are nice guys, but my interest in them is non existant. If I wanted to sleep with someone with feminine characteristics, I would sleep with a woman.

James

The Bailey Charter

2006-01-04T18:37:00.000+10:30

Ok, this is one of those articles which is for fun, but also gives you an insight on how I think and what I would like to see. Scary ... but, what the heck! No one takes me seriously anyway :-)

The Bailey Charter is sort of my wish-list for humanity, and where I would like to see us sometime in the near future. It is my blueprint for humanity, so to speak, and me being so un-selfish, if any government or international body wishes to adopt and implement it - feel free to do so. No payment required.

The Bailey Vision

In the interests of universal peace and harmony, the following changes are suggested by yours truly:

1. The United Nations.

The United Nations shall be relocated from New York to the island of Cyprus. A UN Territory should be created within Cyprus and be an independent entity governed by the UN itself. The purpose of the move is to bring the UN closer to the centre of the world's population. Cyprus is at the crossroads of Europe, Asia and Africa.

The United Nations should undertake a major structural revamping, including the Security Council. A Peoples Congress will be established within the UN with its members directly elected by the citizens of each member country.

The UN shall have it's own defence force for the protection of the UN Territory and associated administrative regions. Further, any UN forces sent to countries as peace-keeping, shall also be peace enforcing and have the right to not only defend themselves, but ensure that their UN charter is implemented. The UN shall take a more aggressive stance on the implementation of its rulings and decisions, even if the use of UN troops to enforce these is required.

2. Olympic Games

The Olympic Games will continue to be held at different locations around the world. However, every second summer Olympic Games shall be held at Olympia, Greece. Every second winter Olympic Games shall be held on the slopes of Mt Olympus in Greece. The establishment of the facilities at Olympia and Mt Olympus shall be jointly financed by all nations, and come under the control of the UN. Greece shall hand over an area of no smaller than 50 square kilometres around Olympia and Mt Olympus to the International Olympic Committee, which shall administer the area.

3. Human Survival

All nations shall allocate 1% of their GDP to the World Human Survival Fund which shall be responsible for the establishment and funding of infrastructure in the Third World. The WHSF shall establish industries and allocate resources to produce sufficient renewable resources to not only feed the poor nations, but allow for the development of medical and educational facilities.

4. Space Colonisation

The exploration and colonisation of space shall fall under the administration of the UN. Individual nations shall be allowed to undertake space exploration and colonisation, however administrative control shall rest with the UN.

5. World Resources

All governments shall aim towards a sustainable world economy. To achieve this, the renewable world resources shall be exploited, and industry shall be directed towards these rather the exploitation of non-renewable resources. Where nations are heavily dependent on non-renewable resources for their income, these nations shall be encouraged to slowly migrate to renewable resources through the WHSF and other world bodies.

The full Bailey Charter will be available online soon with more in-depth details on the UN, Olympics, world economy, space, human rights and more. So keep an eye out for it.

And as I said earlier, anyone wishing to implement it - feel free in doing so. No payment required at all ;-)

James

A Good Deed

2006-01-03T22:13:00.000+10:30

Are you superstitious? Do you believe that whatever you do on New Year's Day, will set the pattern for the rest of the year? My parents always told me to "be a good boy" on New Year's Day, not to argue or fight, otherwise I would not have a nice 12 months.

I am not superstitious, not in the slightest. Yet 3 days into the new year, and I am beginning to wonder.

My New Year's Day was a good one, a very relaxing day and enjoyable. With dad, brother, sister in law and my two nieces over for lunch, followed by a number of visitors during the day. What was unusual was the fact that instead of following my usual New Years Day of not spending money, I went to the local service station for cigarettes, and came back with a large bag full of lollies, biscuits and ice cream [it is summer after all here in Australia]. The whole shopping spree was just under $80.

January 2nd was a day off for me. Although the day was spent doing housework, I somehow managed to not only spend nearly $200 in buying software programs via the Internet, but also helped a friend design his website. Yup - just being friendly, except the software was for him!

January 3rd and off to work I went. Don't know why, but I went through my mobile phone book during one of my breaks. Some of my friends are extremely well off, others are comfortable, whilst others are struggling financially. Now don't know why, but I sent the following text message to three of my younger friends who are financially hard up.

"If you had a choice, what would you choose - the envelope or the box"? was the question. Two chose the envelope, one chose the box. $1,200 later and two cheques of $400 were in the post for two of them, and the third had an iPod in the mail!

Now, don't know about you but I am financially okay. However, at this rate, I think I will be dead broke by the time my birthday comes around in March. So I am now praying that this New Year's Day superstition is just that - superstition. On the off chance that it isn't superstition, can someone please please give me a phone number for a Counsellor, because I think I will need all the help I can get.

James

Coming Soon

2006-01-02T12:16:00.000+10:30

One of my New Year resolutions is to do some good in the world, not that I don't do that now. But, I will be promoting some interesting newcomers.

Launching shortly, is a new face in the Australian modelling industry, who I hope goes a long long way. Full details will be announced soon here on my blog. As a teaser, below are some photos.

Photographer: James Bailey
Model: Lochlan
All photographs are copyrighted to myself via Bailey Entertainment. Reproduction in any manner is strictly prohibited without written consent from myself.

Happy New Year

2006-01-01T00:00:00.000+10:30

To everyone, I wish you all a Happy New Year.

May the coming twelve months be one of happiness, success and full of dreams coming true.

On New Years Eve, have fun, drive safely and play safe.

Catchya all in 2006!

Alexander's Dream Lives On

2005-12-31T13:16:00.000+10:30

Since the time of Alexander the Great, who marched east into Asia after uniting the then civilised Europeans [ie the Greek world], Europe has always looked towards a unity amongst its people. Unlike Alexander the Great and his vision of "one world, one people", attempts to unite Europe have been through one race and its beliefs dominating the others.

Whether it was Napoleon or Hitler, whether it was through political ideology [Communism] or religion [Christianity or Islam], the past attempts to unite Europe has always been at the expense of the various races within the continent.

Alexander the Great's vision was to unite the then known world under one ruler. Nothing different from any other conqueror before or after him. What was different was his belief that by inter-marrying the various races, one would eventually create one race. By inter-marrying and by blending the best [and worst] of each culture into one huge melting pot, Alexander the Great envisaged what was loosely labelled as "one world, one people". His vision, to some extent, died with his own death and the lack of a nominated successor to take over.

However, even though his empire collapsed as a single entity, his dream continued to live on. First through the succeeding four empires that emerged, but also through the eventual rise of the Roman Empire and its successor the Byzantine Empire. What has been labelled as "Hellenistic" by historians, was the ongoing vision of merging the Greek culture and beliefs with those of the locals [Egyptians, Indians, Persians etc]. Although officially, the Hellenistic Era ended with the Roman conquest of Egypt in 30BC, the Hellenistic philsophy survived through the rise and fall of the Roman and Byzantine empires in 1453AD - nearly 1800 years after Alexander the Great's reign.

Today, the vision of Alexander the Great's "one world, one people", has emerged in what is known as the European Union. From the debris left behind from World War 2, six countries founded the European Coal and Steel Community in 1952. Initially just a trade body, it transformed itself into the European Economic Community in 1958, and finally into the European Union in 1993. In 2004, the European Union encompassed 25 countries with a population of over 450 million [more than the USA and Russian populations combined]. A further four countries are going through the formalities of becoming members of the European Union, and several others are also waiting for membership.

If all the potential new members become part of the European Union, the membership by 2020 would have ballooned to over 33 nations with a population in excess of 600 million. Its borders stretching from Portugal in the west, to Sweden in the north, Cyprus in the south, Ukraine and Turkey in the east.

Whereas Alexander the Great attempted to create the "one world, one people" via conquest, the European Union is achieving this through democratic processes. Where Greek language and culture was used as the central pivotal focus of Alexander's dream, the European Union is a truly mixed cultural and racial group where no one culture is predominant.

Alexander the Great's attempt to unite the world begun at the age of 20 when he became King of Macedonia and died in Babylon in 323BC at the tender age of 33. The path of unity of Europe has taken a lot longer, over half a century, and still evolving.

The road to a united Europe is a long and tedious one, filled with progress and setbacks. But the unity is one of choice rather than force. Whereever the road may lead for the European Union in the future, one thing is for certain. Whether as individuals we agree or disagree with the development of the European Union, is irrelevant. Peace and prosperity can be achieved in one of two ways - through co-operation or through conquest.

Alexander the Great's vision of "one world, one people" is coming to fruitition.

James

Where Are They All?

2005-12-30T17:05:00.000+10:30

Depending on who you listen to, the gay community makes up anything between 5% and 20% of the overall population with the general consensus seeming to be around 10%. In Adelaide, where I live, the general population is just over a million people, so using the above average, there should be around 100,000 gays. [And by gays, I am including gay men and lesbians.]

Even if we work on 5%, that still makes the gay population some 50,000 individuals. And, if we make one further assumption that the split is 50/50 between men and women, that makes 25,000 of each sex. In the last census [2001 report], 24.1% of the population was over 55, whilst 32.6% were under 25. This leaves 43.3% of the population being between 25 and 55, or roughly 430,000 people.

You are probably wondering where I am heading with this. But please bare with me.

Ignoring the extremes, if 430,000 people are between 25 and 55, and we work on 5% of the population being gay, that means that gay population of Adelaide is 21,500. If we assume 10%, then it balloons to 43,000 and if we go further to 20%, its a whopping 86,000.

That is a large and sizeable gay community regardless of which percentage you use.

As someone who used to go out on the [gay] scene quite regularly, I can honestly say that the total gay people that go out would be no more than about 500. To be totally honest, a large portion of these people are also under 25, but we can ignore this for the time being.

The question I want to find an answer for, is this.

If there are 21,500 gay people in Adelaide aged 25-55, and only 500 go out, where the hell is everyone else? Even if half of them are partnered off, that would still leave over 10,000 who are single. Sure, a lot go to straight venues - but 10,000 of them? Surely they can't all be closet celibate gays. Even going one step further and assuming that 75% of them are closet gays who either live a straight life and/or are married to someone of the opposite sex, that still leaves 2,500 single people.

Where does one go to find them? To meet them? I can hear you saying "you already answered that ... they go to straight venues", but honestly, if they are closet gays in straight venues, picking them out isn't an easy task. My gaydar only works 90-odd percent of the time. Is there any other way of meeting up with these non-scene gay people, other than the chatrooms, beats and straight venues?

And further to that, how do they end up "hooking up" with others?

I have taken a very conservative figure here, but even on this, there are a lot of gay people who simply don't go out.

Any thoughts anyone?

James

Why Don't I Dream?

2005-12-27T19:20:00.000+10:30

Christmas Day has come and gone, and unlike all my previous years this one was a sombre one. With my mum having passed away suddenly six weeks ago, the gathering of the family was more of a "Sunday lunch" rather than a Christmas festivity. None of us had expected anything different other than the way it had turned out.

Yet what stuck in my mind was the conversation we had. Over lunch and later at the cemetery, dad made the comment that he dreamt of mum every night since she passed away. About the conversations they have, the advise she has been giving, and believe it or not, where the paperwork is that we have been looking for but have been unable to find. These conversations are a nightly event for dad.

My brother sees her every couple of nights, sometimes asking him if he wants a coffee, or just idle chit chat. Even my sister in law, who in many ways had become one of mum's closest friends, dreams of her on a regular basis. In the dreams, they still do their "tug of war" over the grandchildren and their meals, just like they did in a playful way in real life.

Yet, to date, I have not dreamt of mum at all. Even though I dream on a regular basis, not once has she appeared in my dreams either to tell me off or simply to say "hi". When the others asked me if I dreamt of mum and I replied "no", no one believed me even though its the truth. And that saddens me, for why is it that the others see her in their dreams yet I don't?

Is it because I didn't love her enough? Or that she didn't love me? Is it simply that I have subconsciously blocked her and her memory out of my mind to avoid bringing up the feelings of loss? Further, why is it that since the actual funeral five weeks ago, have I not cried whereas the others seem to have tears well up simply by mentioning her?

I don't consider myself to be a heartless person. If anything I am quite the opposite.

So the question is - why don't I dream of her? I don't think I ask for much, just one night for her to come into my dreams, just like she does with everyone else.

James

An Open Letter

2005-12-25T00:02:00.000+10:30

To the Honourable Prime Minister of Australia, Mr John Howard.

Firstly, let me wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. I hope that you, your wife and children enjoy the festive season.

Secondly. I was quite disheartened by your comments that you would never allow gay unions in Australia. I feel very saddened that you believe that only a man and a woman can have enough love for each other to not only make a long-term commitment to each other, but also have that commitment acknowledged by the state.

Yes, various religious documents like the Bible state that a union is between a man and a woman, but the same documents also state that one should love one another regardless of who or what they are.

I find it hard to fathom how in the eyes of the law and yourself, a heterosexual couple - whether married or in a de facto relationship, are superior to that of a gay couple. All parties bleed when they are cut, hurt when in pain, love from the heart, show the same feelings and emotions as each other. So how are we different? Is it because instead of being a male/female couple, we are in some manner inferior? Is our love for our partner not worth as much as a straight couple's? Or is our love different?

Why is it that various Federal government departments [eg the Australian Defence Force] acknowledges us gay couples and gives us the same benefits as straight couples, yet under your government, we are not able to show that commitment to the rest of the nation by having a piece of paper which says "married"?

In Australia the state and religion are seperated for a good reason. Yet by passing a legislation which defines a marriage as being one between man and woman, you are also drawing religion into the state. Or am I reading this wrong? I pray that you are not so anti-gay by your actions and your words, for then I feel sorry for you Mr Howard.

I sit back and wonder how much love you really have and how you would react if one of your own children or grandchildren turned out to be gay. Would you love them any less? And if one did turn out to be gay, how would you defend your actions to them when they ask "Why can't I marry my partner?", considering it is you who changed the law to define what a "marriage" is? When they look overseas to countries like your beloved UK, where gay unions are now acceptable, how will you defend your actions? Will you pull out the Bible and say "God says only straight couples can marry"?

Mr Howard, today is Christmas Day when Jesus was born. He came into the world preaching peace and love to all humanity. He accepted everyone - whether Jew, Roman, prostitute etc - as an equal and loved them with all his heart. I know you won't read this blog of mine as you have more important things to deal with. But I do pray that today you find it in your heart to look beyond your confines, re-consider, and in the new year you show that being gay does not mean being inferior. That in the new year, you allow us to feel as equals within our great nation by allowing gay unions.

On that note, I will leave you to your Christmas Day and your family.

Regards

James
A gay man who believes that miracles can happen.

Merry Christmas

2005-12-24T17:50:00.000+10:30

To everyone who reads my blogs, I would like to wish you all a very Merry Christmas. Drive safely, enjoy the festive season and take care.
Remember - its a time to be with family and friends, so even if you don't get along during the rest of the year, put aside any ill feelings and enjoy the time together.
Otherwise, I won't ask these gorgeous reindeer boyz to come over and visit you :-)

with love, James

Google and AOL - Where Is Google Going? Pt 2

2005-12-21T17:20:00.000+10:30

Ok. Since my last article on Monday December 19th, Google and AOL have officially announced their partnership. True to the rumours, Google is buying into AOL a 5% stake for US$1billion plus providing a "credit" for US$300million so AOL can buy advertising.

What is interesting is some of the things I hinted at in my previous article. Whereas most were looking at the advertising side, I was looking at the added benefits that Google would obtain from a Google-AOL partnership.

Under the Google-AOL partnership just announced, Google Talk will obtain interporality with AOL's IM thus allowing users from the two services to communicate with each other. Plus, the two companies will collaborate on video search "which will help increase consumer awareness of Time-Warner AOL video content on the web". [click here and here for news reports on the deal]

As predicted, the reason Google pursued the AOL partnership is and was for more than the advertising side. As more and more details are released in the near future, Google's vision of its future will become even more evident.

On a side issue, it is interesting to also note that Google has also made available to the public the ability to obtain a Gmail account by subscribing to the service with a mobile [similar to what was been offered in the USA]. I haven't checked to see how many countries this new rollout has occured for, but is available for the first time to Australians [here].

With their other "soft" launches like music search and gmail for mobiles, expect to see a new Google portal being launched within the next 6 months or so, similar to Yahoo, AOL and the rest. A portal that will not replace the current www.google.com homepage, but compliment it, providing news, weather, video clips etc. Just like the personal homepage Google currently offers, but expanded and updated. I would not be surprised to find that Google announces the launch of an online Office service [via their partnership with Sun and the Open Office Organisation] in the near future.

And the purpose for all this?

As stated in previous postings on Google, their aim in the long term is to establish a customer base through their portals and alliances to begin bringing together their various offerings and thus generate income from outside their normal advertising streams. In addition to all this, provide an alternative to their main "enemy" - Microsoft. Whether we like it or not, Google will over the next 12 months become an even bigger integral part of the Internet community.

Whether the "do no evil" philosophy is still valid, is another issue. But we are in for interesting times ahead.

Yes, it is sheer speculation on my part, but hey, what would I know? I could be totally wrong. Time will tell.

Celibacy - A Gay Man's Life

2005-12-20T06:25:00.000+10:30

Sex and being gay goes hand-in-hand within our community, and this is the perception within the general community as well. If you are gay, then sex has to be the number one thing that is always on your mind. If you don’t get laid, then people automatically assume that you are either lying or there is something [medically] wrong with you.

Come on – one is gay and does NOT have sex? You have to be kidding! Right? Wrong! Not everyone is driven by that desire to off-load with someone else. Believe it or not, some people place sex very low on the list of priorities, for various reasons.

Take me for example. Having been in and out of long-term relationships, and having had my share of one-night stands and flings, I have for the last twelve months followed a life of celibacy. No, not because I can’t pick anyone up or find a partner – far from it. I know enough people who are interested in me that I can be ‘married off’ within a week.

I am celibate for several reasons., none of which has anything to do with the ability to pick up or medical reasons. My decision to be celibate was based on several things.

Firstly – the main one being that over the last 20 years I have been in four relationships during which I had been single for only 3 years in total. Anyone who goes from relationship to relationship tends to lose, to a certain degree, a sense of individuality. After my last relationship ended after 6 years, I went through my period of one-night stands till one morning I woke up, and took a hard look at myself and the life I was leading.

What I saw was something I had not expected, although subconsciously, I always knew. Within me were merged my ex partners - their mannerisms, speech patterns, attitude and more. That is not necessarily a bad thing, as we all tend to pick up things from others. What worried me the most was that the “me” was now part of a collage of several people.

Secondly – my own direction in life of where I wanted to be and what I wanted had somehow fallen by the side somewhere over the last 20 years. My dreams of living in Europe, of owning my own business and other dreams, had been put on the backburner with “I’ll do that next year”. My life had become one of drifting between partners – both long term and short term – and all of them, whether I wanted to admit it or not, revolved around sex.

And finally, I started to open my eyes as what was really happening out there in the gay scene. Seeing people on the hunt for sex, people being emotionally hurt by others purely for fun, and people taking advantage of others. One image still haunts me. My previous partner and I were at a local nightclub, where we saw this older guy ply a young man with alcohol, and once he was drunk, took him into the toilets and raped him. Now this isn’t an everyday occurrence, but similar less “violent” events occur around us on a daily basis.

The decision to be celibate can be seen as one where I need to find myself. To find the ‘true’ me within this collage of people, to find those lost dreams and try to at least fulfill some of them, and to use my energies into providing some good to others. Yes, sex is still important to me, and eventually I do want to go back out on the hunt for one-night stands and a partner, but that isn’t my main goal at present.

Over the last twelve months, I have been celibate despite what people may think or believe. And during this time, my closest friends have seen a transformation in me that they find it hard to believe. I am happier, more content with myself, and my life has finally got a direction. But most importantly, the collage that I was is still there, but my own individuality is now more at the fore than it was.

So celibacy to me is one of control without the distractions. And as some wise person said ages ago – to be happy one has to be happy with one’s self first.

James

[Originally written in 2003, I have re-published it in my blog as a "kind reminder" that being gay does not necessarily mean we are all sex starved :-)

Google and AOL - Where Is Google Going?

2005-12-19T08:22:00.000+10:30

Back in November, I wrote an article entitled "Google - the new Skynet?" inwhich I questioned where Google was heading with it's ever increasing new products, services and partnerships. In the last 48 hours, Google succeeded in beating Microsoft in partnering with AOL via a 5% acquisition for US$1billion. Many commentators are somewhat mystified as to why Google would spend so much to acquire so little of AOL. Most focus on the value of "Search" where AOL provided some 10% of Google's revenue during the first 9 months - or approximately $430million. Had Google failed to win, they would have lost a reasonable chunk of their revenue to Microsoft and also seen a AOL-Microsoft alliance competing with them in the lucrative Search field.

However, one thing that many have failed to focus on is what AOL has to offer Google.

Google is currently the leader in Search, and has a wide number of products and services available to the general public. Products like Google Talk, Gmail, Google Video etc etc. What they lack though is an established customer base which Google can tap into. Sure, one could claim that the entire internet community is their customer base, but there is no "loyalty" in this respect.

What AOL offers Google is just that - a captive customer base which it can easily tap into. Take for example Google Talk. Currently the three main IMs are AOL, Yahoo and MSN Messenger, none of which have interporality with GoogleTalk. So, although Google Talk is a great product, people are not flocking to it as people do not have family and friends on it. And many people are not willing to dump their current IM for Google Talk if they can't chat to anyone.

The same applies with Google Video. A great service but mainly made up of home videos provided by the public. What Google Video doesn't have is the movie and tv studios to provide the content to make Google Video a success.

With the new AOL- Google partnership, do not be surprised to find that in the next 12 months, Google Talk will have interporality with AOL's IM, and that movies and TV shows are suddenly part of Google Video.

Further, AOL operates not only in the USA but also in Germany, Argentina, Australia, Mexico, Japan, Canada, Brazil, France, UK and Puerto Rico. AOL has a customer base that Google can easily tap into to provide its services in conjunction with AOL's own products. In all these countries, AOL has paying internet customers - a readymade customer base for Google.

With AOL being part of the Time Warner group, Google will have access to CNN, Time, HBO and Warner Bros and their content.

Don't get me wrong. I am not saying that simply because they now own 5% of AOL, Google will automatically get access to all this. However as part-owner, they will have a foothold and leverage to obtain access. Paying US$1billion for a 5% stake in AOL is a lot of money, but the side benefits Google will obtain from this partnership far outways the cost. Its cheaper paying US$1billion and gaining access to a large international customer base and "rich" media content, than setting it all up by itself.

And that is what Google is eyeing for, not the money that AOL is generating for them via the "search" service.

James

Gay, Bi, Straight - Does It Matter?

2005-12-18T18:27:00.000+10:30

One of the movies that I am looking forward to watching is the much-acclaimed "Brokeback Mountain". Not because of the supposed sex scenes nor the fact that two really cute guys are the main actors, but because it is "different" to the run-of-the-mill movies that have been coming out of Hollywood over the last few years.

Sure, there have been some exceptions like "Saw" and "Lord of the Rings", but generally once you have seen one, the others seem to be a different version of the same thing.

What has me excited about "Brokeback Mountain" is the fact that two "straight" guys discover that love is not necessarily bound by the male/female relationship stereotype. Love can and does transcend genders because us humans are by nature, bisexual in orientation - not straight nor gay. In pre-Christian Europe and in the current non-Jewish/Christian/Islamic countries, bisexuality was and is generally the norm and/or acceptable. [You may wonder why I clustered Jews, Christians and Muslims into one category, and that is because each has developed from the other, carrying on some of the "beliefs" of its predecessor.]

Which brings me to the issue of bisexuality versus being Gay or Straight. Does it really matter in the scheme of things, who one actually sleeps with? Does it really matter if an actor [or actress] is gay or bisexual? Why does it need to be a "secret" from the main public? Throughout cinematic history, many leading actors and actresses have been gay or bisexual in real life, whereas the Hollywood PR people actively portrayed them as being straight.

Some examples include James Dean, Tab Hunter, Liberace and more. Actors and singers nowadays play up on the ambiguity of their sexuality, and a good example is the former Take That member Robbie Williams. He has been always playing up on his sexuality, dropping comments and hints that he is gay, yet taking the newspapers to courts when one of them publicise it too much.

What are they afraid of? Do they believe that by being honest about their sexuality - whichever one it is - that they will lose public support, and thus lose out on lucrative recording or movie contracts?

Take Jake Gyllenhaal who stars in "Brokeback Mountain". He is one stunning guy and can honestly say that many of the guys I know, would love to take him to bed - even if for only one night [including yours truly].

But he has denied being bisexual, yet when questioned, he has stated the following:

"You know it’s flattering when there’s a rumor that says I’m bisexual,” the actor — who stars in “Brokeback Mountain,” which some are calling the gay cowboy movie — tells the December issue of Details. “It means I can play more kinds of roles. I’m open to whatever people want to call me. I’ve never really been attracted to men sexually, but I don’t think I would be afraid of it if it happened.”

[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9916519] 21/11/2005

Now, you will notice that he doesn't deny he is bisexual but he also doesn't confirm he is straight either! What is of interest in his last comments, which are "... never really been attracted to men sexually, but I don't think I would be afraid of it if it happened". What does he mean "never REALLY been attracted"? And why does he think he wouldn't be afraid if it happened?

Is he saying that he has been attracted to guys but not to the point of taking them to bed? But if the right one came along, he would? If he is straight, why not simply come out and say "I am straight"? Why do the "Robbie Williams" game playing?

To be honest, I really don't care whether he [or anyone] is gay, straight or bisexual as long as they are honest about it. And that, to me, is the crux of the issue - why not be honest?

It won't change my mind about seeing the movie because his sexuality is irrelevant to me seeing it. I will enjoy the movie for the sheer purpose of it being a different kind of movie from Hollywood. The fact that I will also sit there wondering if he is gay, straight or bisexual will only be a side issue :-)

James

Ignorance Is Bliss

2005-12-17T10:45:00.000+10:30

I generally try to not raise issues of a political nature, mainly due to the fact that people are generally very set in their minds. Having also studied International Politics and Classical History at High School and University, I also am mindful of the fact that humanity evolves in cycles.

Take for example, classical Athens. After the Persian Wars, Athens became the main power within the Greek world, establishing the Delian League to keep the Persians at bay, and later evolving into the Athenian Empire. During this era, Athens became the powerhouse of thought and development within the Greek world, and its influence extended way beyond its own borders and that of it's empire. Yet despite all this, it's greed for more and more gradually led it to it's downfall. Many claim the turning point was it's defeat at Syracuse.

The reason I raise this is simple. Today the main power in the world is the United States of America. Although it doesn't have an empire, it's economic and military capabilities allows it to literally dictate what and when things occur. It's foray into Iraq - whether one agrees or disagrees with this is irrelevant - is one example of the USA flexing its muscle on the rest of the world. In turn, now that Saddam Hussein has been overthrown, the USA is trying to bring it's form of democracy and economics into an environment that finds these as alien.

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that what the USA is doing is right or wrong. That is a matter of personal opinion. But now that it has achieved its goal of ridding Iraq of Saddam Hussein and bringing some order within Iraq, it is now flexing its muscle with the other Middle Eastern countries. In an ideal world, it would be great if every country had democracy and a free economy, but this isn't going to happen.

The USA has to be very careful as to how and where it uses its power, for like every other superpower in the past [Greece, Rome, Byzantium, Turks, Egyptians, British, French etc], their power will reach a climax and gradually will fade away, to be replaced by another. If one looks at the world stage at present, there are already other nations like the European Union, India and China which are seeing their power and influence increasing. These three nations today account for over 50% of the world's population. With time, these will be the new superpowers of the world, replacing the USA.

How the USA is dealt with in the future, will largely depend on how the USA has treated the rest of the world during its superpower era. In other words, the USA of the future may be nothing more than what Athens was under Alexander the Great or Rome - nothing more than just a past relic of a "has been power".

There would be nothing more shameful than a great nation being reduced to a third world power whose claim to fame in history is that of a bully. And let's face it, the USA has taken on the role of superpower rather quickly without also developing the necessary skills to handle that role. It's past actions talk for themselves.

Ignorance of the past is bliss, but history does teach us one thing - everything goes in cycles. Today's super power is tomorrow's third world country; and vice versa. Think about it.

James

Alter Egos - Who Needs Them When You Have Chat Rooms?

2005-12-16T08:30:00.000+10:30

If I could have another job in life, it would be that of a psychologist specialising in multi-personalities and alter egos!

As someone who frequents the chat rooms on the net, I am continually amazed at how people have two or more nics, and the personas they portray to reflect them.

Take one particular person in his mid-20s who is well known [but will remain anonymous for legal reasons]. Under his regular nic, he is the nicest person you shall ever meet. Nice as pie, could even say marriage material. And under this nic you could actually say "yeah, I could see myself falling for this guy".

But when he is in chat under his 'alter ego' nic, well -- what can one say. Do you run for cover? Leave the room and don't come back till he is gone? Or dare take the chance of staying in there and keeping your mouth shut, hoping you won't be spotted! He is the most vicious and cruelest person you can imagine, picking on people from their nic to their race! And even strychnine would do this person no harm!

Now, knowing this person in real life, he is actually not only a blend of these two nics, but more. He has the qualities of "marriage material" crossed with the "devil re-incarnated", with one extra trait which none of his nics disclose - a thief. Many unwary people have fallen for his charm, only to find that they have lost money, property items or worse - their trust - for falling for this guy.

One wonders whether the net allows these people to allow their alter egos loose, or whether the net actually creates them and the person then fine tunes and adopts the traits. That is one of the hardest questions one can try to answer. Maybe some one out there doing a thesis, may want to look at this perplexing question - does the net create alter egos, or do alter egos simply emerge from a dormant state within someone.

Maybe the net is not responsible for any of it at all. No more a catalyst than having alcohol in a liquor store, and blaming it for someone being drunk. Who knows, but alter egos do have a role to play, even if for no other reason than to entertain the rest of us during quiet moments in the chat rooms. Who knows!

James

The Trees From The Forest

2005-12-15T17:37:00.000+10:30

Have you ever walked into a forest and kept walking, thinking "this forest goes forever"? Or walked into one of those huge department stores with umpteen levels and gone up and down the escalators but not noticed the products on the shelves? How many times have you walked past that shop down the street and only just realised that they sold your favourite candy?

I raise this because us humans have selective listening and seeing capabilities, whether we wish to admit it or not. We only notice the things we want to notice, and when we do notice something we think to ourselves "how long has that been there?".

Example. I live in the heart of Adelaide and walk practically everywhere, even to work. I always take the same route to work and home, so after six months, one would assume that I would know the buildings in the area quite well. Surprise surprise - no I don't. For the first time in six months I noticed that there is a small business which sells imported car accessories from Japan. Now one would think that with all the auto-stuff in the window, I would have seen it. Out of curiosity, I popped in the other day and asked them how long they have been there. And the reply was "four months". Four months of me walking past it and not noticing it! That is sad.

We do the same with our relationships - whether romantic or friendship. Take my closest friend Chris, who I have known now for thirteen years. The other day he called in for a coffee and a chat after he finished work. We sat there for nearly two hours chatting when I suddenly noticed he has a small mole on the back of his neck. Now, that's nothing major, but one would assume after all this time I would have noticed that. Another friend of mine of four years continually bites his nails - never in public mind you - but his fingernails are well chewed. How can one miss that?

Further, two weeks ago I got introduced to another guy by a friend and we chatted for like an hour. It is strange how he has continually gone out to the Mars Bar [our local gay nightclub] every Friday and Saturday night for over a year now. And yet, when Greg and I were out every Friday and Saturday night last year, we never bumped into him. Looking at him, he is the type of person I could easily fall for - yet our paths never crossed before! Was it because I was too busy looking after Greg that I didn't notice anyone else, or that Jase was too busy to notice me? How many missed opportunities have I passed up without noticing?

So the questions that arise are - does familiarity with a person or place result in us missing all these little things? Do we only see what we want to see and subconsciously block out everything else? And if we do that, then why all of a sudden do they suddenly become so focused? What triggers that off in our minds to notice them?

I know that by realising this, I am now paying more attention to my surroundings and am continually being surprised by what I have failed to notice in the past. It is making my small world look a whole lot different to the way I have seen it in the past.

James

Know Thyself

2005-12-14T18:18:00.000+10:30

Two of the most important concepts the Ancient Greeks followed were inscribed in the Temple of Apollo - in Delphi - were "Know Thyself" and "Nothing In Excess". These two concepts so commonly known in today's society that they have become part of every culture. Yet so few people practice them.

"Know Thyself" - we all think we know ourselves quite well, but how much do we really know? How much do we understand who we are and what we want? If we don't know ourselves, how do we expect others to know us? And for that matter - understand us and what makes us tick?

"Nothing in Excess" - well, that one is open to personal interpretation as to how much is too much. But, how do we gauge when enough is enough? How do we know we have gone beyond the level where it becomes excessive?

Take the two together and you have one great ideal in life - Know Thyself with Nothing In Excess. A former partner of mine - Tony - is a prime example of someone who did not follow either of these. We were seeing each other for around six months - one of those relationships which did not last.

In his entire life till about three years ago, the longest he had been single was three weeks - and he was so excited about it, that he had to simply tell everyone. His entire life from around 18 through to his late 30s he went from relationship to relationship, normally finding his next partner before ending his current relationship. But as fate is always around, he ended up being single for nearly a year - and was totally lost! He had no idea as to who the real Tony was - what made him "tick" so to speak. And more importantly, did not know how to survive without having someone around him all the time.

Some of us call it soul searching, but for him, it was more. He spent the year trying to find himself and the more he dug into himself, the more he realised two things. One - he was nothing more than a blend of every partner he ever had, and two, his own self was such a small percentage of who he was, that it scared him. Depression simply set in, and the realisation that his obsession with being in a relationship was the main culprit behind it all. Thankfully, he pulled through and now can survive being alone.

The reason I raise this [and there is always a reason], is because I am looking at how some of my younger friends are today acting. And all I can see is junior Tonys. One of my younger friends in particular is of great concern, for he has given his current other half more and more opportunities to make efforts to keep the relationship going, and it seems to be ignored. How many times must one put out the fires before one says enough is enough and give up? It's like using a bucket full of holes trying to empty a sinking boat. The old saying "nothing in excess" seems applicable - he is using all his energies to try and make something be what it isn't.

The other thing is that he himself only knows or wants one thing - to be in a relationship. Yet, so far, he has succeeded in losing a large part of his own identity, and become a collage of his closest friends and partners [past and present]. I kind of sit back and wonder what he would be like when he is 25? Will he be the same person or will I sit across the table having coffee with him, and all I would see is bits and pieces of his ex's?

Maybe I am trying to latch onto someone I once met and can't come to terms with the changes that every one goes through. Maybe I am scared that he might change so much that I won't want to know him. Maybe I am afraid that one day I will look at him and see myself - for many of my friends say that he is another me - speech, mannerisms, attitude and more.

I do know that he needs to sit back and find himself, for once he knows who and what he is ["Know Thyself"], then and only then can he really be an individual. Someone with the ability to not only live within a relationship, but also live without one too. Only then when he realises when too much effort is being wasted ["Nothing In Excess"] that it's time to say enough is enough and call it either quits or issue the ultimate ultimatum - and stick to it.

But then, in all honesty, how many of us know ourselves and do go beyond the excess bit? I for one know that I don't truly know myself, and that on many occasions I go beyond the point where I should have given up. But then, I also know that about myself too. Catch22.

James

Racism in Australia

2005-12-13T20:13:00.000+10:30

Ok. I wasn't going to comment on this subject, but with the events happening in Sydney and elsewhere in Australia over the last few days, something needed to be said.

I am ashamed of being an Australian. Totally and utterly ashamed! The events of Sydney where narrowminded, ignorant and totally "UGH!!!" stupid people running around, smashing other people's properties and attacking "non Anglosaxon" citizens is driving me nuts! When I see and hear newsreports of some people saying "I was born here" and "Australia for whites", my blood begins to boil.

Why?

Well, lets take a 2-minute history lesson. Oh stuff it! Its going to be a 15 minute lecture!

Prior to 1788 when the first British fleet arrived, Australia was inhabited by the Aborigines. When the First Fleet arrived and landed, they brought with them not only convicts from what is now the UK, but also from Madagascar, the West Indies, Holland, France, Germany, Portugal, Sweden, Norway and Bengal - just to name a few. So the First Fleet was actually a multi-racial mix of convicts.

During our one "civil war" - if you wish to call it that - there were American Blacks, other Americans, Germans, Austrians, Swedes and Italians who all fought at Eureka. As the two world wars begun and ended, and the world plunged into the Cold War, Australia accepted hundreds of thousands of people from all over the world.

During our first 200 years, Australia accepted people from all over the world to the point that today's society is not only a mish-mash of various races but also of religions. It can in fact be described as a mini-UN and 99.9% of the time, we actually do live in harmony with each other. Except when you have idiots like those in Sydney over the last few days.

I have heard and read people saying that "we" should send these "foreigners" back to where they came from. Others have said that with "Australians" being unemployed, we don't need "more foreigners as well". Well, sorry, but I am at a total loss here.

Firstly. What constitutes an "Australian"? Is it the fact that one is born here? Or has taken out citizenship? Or is it because they are not Anglosaxon? If we use the first criteria [born here], then I am an Australian even though my parents were born in Greece. If "citizenship" is the issue, then my parents are also Australians as they took out their citizenship back in the 1970s. However, if we take "Australian" to mean "Anglosaxon", then ok - ship everyone back to where they came from. BUT, where do we draw the "Anglosaxon" line? One generation ago? Three generations ago? Or ... how far back? And what do we do with those who may have a "British" dad but an Irish or Greek or Asian wife? Break up the family?

Secondly, on the issue of jobs and employment. Who's fault is it that there are people who are unemployed for lengthy periods? The "non-Anglosaxon" people here, or those that have set standards for themselves and won't take a job because "I am too good for it"? And before you start having a go at me, I know people who have never been unemployed, both young and old. They get off their backsides, get any job they can and then keep searching. In fact I know a couple of people who have upto 3 parttime jobs simply NOT to be unemployed.

Some people have said that immigration is bad for the country. I really don't see how though. Let me use an example here and if you find faults in my theory, please tell me.

If we allow 100,000 people to set up residence in Australia, it means that these 100,000 people will need clothing, housing, jobs etc. Lets make a further assumption [for the sake of the argument] that these 100,000 people are actually 25,000 families made up of dad, mum and 2 kids.

These 25,000 families will need 25,000 homes to live in. They will also need 75,000 beds, mattresses, quilts, etc to sleep on; 25,000 tables and 100,000 chairs, 25,000 cars, 25,000 jobs etc etc etc. Now, narrowminded and not very forward thinking people will say "they are stealing the stuff we need!!". Okay, yes they will need all these products and services [as well as jobs]. But when you think about it logically, someone has to produce all this stuff. So the factories will need to increase production to cater for this demand, which means they employ more people. These factories need resources, so their suppliers also bump up production [and hiring] to accommodate their own customers.

The end result is that although we need 25,000 new jobs for these new immigrants, they are actually created a lot more jobs simply to provide them with the goods and services they need. Think I am joking? Think about how many people are needed to build and furnish just one house. No, not just the builders, but also electricians, plumbers, the businesses that create the materials for the house construction, the TV manufacturers, bed and furniture makers and so on. Get the jist?

Australia's economic booms have always been when this country has had a high level of immigration. When immigration has been down, we have faced high unemployment. Coincidence? I think not.

Finally. I wonder how many of those "idiots" drive home in their Fords or Holdens after their rampage and sit down to pizza or a yiros and skull their Coca Cola or Scotch and say "we taught those bloody foreigners a lesson".

Our country is built on the back of the immigrants, whether they came from Europe, Asia, Africa or the UK. Take away the immigrants and you really have very little left.

Enough said! I am going to now sit down and enjoy the rest of my night, and hopefully by the weekend, a lot of those "idiots" are not only behind bars with the law throwing the book at them, but also given an education on reality.

James

Send Me An Angel

2005-12-13T05:40:00.000+10:30

Enough of the serious stuff here. I am going to be selfish today and all I am going to say is this. "I want one! Right Now!" [oh yeah, scroll down past the picture]

Send Me An Angel by Real Life

Do you believe in heaven above
do you believe in love
don't tell a lie don't be false and untrue
it all comes back to you

Open fire!
on my burning heart
i've never been lucky in love
my defences are down
a kiss or a frown
I can't survive on my own

If a guy walks in and carves his name in my heart
I'll turn and run away
everyday we've all been led astray
it's hard to be lucky in love

It gets in your eyes
it's making you cry
don't know what to do
don't know what to do
you're looking for love
calling heaven above

Send me an angel
send me an angel
right now, right now

Empty dreams can only dissapoint
in a room behind your smile
but don't give up,
don't give up
you can be lucky in love

It gets in your eyes
it's making you cry
don't know what to do
don't know what to do
you're looking for love
calling heaven above

Send me an angel
send me an angel
right now, right now.

[Note: I have changed "girl" to "guy" and "her" to "his" ... after all, I am gay :-) 
Oh ... any takers? Let me know LOL

Dying Is Such A Pain - A Personal Perspective

2005-12-12T18:08:00.000+10:30

Believe it or not, everyone is dying from the moment one is born. It is a natural thing – you are born and then you die, and somewhere in between you have a life. For the majority of people, our time on this planet is not known – we simply don’t know when or how we will die.

For some though with terminal illnesses, we know roughly how long we have left. Whether it is a matter of months or several years. In some respects, these people who know, are the lucky ones. Knowing when one will die, allows you to try and cram as many of your dreams into your life as possible. Unlike the rest of the population, knowing when allows one to plan one’s remaining life.

Two of my friends have cancer, and thankfully are in remission. They both know their time is limited, and both are trying to make the last months/years of their lives as fulfilling as possible.

Five of my other friends are HIV+, with one of them having being HIV+ for over ten years now. They too have gone through the rough bit of “why me”, come to terms with it, and now living a full life, even though they all know it’s only a matter of time before they are at the pearly gates.

The disadvantage of knowing is that you are forever aware that time is passing. Don’t know about you, but I am seeing time flying by just a tad too quickly for my liking. Maybe it’s a sign of growing old, or maybe everything is simply speeding up.

What I find most annoying is that knowing how long I have before I too go through [hopefully] the pearly gates, my amount of time left is quickly passing. There are too many things I still want to achieve, and yet as each day passes, I think to myself “will I do everything I want?”.

One thing my dying friends and I have in common, besides knowing we are dying, is the day we do die and how everyone will react. Some of us have told our family and friends, while others have kept it a secret to all but a select few.

I myself made the decision that I would not tell a lot of people, and that has been the hardest thing. The ones that know are my doctor, a close personal [female] friend and my flatmate’s partner. As you probably appreciate, you can’t hide anything from your doctor, and my female friend happened to find out by mistake [I accidentally let it slip one day when talking about cancer].

The decision to tell my flatmate’s partner that I was dying [without telling him how or why], was not taken lightly. Knowing how my flatmate would react to the news based on his previous negative reactions to others dying, I am hoping that his partner may be his sounding board and a sense of understanding. Time will tell. Hopefully our friendship is strong enough for him to take it into account and accept it without feeling let down or betrayed.

I have known for the last twelve months that I am dying, and for that time, I have gradually come to terms with it. I know for a fact that if my family found out, the impact will crush them, and then become an issue of being “baby-sat” to make sure I was okay.

As those that have read my previous articles, my time has been spent enjoying myself and helping others. I suppose in some respects the old saying “what goes around comes around” is something I am hoping will eventuate. By doing good deeds to others, others will in time reciprocate in some form. Not that I have any doubt about this from my close friends.

By letting people know through this article that I am dying, you as the reader, will finally be able to put two and two together and realise that my previous articles were nothing more than building blocks to me fulfilling my dreams.

By this stage you are either shocked or about to reach for the phone. But DON’T! I don’t need sympathy or a flood of questions. I still have about 4 to 5 years left [maybe longer], according to the doctors, and I intend living my life to the fullest. The only thing I need to ensure each day is that I get sufficient sleep and as little stress as possible. The impact of these two things have seen me really drained and exhausted, and its something I am trying to control, with some success.

Why this sudden confession?

Simply so that people out there finally realise that what I do is not only for the benefit of others, but also to make my last few years fulfilling. Yeah, ok … selfish as that maybe, it is for me that I do this. Simply so that when the day comes, I can honestly say I did some good. And by telling people now, you may understand the reason for the hugs and cuddles that I sometimes crave – it is for simply to be close to someone without the hang-ups or expectations of sex, at times when I am down.

Cancer is such a bitch … and dying is such a pain … but hey! Everyone dies at some stage, and I am one of the lucky ones that know when and how long.

So my advise to you is enjoy your life, live as if today is your last day, and make sure that you try at least to fulfil some of your dreams and hopes.

James

[Written in the first person on behalf of a friend]

Where Are My Friends Going? Where Am I Heading?

2005-12-12T05:50:00.000+10:30

I got back yesterday afternoon from spending some quality time with a lesbian friend of mine. I hadn't seen her since my mum's funeral four weeks ago, not because of her avoiding me, but rather me taking a low profile. One of solitude and reflection at my loss as well as trying to keep my dad, brother and sister in law from going off the deep end, while trying to maintain my own sense of sanity.

We sat and had a late lunch at the beachside suburb of North Haven, just the two of us, catching up and what's happening like any two good friends do. But it was after I dropped her off home, that I sensed another loss. She was leaving that evening for Sydney, first for only 6 weeks to see how she would cope living with her partner, and then if it worked out, permanently.

I looked back over the last 18 months and realised that most of my good close friends have either moved interstate or are about to. By the end of 2006 I will only have 2 close friends left in Adelaide. The rest would have also moved on to Sydney, Queensland and beyond.

My own plans of moving to Canberra for a better paying job in January and a new life, is now on hold due to mum's passing away and having to "train" my dad in the simple things of independent living. Things like how to use a washing machine, how to cook a decent meal, paying bills etc. These were things my mum used to take care of during their 45 years of marriage, and now that role for the time being has fallen on me.

I can hear some of you saying "you'll be okay, he'll get used to being alone" etc., and that I already know. And that is one of the reasons for my holiday plans for 2006. To give myself time away from here as well as foster a situation where he does start standing on his own two feet. However, it's the period between now and then that has me worried and concerned, for till that time I need to be here and I need my close friends around me for the emotional and social support. I know, it sounds selfish but then what are close friends really for? The good times and the parties only? Or are they there for the bad times as well?

And while I am going through all this, my friends are moving interstate and to a new life. In the meantime, I too need to work out where I am heading.

Copyright - The Other Issue

2005-12-11T20:40:00.000+10:30

Over the last couple of years or so, the movie and music industry have been targeting peer-to-peer sites and software providers trying to stop people from downloading free of charge. Their argument has been that they lose revenue through these illegal downloads via reduced sales, reduced tickets at movie theatres and more.

Now, they are also targeting sheet music and lyrics that can be found online because they claim that they are also loosing revenue for these products. Google is also in the midst of a legal case over its plans to scan thousands - if not millions - of books and put snippets of the content online.

All this is being done in the name of "copyright" and "loss of revenue".

Now, please do not get me wrong. Artists - whether singers, actors, producers or writers, to name a few - produce their work so they can actually make money. Thus they deserve to earn royalties from their works, just like everyone else who provides a service or product.

However I think they have missed the point as to why people download music, movies etc. It is not for greed or lack of money that people do it. There are a myriad of reasons, however if you ask most people who download these copyrighted products, they will simply tell you that the cost of buying the goods is too high.

Take for example a CD by a popular singer or band. In Australia, the cost is between $25 and $35 per CD which would have between 10 and 12 tracks. Of these, 3/4 of the songs are what most would describe as "Crap" or "fillers". Only 2 or 3 songs are worth buying the CD for, yet why would anyone want to spend that sort of money just for a couple of songs?

The record companies would argue that it costs money to make the CDs and promote them. Yes, no argument out of me on that one, but how can they justify the cost being so high? And, how can they justify that 3-6 months after the new CD is released, one can buy it for only $10-$20 instead of $25-$35? Has production costs decreased, or have they made enough money during the first 3-6 months to subsidise the reduced sales price? I think not.

The same goes with movies. A cinema ticket is around $14 unless you go on a cheap night [normally Tuesdays]. Or one can wait until it is out on DVD and buy it for anything between $30 and $40 upon release, or $15-$25 a few months later. Novels and other books are no different. Buy them when they are released and you pay "an arm and a leg", but wait a few months and you can pick them up from $1 upwards.

Now, if the entertainment industry is really serious about reducing pirating of their goods, then they need to look at the reason behind people downloading their products. The cost is one factor which if they used their ingenuity, would follow in the steps of Apple and it's I-tune store and sell the music online for a nominal price. People would then legally download the music because they can pick-and-choose what they wanted. Same goes for movies, books etc.

The second thing they need to do is make available their entire collections to the public, not just the hit albums, songs and movies. Many people download music and movies that are no longer available for purchase or are too difficult to find.

The thing that the entertainment industry tends to forget and ignore is this. If a CD or movie is not available for purchase, and someone downloads it from someone else who already has it, then there is no loss of revenue for the producer. The purpose of the Copyright laws are to protect the creator from someone else copying it and earning an income from it. However, if the movie or song [or book for that matter] is no longer available for purchase, then the entertainment industry's claims are not valid.

It is interesting to note that the US FAMILY ENTERTAINMENT AND COPYRIGHT ACT OF 2005 states that for one to be punished for Copyright violation, one must do this for commercial advantage or financial gain, must be in excess of $1000 within any 6 month period, and make it available to people who one knows are going to use it for the above reasons. [below is an copy of the actual act].

Finally the third thing the entertainment industry needs to consider. People download music and movies because many wish to "preview" them before forking out their hard cold cash. In these tough economic times, people do not wish to throw money away for a 2nd rate or 3rd rate album or movie. If they like it, they will then either buy the CD or DVD, or go and see the movie at the cinemas.

Enough said.

US FAMILY ENTERTAINMENT AND COPYRIGHT ACT OF 2005 [excerpt below]
(a) Criminal Infringement.--
``(1) In general.--Any person who willfully infringes a
copyright shall be punished as provided under section 2319 of
title 18, if the infringement was committed--
``(A) for purposes of commercial advantage or
private financial gain;
``(B) by the reproduction or distribution, including
by electronic means, during any 180-day period, of 1 or
more copies or phonorecords of 1 or more copyrighted
works, which have a total retail value of more than
$1,000; or
``(C) by the distribution of a work being prepared
for commercial distribution, by making it available on a
computer network accessible to members of the public, if
such person knew or should have known that the work was
intended for commercial distribution.
(2) Evidence.--For purposes of this subsection, evidence
of reproduction or distribution of a copyrighted work, by
itself, shall not be sufficient to establish willful
infringement of a copyright.
``(3) Definition.--In this subsection, the term `work being
prepared for commercial distribution' means--
``(A) a computer program, a musical work, a motion
picture or other audiovisual work, or a sound recording,
if, at the time of unauthorized distribution--
``(i) the copyright owner has a reasonable
expectation of commercial distribution; and
``(ii) the copies or phonorecords of the work
have not been commercially distributed; or
``(B) a motion picture, if, at the time of
unauthorized distribution, the motion picture--
``(i) has been made available for viewing in a
motion picture exhibition facility; and
``(ii) has not been made available in copies
for sale to the general public in the United
States in a format intended to permit viewing
outside a motion picture exhibition facility.''.

Pack Your Bags and Let's Go

2005-12-10T17:55:00.000+10:30

A couple of months ago I decided to organise my travel plans for 2006. With pen, paper, a hot cuppa coffee and my nicoteine sticks, I worked out where and when I would go for my holidays in the coming twelve months.

Having been to Europe three times in my life, I decided 2006 would the Year of Australia and go to the cities I have never been before. So Sydney was automatically ruled out as I graced that fair city twice this year. Canberra was left on the list as a "passing through" location mainly to visit family and friends who live there, even though I have been to our nation's capital twice this year already. My itinerary was February on the Gold Coast, May in Perth, August in Melbourne and Christmas 2006 in New Zealand [ok, not part of Australia but it might as well be]. A week away every three months to refresh and recharge these batteries of mine.

Like all good plans something always crops up which throws a spanner in the works! Not in a bad way, but a spanner anyways. In the last week I have had to re-organise my February trip to now include not only an overnighter in Canberra and four days on the Gold Coast, but also a return stay in Canberra for 3 days before flying down to Tasmania for a four day visit, before finally returning home. My 7 day holiday is turning into a 2 week three-state jaunt! Not that I am complaining by no stretch of the imagination.

What I am though is the total cost of the 2 week holiday. I never really realised how expensive seeing Australia is. By the time I include the airfares [to Canberra, Gold Coast, back to Canberra, Launceston and then home], add in the accommodation and car hire costs [Gold Coast and Launceston], plus spending money, the entire trip is coming to nearly $4,000!

Yep. A sweet $4,000 for economy airfares, 3 star accommodation and a basic 4 cylinder car!

Out of curiosity, I also checked out how much it would cost to go to Greece for 2 weeks, where I also have family. Taking international airfares, accommodation, car hire and spending money, the cost came to $3,500. That's $500 less than seeing my own country! It was even cheaper going to New Zealand for 2 weeks. Total cost there came in at $2,500! No wonder so many Australians prefer to go overseas for their holidays.

I was so tempted to say "stuff it! It's either Greece or New Zealand for 2 weeks". Oh I was so tempted, but I am going to stick to my original plans. 2006 is the Year of Australia, even if it sends me broke! In a worse case scenario, I could always take the advise of a friend of mine and sell my "hot butt" on some corner street :-) Then again, maybe not.

But I am packing my bags come February and seeing this country of ours, even if it is with a dent in the bank balance.

Phishing Scammers Are Performing A Community Service

2005-12-09T08:36:00.000+10:30

Here's a question or two for you.

If you received a letter in the mail [regular postal mail] and asked you to post back your bank account details for "verification", would you reply to the letter? Or, would you simply call your bank and ask why they require that information, or alternatively just throw the letter in the bin?

What if someone rang you and said that they were updating your personal banking details, would you sit there and give out your account number, pin number and any other information they requested? Or would you simply say "sorry, but I don't give out my personal information over the phone. I will call into a branch tomorrow" and hang up?

The reason I ask is that the latest AOL/NCSA from the USA has just published a report which indicates that 25% of all Americans are subject to receiving phishing emails seeking personal details. Of these, an astronomical 70% actually believed the emails were from their banks etc! When I read this, I simply shook my head and thought "how bloody stupid are some people!". The second thought that crossed my mind was that if they are gullible enough to fall for these emails, then they deserve to be ripped off. Sorry - but obviously these people don't really have a brain to think with.

Phishing scammers pray on the naivety, stupidity and the "adrenalin rush" caused by "oh my god! something's wrong. I better reply immediately" in people. They also pray on the greed that is a basic instinct in humans. I personally think that these phishing scammers should not be hunted down for punishment, but rather applauded for their efforts. Seriously. They should. And before you post comments abusing me, hear out my reasoning.

I receive phishing emails on a regular basis. Thankfully, my Gmail account is intelligent enough to know they are junk and puts them straight into the spam folder. On occasions I actually read these phishing emails, not because I have "inherited" some astronomical amount from someone I never knew, but because I simply want to see what they say. But one thing I never do, is reply to them. I read them, I chuckle and then click on the "delete" button.

Now, if people are so stupid as to reply to phishing emails, then so be it. The only way they are going to learn is if they become a victim to these scams. If for example, one is stupid enough to reply to a phishing email and give them their credit card details, and in turn, the scammer bleeds them dry of a few thousand dollars, then next time round they won't do it again. Assuming they are not that stupid as to fall for the same trick again.

I can hear people saying "but these are innocent people! they don't deserve to be ripped off". The reply to this is that if they are "innocent", then they shouldn't be let loose in society. Simple as that. This argument simply doesn't wash. Sorry.

Example. If you are driving down the road, and you decide to give a hitchhiker a lift because it's raining. You are being a decent human being. However, if this hitchhiker turns around and says "look, I am going to rob a bank. How about helping me", and you think "oh yeah. That will be fun" and go ahead and do it, get caught and end up in jail, then one has no one to blame but one's self! Stupidity is stupidity is stupidity.

Being a victim of a Phishing scam is simply that - stupidity of the highest degree. People need to start using the same attitude towards these phishing emails as they would if someone knocked on their door and asked for the personal details. If you give out your personal details willy nilly, then you deserve to be burnt.

Adam And Eve Were Black

2005-12-07T16:45:00.000+10:30

I have always had a fascination with history, especially from the Classical era covering Egypt, Rome and inparticular that of the Greeks. Their rise to power, their eventual collapse, their discoveries and achievements have always got me curious how such non-technologically advanced races could build such marvels as the Pyramids, the Parthenon and more.

This interest in classical history was in part due to my own [Greek] background where my parents insisted that we be taught not only the English language and Australian history, but also be fluent in Greek and Greek history. My parents would continually buy me books by various ancient Greek writers to feed the fascination I had of my past. Plato's The Republic and Herodotus' Iliad and Odyssey were my three favourite books. Stories on Alexander the Great, the 300 Spartans and Cleopatra were adventures that I knew off by heart and dreamt of how exciting it would be to have lived during those times. Mind you, one always looked at the excitement of the times and never took into account that despite all "those adventures", it would have been a hard life.

One common thing amongst all those ancient cultures was how humanity actually evolved. In some form or another, there was some cataclysm that occured, whether it was Atlantis, The Flood, or simply even Adam and Eve, from which humanity either emerged from or scattered to the corners of the world.

Like every race, the Greeks pictured the first humans as Greeks, the Egyptians as Egyptians and the Chinese as Chinese. To imagine them as any other race - now or then - would imply that the alternate race was somehow superior to one's own. Every culture always sees itself and its own lands as the centre of the world. For the Greeks it was Mount Olympus, for the Jews it was the Holy Lands and so forth.

Yet this ethnocentricity raised - and still raises - a lot of questions about the origin of humanity. Who do you believe? Do you believe your own religion and what its says about the first humans? Or do you believe the oldest culture and their beliefs? Or do we take a realistic and scientific approach and believe that most cultures are wrong, and that the first humans originated somewhere else on the planet?

The latest theory is that the first inhabitants originated in Africa, and because of a very long term drought, forced them to leave their "little paradise" and move into more fertile lands [see BBC News here] thus eventually spreading throughout the world. This theory in conjunction with the theory that we are actually an evolved version of the monkeys, would make Africa the logical place and support previous African-based theories of evolution.

Which brings me to the title of this article. If the latest drought theory is correct, then the first humans were obviously Africans and thus black. For them, the drought would have been seen as a punishment by the Gods for some "wrong doing" and therefore forced to leave their paradise home. As they left in search of more fertile lands, they would have carried with them the stories of their original homeland, and eventually as they settled down in Egypt, the Holy Lands, Europe etc, these stories would have evolved to become local myths.

Thus for the Christians, Adam and Eve's paradise would have been the lands in Africa prior to this initial diaspora. The Apple and the snake would have symbolised in reality the food [or lack thereof] and the wildlife who with humans, would have competed for the small amounts of food. Obviously the battle between the humans and a hungry wildlife would have been one where humanity would have been more the hunted than the hunter. A hungry lion would have found a hungry human easy prey.

With the diaspora of those early humans, the reality of why they left in the first place, would eventually evolve into myths and legends. In a superstituous society, this diaspora would be blamed on the Gods who would in turn take on the "image" of the local society. A flow on of this would have resulted in the local religious leader incorporating these tales into their religion as a means of teaching and controlling the locals.

Thus by the time we arrive to the Golden Era of the classical period, these long-forgotten ancestors of ours from Africa would have been transformed into local dieties and legends, and the actual cause of the initial diaspora would have been erased or transformed in the memories of the people.

So for us Christians [and am not singling out Christians alone in this article], Adam and Eve's paradise was not in the Holy Lands but rather somewhere in Africa. They weren't - as they are currently portrayed as Caucasian - but actually black Africans, and them leaving their paradise in reality had nothing to do with Eve eating the forbidden Apple, but rather a battle between humans and wildlife for the scarce food brought about by a severe long term drought.

Who is right? Who is wrong? That, unfortunately is the $64,000 question. But one thing for certain is that regardless of what the holy books state, the real Paradise was a long long way from where many of us have been led to believe.

Brad is Hot!

2005-12-04T20:05:00.000+10:30

I don't often write about friends and partners in my articles, not specifically about them anyway. Generally they are included in the articles because of what's happening in my life or me raising a particular issue. Sometimes, on rare occasions, they will ask "Is this article about me?" to which I would reply "sort of but not specifically". Not because I don't want to include them, but because I respect their privacy.

So it came as a shock when someone I know asked if I would write an article about them. When I gave them a "no, I don't do articles specifically on friends", I expected a simple "ok, not a problem". Boy, was I wrong! The sms' from him included "wont speak to you again", "you are not getting a hug from me", etc etc. You name it, the blackmail sms' were such that I thought to myself - well, if he is so persistant, then why not.

So Brad, this is for you. And don't blame me afterwards because I am not withdrawing it LOL. As the old saying goes "be careful on what you wish for".

As my friends can vouch, I know people who range in age from 18 right through to 60 plus and try to treat everyone the same regardless of who or what they do in life. Some are ex-prostitutes, others are lawyers, all are decent human beings with all their faults and good points. Many I have met through the chatrooms over the last few years, who progressed from online friends to real-life friends.

A couple of years ago, I had a [bad] habit of giving online strangers my MSN Messenger nic without thinking of the repurcussions or outcomes, till earlier this year I had over 200 contacts on my list. Of these, only a dozen were people that I actually spoke to or knew, with the rest being people who I added, spoke to maybe once or twice, and then nothing more. So, in one of those moods, I went through my list earlier this year and culled them all off my Messenger, keeping only my friends. Don't speak to the rest, why clutter my Messenger, was my philosophy at the time.

Back to Brad [otherwise I will never hear the end of it] :-)

Earlier this year, I got a messenge which basically said "You are on my list, but I don't know who you are. ASL". [ASL being Age, Sex Location]. I looked at the email address but didn't register who it was, and despite my rule of never responding to any message that starts of with "ASL", I replied back.

Imagine my shock when he sent me photos of himself. I looked at them and re-looked at them, went got myself a coffee, came back and had another look. And the one thing that kept going through my mind was "Where the hell was he hiding? How come I had him on my MSN and we never met?". No offence, I know a lot of cute guys, but Brad blew me away! I couldn't believe that someone like that simply slipped through my fingers, in a manner of speaking.

At the time of our "re-contact", he was seeing someone which automatically put him out of bounds. I don't believe in chasing someone who is already dating. Don't like it happening to me, so don't like doing it to them.

As the year progressed, Brad became single again, and we progressed from Internet friends to eventually talking on the phone. The more I talked to him, the more I liked him to the point that I can so easily fall for him. Over time, I have fallen for him to the extent that I can't wait to be with him. Sad hey?

The only concern is that Brad is one of those guys who is really good looking, nice personality, wicked sense of humour, that any guy or girl could easily fall for him. In short, he is HOT! if you know what I mean.

To give you an idea, at 5'9" tall, athletic build, blonde hair, green eyes and kissable lips, he would drive anyone crazy! Plus, although gay, he still has that musculine butch voice that makes him a Man's Man, if you know what I mean.

To show you how cute he is, there is a photo posted below. I won't show you his face simply to save myself having to compete with anyone else. Selfish I know LOL
Is there a shortcoming in Brad? Well, unfortunately there is. It's nothing personal or anything I would change. But, its his style of music. We are like chalk and cheese in that respect but hey! Target sells earplugs by the packs of 100. And they aren't that expensive either. :-)

Anyways, I think I have said enough. It will be an experience to spend some quality time with him soon when we catch up.

Maybe it will be good and will allow our relationship to go one step further. Maybe it won't be, but one never knows. But if it does, we both have agreed that this time next year, he is moving back to Adelaide and in with me.

So, am going to take up the suggestion a friend of mine keeps telling me - if you don't make the effort, you will never know what the outcome is.
James

The Law Is The Law

2005-12-04T19:15:00.000+10:30

I expect this article to cause as much of a commotion online as it does offline in the discussions I have had with friends, but that's life.

On Friday December 2nd, the Singaporean Government proceeded with the execution of convicted drug trafficker Nguyen Tuong Van despite appeals from both Australia and other nations. A lot of criticism has been leveled against the Singapore Government over Nguyen Tuong Van's execution, with many calling it inhumane, illegal etc. However, despite our own personal thoughts on executing other humans, let's step back and look at the whole situation.

Nguyen Tuong Van was caught with 400 grams of Heroin with a street value of millions of Australian dollars, and the amount he had on him apparently would have been enough for 26,000 "hits". That is a lot of heroin on the streets. The reason for carrying it, was to pay off his brother's A$30,000 debt to money lenders. It was a huge risk he took for so little debt, alternative options existed, but he chose to be a drug courier.

Singapore's laws regarding drug traffickers are well known and publicised, especially in Australia. If you are caught with drugs in Singapore, the penalty is death. No exceptions. So, by going through Singapore en route to Australia, Nguyen Tuong Van knew the risks he was taking.

Don't get me wrong, I am not a supporter of the death penalty by any stretch of the imagination. I don't approve of what Singapore did in executing Nguyen Tuong Van nor any other person - whether a foreigner or a Singaporean. The death penalty is one of the cruelest things any nation could impose on a human as punishment.

However, having said that, if one choses for whatever reason, to be a drug trafficker and to take the gamble of landing in Singapore, then Singaporean Law applies if you get caught. For us in Australia and elsewhere to try and convince the Singaporean Government to give someone clemency for breaking Singaporean Law, is something I fail to comprehend. Why? Let's take a different scenario.

Let's assume a foreigner committed a crime and broke our [Australian] Laws. That person would pay for the crime he/she committed based on Australian Law. If the criminal's home country placed pressure on us to not implement our own law, we as Australians, would object to outside interferance. We don't tolerate other countries telling us what we should and should not do, so why should Singapore be any different?

For Singapore to give Nguyen Tuong Van clemency and commute his sentence to imprisonment would also send a signal to the rest of the world that although Singaporean Law says "Drug Trafficking Carries the Death Penalty .... But if you kick up enough of a fuss, we will commute it to imprisonment". This would then see Singapore experiencing more drug trafficking through the city state than is currently happening. A precedent had to be avoided.

One thing though I did feel extremely disappointed with was the Singaporean Government's refusal to allow Nguyen Tuong Van one last chance to hug his mother. That to me, was insensitive and inconsiderate at the utmost level. The dear lady was losing her son. To allow her to hug him one last time would have been not only a very compassionate thing from the Singapore Government's side, but also a chance for her to say her final goodbye with the love that she had for him.

On that, all I can say is "Shame on you Singapore".

Finally, back to the issue of executions. As stated earlier, I am not a supporter of executing people for crimes they have committed, and the main reason is that not only is human life priceless, but there is always the chance that the wrong person is executed or not all the facts are available at the time.

Singapore is not the only country that carries out executions. The world's most powerful nation - the United States - executes people on a regular basis, as do other countries. If we are to stop Singapore from executing drug traffickers, then we need to have a global push to stop executions worldwide.

Enough said. Am off to dinner.

The Human Factor

2005-11-30T16:26:00.000+10:30

When I was younger, one of my favourite television shows used to be the police show 21 Jump Street with a very youthful Johnny Depp. Each week, the show used to tackle a social issue, whether it was drugs, adoption, abortion, rape or just general every day community problems that we all run into at some stage of our lives. Yet, even now, I still remember one episode that brought me to tears at the time, and has forever imprinted in me the realisation that all that anyone really wants in life, is some to hold you and tell you that they care.

The particular episode revolved around a high school student who was [supposedly] a haemophiliac, or in layman's terms, someone who bled easily. The student, who I forget his name, was being harrassed at school, and Johnny Depp was asked to go undercover and protect him "in case he hurt himself and needed urgent help". As the episode progressed, we - the viewer - discovered that the student was actually HIV positive and Johnny Depp was there to protect him from the bigotry and hatred of other students and their families.

What made that particular episode so emotional was that for the first time, the human side of the disease was shown on a show watched by a large audience both in the USA and abroad. There was no loose-wristed feminine guy or drag queen talking with a girlie accent, no drug addict stealing to feed a habit, nothing that when you mention the words "AIDS" would conjour up the images that most of us have today. The show placed the entire issue of AIDS straight into the lives of every living person regardless of race or sexual orientation.

Through Johnny Depp's involvement, we saw the fear and the loneliness of someone having AIDS and how the community through ignorance, treated the student. As the show progressed, we saw the student go from being portrayed as "strong, nothing scares me" into one lonely and sad person, who all he wanted was for someone to not be afraid, to simply share that milk with him, and hold him. Nothing more - just the touch of another human who cared about him and what he was going through.

I'll be the first to admit it, that by the end of the show, I was in tears over the kid. Not because he was ill or that he died, but because in the end he found someone [Johnny Depp] who cared enough about him, to simply hold him in his arms and let out all the loneliness that he had bottled up because no one else cared. And that is the saddest part of it all.

Yet 18 years after the show was broadcast, we still have many people who have an issue with people with HIV and AIDS. So the question that one needs to ask.

What are we all afraid of? Why is it that when we hear that someone is HIV Positive, we cringe and back off? Are we so scared of catching it that we back off, simply because we ourselves are either ignorant or is it because it gives us the realisation that life is not eternal and that we all die one day?

And on that, why must we treat HIV Positive people like lepers? They have an illness which will eventually kill them. But by the same token, having cancer or any other kind of illness, will also lead us down the same path. We don't treat cancer victims like that, so why treat HIV Positive people differently? If one sits back and really thinks about it, your best friend, a family member or even a co-worker could be HIV Positive, and you wouldn't know it. Would your feelings for that person change simply because you found out one day? Does it make them any less human?

Even if we are 100% healthy our entire life, we all die one day whether by natural causes or by accident. The disadvantage [or advantage, depending on which perspective you take] is that if one has got a life threatening illness, you are aware that your time is limited. And knowing that, one has two options - either sit there, feel sad and blame the world, or, go out and live life to the fullest.

From my perspective, if someone came up to me and said "James, got some bad news mate. You have 5 years left before you die", I know what option I will take. I would tell my friends [and those that are real friends will stick by me] and go out and live my life as if tomorrow is my last day. I would take that holiday I have been postponing for the last 10 years, take up that hobby that I have left for a rainy day, go out and have those skydiving lessons to get over my fear of heights. Whether I died a week from today, 5 years down the track or 20 years, I would know that my life was a full one. And the sad thing to all this is that, in the end, I would have achieved more in my life than those who are 100% healthy.

Finally, something for you to think about. Whether one is healthy or ill, its what is in one's heart and how one treats everyone else, that truly matters. We all cry, bleed, love and feel lonely regardless of our race, gender or orientation. We all crave the human touch at some stage in our lives, someone to hold, someone to simply be there for us during our moments of need.

James

World AIDS Day

2005-11-28T17:38:00.000+10:30

Ok. Firstly let's squash any rumours before they start. I am not HIV Positive. The reason for this sudden "interest" in AIDS is due to the fact that two of my friends are HIV Positive and World AIDS Day is only a couple of days away. Further, with the sudden passing away of my mother through a heart attack, it made me realise how important my family and friends are to me, and how we should all cherish the moments we have with them. Anything we as individuals can do to keep our loved ones alive, is a worthwhile cause.

So on to the article itself.

AIDS has been rampant around the world now for over 20 years and more than 28million people worldwide have died from it so far. Contrary to popular belief, people do not die from AIDS. It is the side effects of AIDS and the HIV Virus that causes one's death. The HIV Virus reduces one's immune system to such an extent that when we fall ill [eg catch a cold], our immune system is unable to defend itself.

Despite the fact that AIDS has been around for such a long time, there is no vaccine or miracle cure to either prevent it or reverse its effects on the human body. Drugs do exist to prolong one's life, but that's all they do currently - prolong it. So the old saying "Prevention is better than cure" is the only solution to avoiding catching the HIV Virus.

Amongst some of my friends, and especially the younger generation, there is the belief that if one does the "penetrating" during intercourse, their chances of catching the HIV Virus is practically nonexistant. Or if they get circumcised, then their chances are also reduced astronomically. Another great "belief" is that if they don't cum inside someone, then that also reduces their chances. It is sad that they actually believe this as this creates a false sense of security.

The facts are that one can acquire the HIV Virus by having unprotected sex with someone who is infected, or sharing needles with an infected person, being given infected blood during a transfusion, allowing infected fluids to enter one's body through cuts or sores, and being born to a mother who is carrying the virus during child birth. One does not catch AIDS through day-to-day contact, like shaking hands, coughing, sneezing, kissing, touching, sharing crockery and cutlery, toilet seats, insect/animal bits, swimming pools or eating food prepared by someone with HIV.

So, what can you do to avoid catching AIDS? It's simple and commonsense.

Firstly, wear a condom at all times. If the other party objects, then you have two choices - don't wear one and pray to whatever god you believe in that you wont catch it, or simply get up, get dressed and walk out. And as you ponder that decision, think to yourself - "Is a couple of hours fun worth me dying?". Even if you are dating this person, before you even consider having unsafe sex, you should both have atleast 2 AIDS tests atleast 3 months apart, before going down that path. The other thing to bare in mind is that they might be a Virgin still, and yes there are a few out there, but that doesn't mean they don't have the AIDS virus in them. They may have contracted it through contaminated blood or passed on through their mother during childbirth, or may have used an unclean needle. So, COVER UP!

Secondly, if you use needles [which is actually another story], then don't share needles. Get yourself a clean unused one and if you are a regular or dependent user, you should always stock up anyways.

It is predicted that by the year 2010, there will be something like 45million people with AIDS in Africa, Asia, Russia and Latin America alone. That, by the way, is the "best case scenario". Reality may be that the figure could be as high as 72million.

Now I can hear you thinking "Well, I am not going to any of those countries". True, you may not be. But lets take a theortical situation here. Lets assume that you have unsafe sex with 5 people, and each of these 5 people have had unsafe sex with another 5, and they inturn have had unsafe sex with another 5. By you having unsafe sex with just 5 people, you have actually slept with 780 people [if my mathematics is correct]. All it would take is one person somewhere down the line to be HIV positive for it to filter through to you. I know for a fact that many of us out there have actually had unsafe sex with a lot more than 5 people!

So what can you, as an individual do?

Practise safe sex at all times and don't share needles with anyone. These are the things you can influence and if you love life enough, cover up and don't share.

Besides the above, we also need to find a cure. And this where we as individuals, can do something. Why not make a regular donation to AIDS Research in your local city or country. Even a couple of dollars a week can make a difference. Or, why not donate generously on World AIDS Day [December 1st]. Another option is to help out in research by taking part in such organisations like The World Community Grid which allows you to download a small program on your PC and runs in the background. Out of sight, out of mind so to speak, but helping the cause anyways.

And finally, when you hear someone talking about the "hot unsafe sex session" they had last night, give them a clip over the ear and tell them to cover up! Life is too short to be ruined through ignorance and stupidity.

James

Resources:

www.unaids.org
www.worldcommunitygrid.org join then click here
www.worldaidsday.org
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/special/aids/default.stm

The Lucky Country

2005-11-27T08:33:00.000+10:30

Australia has always been called the ‘lucky country’ and as a first world nation, we are one of the more advanced ones.

Yet my every day job brings me into contact with a large cross section of society, and I am beginning to wonder how ‘lucky’ we really are. I work in a call centre for a major telecommunications company, and every day we receive thousands of calls from across the country regarding their mobile phones.

Most of the queries can be honestly classified as ‘genuine’, but some – well – I sometimes wonder how intelligent some Australians really are.

For example, one abusive call I had was from a young man in his 20s complaining that we had cancelled his mobile service. I asked him what was on his screen, to which I got the reply “nothing”. No signal strength? No battery strength? “nope, nothing” was the reply. I asked the customer to press the power button, and to tell me what was happening on his mobile screen. ‘Enter pin’ he replied. He proceeded to enter his pin, and like magic, his mobile was working again.

Now not being rude, but how stupid was this person? Like, if my mobile screen was blank, the first thing I would do was try switching it on.

Another customer rung and complained that we had not provided her with a complete list of all her calls. After checking her account, I advised her that the latest bill only went up to the 15th of the month. Her response was that the calls for the 16th and 17th weren’t listed, and again demanded an explanation. Well I don’t know about you, but if a bill goes up to the 15th of the month, it won’t have any calls after that date until the next statement. Yes? You agree? Or am I too smart?

Or another caller who rung to complain that they hadn’t received the account. I found out from the customer that they had moved addresses and had not notified us of a change of address. Nor had they notified Australia Post [our country’s postal service] to redirect their mail to the new address. Further he refused to pay the bill as we had failed to notify him of his outstanding balance. Now dah! I know technological advances over resent years have been astronomical. But I have yet to see a ‘crystal ball’ that pops up in front of us and says ‘Oi! They moved last week, here’s their new address’.

Or another ‘intelligent customer’ who rung to find out what her call rates were. I advised her it was 37 cents per 30 seconds, to which I got the reply ‘so how much is it per 30 seconds?’ I had to repeat the price several times, and even then I don’t think she actually got it! How hard is it to understand that the cost is 37 cents per 30 seconds!

So I have to come to the following conclusion – either there are way too many stupid people out there, or I am way too intelligent. Maybe it is time for me to have a long long holiday away from the public. Some desolate tropical island in the Pacific sounds good, where the Internet and telephones don’t exist.

Hmm. Not a bad idea. Might look at contacting a travel agent tomorrow. Wonder if they will understand what I will be asking them? On the off chance I end up somewhere in the middle of Africa, I might take a long a courier pigeon so at least I can send in my next article.

James

Catholic Church And Gays

2005-11-26T18:52:00.000+10:30

So the Pope does not want gay clergy in the Catholic Church? I wonder if the Pope and his policy making clergy have seriously considered the repurcussions of not having gay clergy in the Catholic Church? Or is this just one way of further ostracising the general community from the so-called teachings of Christ?

The Catholic Church, which for some obscure reason, doesn't allow women to be priests, thus isolating half the world population. Now, to overcome the paedophilia issues within the Church, they are victimising their clergy who happen to be gay. As if this is going to stop the rot that is within the Catholic Church! Every study conducted so far shows that the vast majority of paedophiles are heterosexual males, not homosexual. So banning gay men from being clergy within the Catholic Church is going to achieve nothing more than alienating more people from the church.

Then again, there is an old prophecy that states that before the collapse of the Catholic Church, an anti-christ Pope will be elected. Maybe the current Pope is it?

Enough said.

Telstra and the CDMA Network

2005-11-21T19:19:00.000+10:30

Telstra, Australia's largest Telco, announced last week that it plans to shut down the CDMA network and replace it with a 3G network.

At first I thought "brilliant" as this would mean that the country/rural people would finally be placed on an even footing as those of the metropolitan areas. Yet after some thought, I started having doubts as to Telstra's motives regarding the CDMA shut down.

Some questions I would like Telstra to answer regarding the CDMA shutdown are as follows:

1. The current CDMA network is owned by Telstra but Optus also shares access to it for its own CDMA customers. With Telstra's plan to shut down the CDMA network, are they going to allow Optus' ex-CDMA customers to also use Telstra's 3G network?

2. If the answer to question 1 is a resounding "no", will Telstra leave the CDMA network operating until Optus rolls out its own 3G network, thus allowing the country people a smooth transition to 3G with no loss of service?

3. If the answer to question 2 is also a resounding "no", will Telstra then compensate not only Optus for loss of customers, but also those customers that have signed contracts with Optus but may end up losing the mobile service prior to their contracts expiring?

4. As Telstra has bought a 50% stake into Hutchinson's 3G network, will the replacement to the CDMA network be an expansion of this joint venture with Hutchinson, or are they planning to roll out a 100% Telstra owned 3G network?

5. How will the ACCC see this move to Telstra? Will they view it as simply a move to bring the country areas onto an even "mobile" footing with their metropolitan counterparts, or will they see it as an attempt to monopolise the country areas?

These and more questions need to be answered by Telstra regarding their CDMA shutdown before any move is approved either by the Federal Government or the ACCC.

Personally, if Telstra is going to shut down the CDMA network and replace it with a 3G network, I would rather see the government step in and have all four 3G networks co-own the new network, thus allowing former CDMA customers the opportunity to have choice in which carrier they would like. But then, that is a logical and reasonable option. Something that Telstra doesn't always take into account or consideration.

James

Intelligent Design

2005-11-20T08:33:00.000+10:30

One of the biggest jokes of the last few years has been the theory of "Intelligent Design" and the religious fanatics' attempt to try to make it part of the Science curriculum in schools. Those peddling the Intelligent Design theory claim that it is not an attempt to make the Bible and Christianity a science, nor to use the Intelligent Design theory as a means of introducing religious studies into the schools.

Yet, if one does a quick search in Google on Intelligent Design, every site you find that supports this theory, have links to sites that either preach about Christianity, God or simply peddle Christian books on the Internet for you to buy. Pure coincidence?

But, lets assume that the Intelligent Design theory is not about bringing religious studies into the science classrooms, or trying to make Christianity a science.

What exactly is "science"? Well, according to the Dictionary, Science is "The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena. Such activities restricted to a class of natural phenomena. Such activities applied to an object of inquiry or study." [www.dictionary.com]

And "Intelligent Design"? Well, according to the Wikipedia, Intelligent Design is " Intelligent Design is presented as an alternative to purely naturalistic forms of the theory of evolution. Its putative main purpose is to investigate whether or not the empirical evidence necessarily implies that life on Earth must have been designed by an intelligent agent or agents. William Dembski, one of Intelligent Design's leading proponents, has stated that the fundamental claim of Intelligent Design is that "there are natural systems that cannot be adequately explained in terms of undirected natural forces and that exhibit features which in any other circumstance we would attribute to intelligence." [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design]

When I went to school years ago, one of the courses we had to participate in was Science. Part of our learning was to look at the world around us and through experimentation, show how certain events happened. We could take a jug of water, boil it to create steam, and then convert it back to water by allowing the steam to hit a cold object. Very simple experiment, but easy to prove that when you boil water it becomes steam, and when you cool steam, it reverts back to liquid water.

This simple experiment is one of millions that one can do to prove how things occur in life and nature. In main cases, we don't even have to do the experiments to prove them. They occur naturally around us on a daily basis. True, there are theories that currently can not be proved because we have not achieved a level of technology to be able to prove them. However, that does not mean that the theory is wrong.

With the Intelligent Design theory however, its premise is that some unknown intelligence has become involved in making certain things happen. So the question that begs me to ask, is this. How is the Intelligent Design theory going to prove that there is an "unkown intelligence" out there? What evidence do they have that this "unknown intelligence" actually exists? What documentation do they have to support this "unknown intelligence"? Unlike true science, can the Intelligent Design theory point to something and say "There! See? Told you! the Unknown Intelligence made that!".

The answer to all these questions is a simple "No".

The Intelligent Design theory fails in every aspect in being considered a "Science". It can't observe, identify, describe, experiment and explain a phenomena without falling back into religion. And looking at those who are pushing for the Intelligent Design theory to be incorporated into the schools' Science courses, the only religion they will be falling back onto is Christianity and the Bible.

For this reason [amongst others], the Intelligent Design theory is not a scientific theory, but a religious one. Allowing it into the schools as a "science" is not only an attempt to railroad and stifle rational thinking, but also a means of bringing religion into the curriculum of schools.

The sooner the governments put the Intelligent Design theory back where it belongs - religious studies - the better for us all.

James

PS .. you may like to read this article for a non-scientific perspective http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1103AP_Vatican_Evolution.html

It's A Sad Day - Part 3

2005-11-15T20:24:00.000+10:30

Today, after four days of mourning her sudden death, we buried our mum. In a champagne coloured coffin with ornate designs, she lay there in her favourite red dress, peacefully asleep.

The church had nearly 100 people there to pay their last respects, some of whom I knew and some were friends from long ago that knew her. Like every funeral, the tears were aplenty, yet for some strange reason, I did not cry today. Sure, I could feel them coming, but somehow I remained strong. Maybe it was because I have cried so much over the last few days that there simply weren't any tears left. Or maybe, I am still in shock and hasn't dawned on me as yet what the full repurcusions are.

The morning was windy, but by the time we arrived at the Greek Orthodox Church, the sun was out and the wind had died down. I think no one could have wished for a better day than what we had today.

After the priest finished, I had the unenviable task of providing the Eulogy. Having written it on Sunday morning, I must have read it over a dozen times, and each time the tears came. My greatest concern was that I would not be able to complete it on the day. Even reading it out aloud to myself a couple of hours before the funeral brought tears.

Yet somehow I found the strength to read the Eulogy for my mum without crying. Yes, I felt myself getting all choked up on several occasions, my voice wavered, but somehow the strength remained in me to complete it. [below is the actual eulogy].

With the church service completed, we then buried my mum at Centennial Park Cemetery - one of the largest in our state. Next to her grave is a plot we have also purchased for our dad, for when his time comes.

In many ways, I am glad that the pole bearers were close friends. Their lighthearted attitude made it easier for me to focus on other things. With the Wake afterwards, the atmosphere of the 40 odd people present, was also lighthearted, filled with talks of my mum's life, her achievements and her struggles. Yes, some tears were also shed, but these were tears of not only of a loss but also of a sense of relief.

Finally, the day was over. For mum, her journey from birth to death is complete. For us who remain, a new chapter in life has begun, one where the most important person in our lives will no longer be physically there but will always be in our hearts and thoughts.

James

PS. Apologies in advance for this not being in my normal style of writing, but under the circumstances, I hope you understand.

The Eulogy

Angeliki was born in the small village of Agios Konstantinos, in Laconia on June 24th 1939. She was one of five daughters and a son to Eleni and Stavros Dimopoulos.

At the age of 19, she took the long and ardious voyage by sea to Australia and settled in Adelaide to be with her brother and sisters. In 1961 she married our dad Vasilios, and for the first few years, spent her life in country Victoria and South Australia, following the fruit picking seasons.

Between fruit seasons, she worked at Balfours, Marinos brothers and others. Life was never easy, especially in the late 60s when Dad and her youngest son Antonios lived in Coober Pedy trying to make their fortune, as mum and I lived in Adelaide.

Finally, in 1972, they moved up to Coober Pedy where she stayed for the next 20 years.

Its often said that the ones that God loves, always have the hardest life.

In 1974, after a very bad car accident, she spent nearly 6 months in hospital, with the doctors not expecting her to survive. Yet her courage and love for her family, pulled her through. Her spinal cord had popped out of the spin, and a wrong move could have severed it. Yet as if by miracle, a couple of years ago, it fell back into place.

As if this wasnt enough, she continued to have other health problems, and yet bravely she lived on, preferring to suffer in silence than to worry her family.

Her greatest love was her home, her garden and her family. Nothing made her happier than to see all of us happy. With her grandchildren around her, she found a reason to keep on going despite her problems.

You know, they say that a mother is closer to her children than any other person. Angeliki was more than that. We did not need to tell her how we were, how we felt or how bad the accident was. She seemed to have a psychic link with us, and knew in advance. Many a time she would call to ask "how bad was it" and "are you okay" even though we had not told her what had happened.

Today, we are here to bid her farewell one last time. Her journey through life has been filled with pain and sorrow, yet also with lots of love and fulfillment.

Today, we - the family - have decided to also make a small break with tradition.

On her journey to Heaven to be with her mother and father, we are giving her tokens to remember us by, until we too take the final journey and be with her.

A small album with photos of the family, so when she is in Heaven and sees us living our lives without her, she can open the album and touch us.

A rose and an orchid - her two favourite flowers, to remind her of her garden and home that gave her so much pleasure.

And finally, a coin. To pay the ferryman so that her journey to Heaven is a smooth and peaceful one.

Angeliki, take care. You are at peace now. We love you, we miss you but will always remember you.

It's A Sad Day - Part 2

2005-11-11T15:48:00.000+10:30

It's been less than 24 hours since my mum passed away and the tears are stilling coming on. I don't expect them to stop for quite a while, if ever. The number of calls and messages from people are still rolling in, both from family, friends and strangers who simply read my blog. Thank you and your warm compassionate thoughts are much appreciated.

The hardest thing I find is being able to talk about her. Just the thought of her not being here makes me choke and my eyes watery.

What hurts the most is the fact that she appeared to know that her time had come. Little things like telling my dad on Wednesday that they should organise their funeral plots. They had planned to go today [Friday], and yet we spent the day preparing for her funeral 24 hours later. Leaving the phone number for my uncle in Greece on the kitchen table a couple of hours earlier was also out of the ordinary. Yet she must have known that we would need it, as there were no plans on calling him. So why leave it and visible for all to see?

But what I find amazing, if that is the word, is the events leading up to her passing away. Playing with her 10 month old granddaughter outside, she decided to take her in. My father was outside gardening at the time, not any the wiser as to what was happening. It is only when about 15 minutes later, he saw young Maria crawling out of the back door crying that he realised something was wrong. He found her having a massive heartattack in the bedroom, and despite the prompt arrival of the ambulance, she did not survive. What is amazing is that Maria crawled from their bedroom, down the hallway, through the kitchen and out the back door. How a 10 month old child knew that my mother needed help, is beyond me.

Maybe God was guiding her, or her love for her grandma. I don't know. But her efforts allowed my dad to say his farewells before she passed away. And for that, I will always be greatful to her. My brother and I never got that opportunity. The "what ifs" and the "whys" will never bring about answers nor will it bring her back. But the memory of a lady who suffered so much in her life and yet found the time to give just as much of her love and time to everyone, will be treasured by all of us.

I think I have said enough for today. The tears are back. Below is a picture of my mum and Maria shortly after she was born, plus a poem I found that sums up how we all feel.

A heart of gold stopped beating

two shining eyes at rest,
God broke our hearts to prove
He only takes the best.
God knows you had to leave us
but you did not go alone,
for part of us went with you
the day He took you home.
To some you are forgotten
to others just part of the past,
but to us who loved and lost you
the memory will always last.

Love you always.
James

It's A Sad Day

2005-11-10T23:32:00.000+10:30

Today is one of the most saddest days in my life.

My mother passed away unexpectedly from a heartattack, and I didn't get the chance of saying goodbye.

I will be offline for the next few days.

When I can collect my thoughts, I will write how I feel ... but as you can appreciate, my mood currently is on things beyond writing,

James

Google - the new SkyNet?

2005-11-08T08:39:00.000+10:30

I am a huge science fiction fan and one of my all time favourite movies is "Terminator" with Arnold Schwarznagger and the ever-so-cute Michael Biehn. For those that haven't seen the movie, it revolves around the premise that the human race is nearly destroyed when a computer system is given control of the global defence satellite systems, which then comes alive and decides that humans are a virus. SkyNet - the "living" computer system, sends Arnie back in time to kill the mother of the Resistance leader so as to stop the Resistance from defeating SkyNet in the future.

A brilliant movie with great special effects and an interesting theme.

The reason I mention this movie is because deep down I have this growing nagging thought.

A few years back, two university students got together to set up a new search engine, with the aim of making the internet's content easily accessible. Nobody at the time took them seriously, considering the juggernaut search engines like Yahoo and Altavista, were already there. Yet today, Google is the world's most popular online search engine.

Their "Do No Evil" motto, their spartan search interface and their continual launching of new free internet services, has made Google the darling of the public. Google has become synonymous with search - one Google's the net, so to speak.

Today, Google is not only a search engine. It has side products including the famous Gmail email service that sent major shockwaves worldwide with its initial 1 gig of free space [and now over 2.6 gig and increasing], launched Google Talk to compete with MSN Messenger, AOL and the like; Google Maps and Google Earth which gives everyone access to aerial photos of practically anywhere in the world, and more. Google is further "testing" free internet access [wifi] in San Francisco, buying unused internet bandwidth across the USA, signed agreements with major libraries in the USA to put online thousands of books, and partnered [officially and unofficially] with software giants Sun Microsystems and internet browser maker Mozilla who make the popular Firefox.

Their current testing is for the launch of Google Base, which from the "leaked" news reports, appears to be similar to what eBay is offering. They are also testing a similar program to Paypal, and are likely to also launch their own version of Microsoft's Office program via the open source software Open Office [via Sun].

I look at what Google has done so far and what they are branching out into, and wonder where exactly Google is heading. Each new product or service launch by Google, although standalone, are slowly becoming integrated. Further, their current offerings are causing juggernauts like Microsoft to have many a sleepless nights as they see this upstart creeping slowly but surely into their turf.

Google is also branching out into other areas. The Massachussets Institute of Technology in conjunction with several other companies including Google, are testing $100 [yes, one hundred] laptops with the aim of having every child in the world possessing one, preloaded with the linux system and the Firefox browser.

And thus for the nagging thoughts.

Are we going to wake up one day, turn our computers on, and suddenly realise that Google is everywhere? A Google/Firefox browser with a Google homepage to search from, getting our news from Google News, chatting to our friends via Google Talk, shopping for the best deals via Google's Froogle, connecting to the internet via Google's internet service, paying for our online purchases via Google's paypal, making phone calls via Google Talk's VoIP, and using Google's Office suite to create our documents - all for free?

Will we realise one day that Google is like our electricity - a necessity for everyone?

In the movie "Terminator", SkyNet came alive and tried to destroy humanity. In our not so distant future, Google maybe the new SkyNet but with a difference.

We shall see.

James

Me Me Me

2005-11-08T08:28:00.000+10:30

Oh, I am so over it!

I am tired of the "Me Me Me" attitude of people where everything MUST revolve around them. Ok, I am guilty of that myself - as most of us are - but not to the extent of some people I know.

Take for example one of my work colleagues. Brad is a lovely guy and fun to be around. An ex-Sydneysider, he moved to Adelaide to get away from his ex-wife and rebuild his life. Now we are not close friends nor do we work in the same area, but I got to know him when he came to my section to relieve a fellow worker for a day.

Now, my employer will pay for us to go out for dinner if we achieve our targets. About two weeks ago we were given a cash incentive for our team to go and enjoy ourselves, so we - as a team - decided to go out. What I fail to understand is this. Brad was in our team for one day only and the incentive we received was for our permanent team and our results for the last three months. So why would Brad even think that he would be invited? Don't get me wrong - he worked in our area for one day - but he is not part of our team.

But obviously Brad had a different perspective. The carry on and the sulks were - well - very childish to the point that one of my other fellow workers turned around and said to him to grow up! And to drive the point home, asked Brad if at his team function did they invite any of the others that had been there relieving [to which he said "no"].

Closer to home, a good friend of mine also has this "me me me" attitude. Ok, we are close and we see each other 3-4 times a week. But that does not mean that if I get invited to a party or whatever, he automatically gets invited as well. If he was my other half then fair enough, but he isn't. If he was friends with the people then he would get his own invitation. Or, if my invite said "and friend", then I would probably invite him along [depending on his work schedule].

But the invite to the 21st birthday party that I am going to is from a person with whom he is not friends, nor did my invite say "and friend". So why the hell does he get pissed off that [a] he was not invited and [b] I am not asking him along? Am I missing something here? It is not through a misunderstanding or anything, because he knows he doesn't know the person. Sorry - but I would not expect to be invited to a party if I didn't know the person [ESP is not that well developed in human beings to be able to say "oh - better invite that stranger because a friend of his is coming and he is going to be pissed off"].

I am mature enough to know that people have friends, but that does not mean that my friends are automatically friends of my other friends. Nor do I presume that I will be invited to EVERY party that is held, whether friends of mine or not [even though that would be nice].

So to everyone [and that includes me], before you start the "me, me, me" attitude - think about the issue and consider the "why" in the issue. If there is an issue, then take it up with the person concerned - not your work colleague or friend - but the person organising it.

There, had my dummy spit. I am off to work!
James

Something's Missing

2005-10-31T20:56:00.000+10:30

Today, something different.

Just a collection of thoughts and feelings. No hidden agenda, no point of view - nothing just what's going through my mind at present.

I feel so alone today.

Don't know why, but I feel so lonely and alone. After 3 days of spending time visiting my close friends, today seems like an anti-climax. Work was busy as always and coming home to unwind was something I was looking forward to. Yet barely an hour home, I just didn't want to be here.

I went through my phonebook and every friend that was listed in there, I simply did not want to see or talk to. Online, even the regulars in the chatroom, I simply didn't have the inclination to chat.

Normally, when I have felt this way in the past, I would head for the beach. But even that today failed to pull me out of this mood. Two hours of driving around Adelaide, walking along the beach, had no impact on how I feel.

Why do I feel like this today? Is it because summer is only around the corner? Is it because all my friends [with the exception of two] are all partnered off? Is it because I am longing for something or someone, but it's simply not there? Why do I feel so "empty" inside?

Maybe I just need someone to hug for a while, who won't ask "what's wrong", won't question my mood, won't sit there and tell me their own problems.

I don't know. All I know is that tonight I am alone and am lonely.

That's all.

Aljazeera - The Phantom Menace

2005-10-29T08:46:00.000+09:30

We often hear of politicians and people talking about freedom of the press and the right to voice our opinions. Here in the West, we have a vast variety of sources from which we can obtain our news and information, whether it be newspapers, magazines, radio or television, not to mention the net.

Yet I wonder how accurate the news and information we receive every day, actually is. Here in Adelaide, our two local newspapers are owned and run by News Corp. The commercial TV stations are run by the three powerful networks which control most of the TV stations across the country. The same, but to a lesser extent, are our radio stations which are part of national networks. The only independent TV stations we have in Australia are the ABC and SBS networks, which are government owned but independently run [similar to the way the BBC is managed]. Our radio stations are in a slightly better situation with a higher number of them independently owned.

Yet their news feeds all come from a small group of sources like CNN, BBC, AP etc, and the vast majority of those sources are either US or UK based.

Years ago, I used to do volunteer work for a local community radio station as a weekly current affairs news reader. We used to sit down on Friday, read and edit the dispatches we received overnight from SBS [which they sent to us unedited], record the show and place it on air Monday morning. By the time our show would go to air, the news was already a week old. These same stories would appear as "news" in the local media up to a week after we broadcast them. On many occasions, what the news feed reported and what was published by the mainstream media was totally different.

Through this experience, I begun to source my news direct from overseas either by tuning in to overseas radio stations or picking up overseas newspapers. When I finally got internet access, I sourced my news through the overseas media websites. My fascination with what's happening around the world was fuelled by my political involvement, which at the time was a major part of my life.

Today, I don't bother reading the local papers or watching the news. My information is sourced from Google News, which links to over 4000 media sources worldwide. From there, I choose the stories that interest me and read the articles from various international media outlets. It still amazes me on how different outlets report the same event but change it to suit their needs.

Which takes me to the point of this article.

In 1996, the tiny Arab state of Qatar established a media company called Aljazeera. Unlike other Middle Eastern media outlets, Aljazeera was given total independence as to what and how it reported its news. This in itself, was unique for the Middle East where the media is strictly controlled by the government. This editorial independence has seen Aljazeera break not only news stories that other Middle Eastern media wouldn't show, but also taken on issues which has earned them the ire of the West and the Arab world. Further, this independence has made it the number one media source that people in the Middle East rely on, similar to the way we Westerners view the BBC. Today, Aljazeera is the fifth most recognised brand in the world [similar to Google and Apple].

Aljazeera is seen by many as being anti-western, anti-American purely because it doesn't tow the line of how the West perceives the news should be reported. Why? Mainly because Aljazeera has in the past broadcast events from a different perspective which contradicted the Western "view". Events like when the US was overthrowing Saddam Hussein and was the telling the world that they had secured locations, Aljazeera reporters were beaming live reports of fighting still occuring in these places. Or more notoriously, broadcasting Bin Laden tapes without [from the US perspective] getting "approval" for them.

This "view" of Aljazeera in the west, has this week resulted in the BBC announcing that it is cancelling 10 other services so as to launch an Arabic station to "win the hearts and minds" of the Arab world, and go head-to-head with Aljazeera. The USA tried this with their version of Aljazeera and failed, and personally I can not see the BBC achieving its goal either.

Aljazeera might be Arabic in origin and funded by the bottomless money pit of the Omar of Qatar, but the staff that run Aljazeera are actually ex-BBC staff who used to work for the now defunct Arabic channel the BBC used to own in the early 1990s.

If one takes the time to actually read the reports coming out of Aljazeera and match them with those from the BBC or the Washington Post [to name a couple], Aljazeera's reporting is much the same. They aren't a radical Arabic network hellbent on being anti-Western, they simply report the news the rest of the world reports, but from an Arabic perspective. Similar to how an Australian network broadcasts a news report from an Australian view.

Personally, the view expressed by certain Western leaders and media about Aljazeera, is inaccurate and politically driven. In one respect, I personally am grateful that stations like Aljazeera do exist because they can go out and report the news from an alternative perspective, without having to bow to Governments or media moguls like the Murdochs, Packers and Turners of the world.

Today, my news comes from Google News' 4000+ feeds, but my bookmarks include not only the BBC, Washington Post, ABC [Australia] and The Gaurdian, but also Pravda, Athens News Agency, Xinhuanet and Aljazeera.

The media is there to provide accurate information as to what is happening out there in the world. The best way for anyone to be informed is to source the news from various outlets and read the alternative perspectives given. For this reason, Aljazeera is not the phantom menace that certain western governments portray them to be. They, like every other media outlet, simply provide an alternative view of events, and it's up to us to decide whether we believe or disbelieve what they report.

It's called "making your own mind up" and "independent thinking". And I for one, will decide what I read and where I read it. Not what a politician tells me to do.

Gay And Proud Of It

2005-10-27T22:02:00.000+09:30

Ok, in case no one out there knows, I have a secret to tell.

Shhh! Don’t tell anyone but I am gay!!

Yup – you got it. I sleep with other guys, not women. In fact women do absolutely nothing for me sexually. They may be great company, help out with the cooking or shopping, catch a movie, or go man hunting together, but that’s where my interest in them ends. Want to go to bed with me? Well yeah no probs, but only if you are a guy.

Don’t get me wrong. I am not ‘anti-woman’, its just I don’t want to sleep with any of them. Not that I haven’t gone down that path back at university.

I like the look of men, the smell of men, and the feel of men. There is something about men that makes me hard and turns me on. There’s nothing like picking up another guy, spending the night together, and waking up in the morning to feel their 5 o‘clock shadow on their face.

Men for me are easy to talk to. You don’t have to try and ‘interpret’ what they are saying or wanting. If a man wants a beer, he asks for a beer. If he wants to try a new position he saw on the porno tape last night, he will say so. If they see a shirt they like, they buy it, and rarely do they go home and decide they no longer like it.

A woman on the other hand [and this is generalising obviously], is totally different. For a start, their brains work on a different wavelength than ours. If they ask for a beer, then buy her champagne because that’s what she really wants. Nine out of ten times, the outfit she bought will not be the right one once she gets home. The other one was better.

So what brought this on you may ask?

An interesting situation arose last week at work. One of the girls I know propositioned me! It wasn’t the fact that she was a girl, or that she propositioned me, but what took me by surprise is that she didn’t know I was gay! My sexuality is well known at work, and it is something I don’t hide. Not that I run around saying “hey, I am GAY”, but if someone asks me, I give them an honest answer. A lot of the girls ask me to check out the “new guy” and whether he is straight or gay. And some of the staff in our training department always call around with “a friend of yours is in training” when a new gay guy joins the company.

But with this girl – Jackie [and not her real name] – she honestly did not know I was gay, even though we work on the same shift and generally have been having smokos together for the last year. At first I thought she was joking, but when she started giving me her home number and address, I was thrown. And THAT does not happen very often. Me and speechless does not go hand-in-hand, but that is exactly what I was – speechless.

I was rescued from this embarrassing situation when Margaret – one of my co-workers who has known I am gay for a few years – came up and asked if I wanted to go “man hunting” this weekend. My reply to her was “if I can have him first” brought a shocked look on Jackie’s face as it dawned on her that I wasn’t straight. The shock then turned to embarrassment for her as she realised what she had actually done. To save her further embarrassment [and to myself], I told her that coffee would be great, and that we should organise it sometime.

This situation [which has happened on a number of other occasions] makes me wonder about women. Women are supposed to be the more sensitive and ‘in tune’ with their feelings, and generally are the ones that can pick a gay guy, than men are. So how is it they can sometimes be so blind?

I am so glad that I am gay; at least my gaydar works 99.99% of the time. Any yep, that masculine scent still is the only thing that turns me on. Sorry ladies, but I am gay and proud of it.

James

Dreams

2005-10-24T21:12:00.000+09:30

This won't be a big article, just a collection of thoughts about these wierd dreams I am having.

Since the beginning of last week, I have been having the most unusual dreams. Don't ask me why for I don't know, however each night the dream is different yet the same. In each one, the same four people are present - one a close friend, the other two are acquaintances [who I prefer not to know], with the fourth person being myself.

In each dream, the location is the same - a country town I have never been to. The conversations and surroundings are different, yet by the same token, the subject matter is always the same. In each of my dreams, it's always a warm summer day when my friend and I arrive, gets colder as the day progresses, and then reverts to being warm again prior to us leaving.

In my dreams, the meeting starts off with a lot of anger and hostility from the other two, nearly resulting into a fight, yet somehow diffuses itself. Not because of any interferance from outsiders, but through questions that I seem to raise. Issues that seem to have been harbouring amongst the four of us, which remain unresolved.

Why am I dreaming of this? Is my subconscious saying that I have issues that need resolving? Issues that need to be finalised before I progress to the next step? And why, all of a sudden, do I start to have these dreams over something that is long gone? An event that is no longer relevant? Or, is it relevant and I am simply pushing it aside? Why do I need to make the other two understand? Why is it so important?

Why, in each dream, do I have to justify why I do things? Why do I have to show their own inadequacies so as to justify my actions? Why, at the end of each dream, we leave knowing its the last time we will see them? And yet, our departure is also one of a new beginning? And for that matter, what is the new beginning?

I am so confused. I hate dreams at the best of times, but having dreams night in night out, with the same people, same discussions, same resolution, makes me wonder why.

Dont Ask, Dont Tell, Big Deal!

2005-10-22T06:29:00.000+09:30

The United States never seems to surprise me in their naviety and sometimes narrowminded view on issues. Don't get me wrong, I am not anti-American, however I do sometimes sit back and wonder about them.

Take for example the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy regarding gays in the military. If you are gay but you don't tell anyone, then the US Defence forces welcome you with open arms. They'll train you, send you overseas to fight, promote you, and even pin medals on you for being a brilliant soldier serving the needs of the country. But let anyone know, and you are discharged because you are seen as a threat to the military cohesion.

I, for one, can not get my head around that. Seriously, it's beyond comprehension! Like, what is the US Defence afraid of? That if I was openly gay and in the army, I would drop my rifle in the middle of a battle, to have sex with that cute 6-packed blonde soldier fighting next to me? [Hmm, there's a thought]. Or that if I was caught by the enemy, I would not be mentally strong enough and reveal defence secrets? Or worse still, I will eventually convert the straight military boys into young "queens" and leave the country defended by men who wear skirts, swing glomesh handbags, sip champagne and have running mascara because they cried over a broken finger nail?

Oh please!

One needs only look internationally to places like the UK and Australia, where gays are not descriminated against, to see that having openly-gay military personnel is no threat. Here in Australia, the Australian Defence Forces are now extending the same rights and privileges to gay military couples as what is offered to straight couples. Openly gay people have been accepted into the Australian defence forces for 13 years now with no adverse impact on it's capability of defending the country and fighting overseas.

Being gay is no threat to the US Defence forces and their cohesion. The defence department accepts gay people if they are closeted, so why not accept them when they are open as to what their sexual preference is?

When are they going to realise that the difference between gay and straight people is simply who we sleep with? And thats the only difference. It has nothing to do with our ability to work, play or fight. A gay soldier is just as likely to go AWOL or divulge defence secrets when captured, as is a straight soldier.

Drag yourself into the 21st century America and leave the naive Dark Ages mentality where it belongs.

Enough said. Off to work I go!

Is Rupert Murdoch About To Lose Control of News Corp?

2005-10-19T15:58:00.000+09:30

One of the most fascinating things about humanity is it's ability to ignore it's past and learn from the mistakes. This is especially true in business and one only needs to look no further than the 1980s and 1990s to see companies rise and fall through their greed and lack of planning. Companies like Exxon, BondCorp and Qintex - just to name a few.

One of the biggest success stories to come out of Adelaide - and Australia for that matter - is Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. From it's minor beginnings back in 1952 when he inheritted the "News" and "Sunday Mail" newspapers in Adelaide, Rupert turned his small company into one of the largest media conglomerates in the world half a century later. His insatiable appetite for more and more power has made Rupert and his company into a media and political power to be reckoned with.

However, this is where the issue arises. Has Rupert, in his search for more wealth and power, driven him into a position of losing control of his own company?

The Murdoch family control 30% of News Corp, making them the largest shareholders in the company. Whilst based in Adelaide [Australia], Rupert was able to run the company as if it was his personal business. What Rupert wanted, Rupert got and very very few people and shareholders here in Australia would even consider challenging him. However, Rupert and News Corp begun to run into a tricky situation.

Expansion was becoming restricted as the world's biggest prize - the USA media market - considered News Corp as a "foreign" company. His decision to move News Corp's headquarters from Adelaide to Delaware in the USA, thus becoming a USA company, was made to allow him to expand his media interests.

All fine and good to this stage. But this is where the problem arises and the issues of Rupert losing control of News Corp comes into play.

Whilst News Corp was based in Australia, the company was "the big fish in the little pond" and was protected by Australia's foreign ownership laws and a compliant shareholder base. However, relocating to the USA, News Corp is now playing in an environment where other media companies [like John Malone's Liberty Media which owns 17% of News Corp] are just as big if not bigger than News Corp.

Further, the USA shareholders are not so "accommodating" to Rupert's style of leadership, thus the legal proceedings against Rupert and News Corp by disgruntled shareholders over the so-called "poison pill" issue. And there are already rumblings by some major shareholders to try and ensure that the News Corp board is made up of predominantly "independent" directors.

Personally, I think this is the beginning of a very turbulent period for Rupert Murdoch and his family. His style of management is not conducive to what the USA considers "appropriate", and this will eventually see him lose his position.

Shareholders like Liberty Media do not need to increase their shareholdings in News Corp to overthrow Rupert. They simply need to combine their votes to elect a replacement, for the Murdoch family only controls 30% - the remaining 70% is owned by other shareholders.

Maybe Rupert should have listened to his son Lachlan, and not moved News Corp to Delaware. Time will tell but somehow I can not see News Corp being run by Rupert Murdoch [or any Murdoch for that matter] five years from now.

James

Slavery In Modern Society

2005-10-18T08:47:00.000+09:30

The United Nations has passed resolutions against slavery. The vast majority of nations have also anti-slavery laws in place, and the world crawls into bed each night content with the thought that slavery no longer exists on this planet.

And yet, a form of slavery does exist today. A slavery which in most cases, one that is self-imposed upon one's self.

In the gay community, and to a lesser extent the general community, the Master-Slave role has been in existence for centuries. Originally the Master would "buy" the slave and use him for his own needs. As slavery at the time was normal, the role of Master-Slave took on the normal and the erotic aspect. In today's society though where slavery is not only illegal but also frown upon, the role of Master-Slave is more of the erotic side.

A friend of mine [Gus] who has dabbled in the Master-Slave role, and who has connections within this subculture, says that it is widely practiced within our community. A quick look through the personals section of our community newspapers and in the chat rooms, one often sees profiles and ads like "Slave available 24/7" and "Master seeking Slave". Most of us look at them, chuckle, and move on. Yet for these people, the role of Master-Slave is real.

Gus reckons that the subculture of Master-Slave is so prevalent within our community that if real statistics were obtained, it would shock not only our community, but also the general community as a whole. Master-Slave gatherings are not uncommon although they are held in discrete locations and organised through a secretive network of contacts. Breaking into this sub-community is not easy and generally done through associates.

Yet once in, a whole new subculture is there - one where slaves are "auctioned" off to the highest bidder or shared.

What I find scary is that these people are willing participants in the whole thing. Willing to put their lives on the line to serve another human being willingly in any aspect necessary. To subjugate themselves to the Master's whim, whether it is pleasure in bed or in some cases, more harsher pleasures like whipping etc.

To test out his claims, I created a nic in one of the world's popular chat rooms and went searching for a slave - all in the interests of research.

The results were surprising and shocking. I sat in the main room without participating in the main room conversation nor privating anyone. My bio simply read "Master,41, seeking Slave for 24/7". Within the hour I had found myself five guys aged between 18 and 30 who were willing to be my slave. All of them were genuine and willing to introduce me to their former Masters for references. All of them provided me with their personal phone numbers and websites with well-hidden URL's with photos. With the exception of one, they all were reasonably good looking guys who, if one bumped into them in the general community, would see them as normal people. Occupation wise, all of them worked in fulltime jobs ranging from clerks to one being a local lawyer in a well-known firm.

One thing I found surprising with all of them was their desire to be subservient to another person, to obey their every whim. All of them privated me with their opening comments beginning with "Sir,....". In the private chats, I dug deeper and deeper prying information out of them, and testing them to see whether these guys were genuine or simply role-playing to get their rocks off.

A further quick search on the internet to see how widespread the Master-Slave subculture existed within the gay community, resulted in some surprising finds. There is even a website that is well-visited that allows Masters and Slaves to meet and hook up. All free of charge, and complete with every nitty gritty detail about each other. The other surprising thing I discovered was the Master-Slave Charter which comprises of the "do's" and "don'ts" - a sort of agreement which both parties sign prior to officially entering the Master-Slave relationship. How many adhere to it, I don't know, but the agreement is pretty thorough. It incorporates things like respect, boundaries beyond which neither will go, etc.

In some ways, modern slavery is rather civilised, yet one wonders why people would put themselves in a situation where their lives are controlled by another. I for one, prefer a truly equal relationship where the role of Master-Slave is not involved. But by the same token, I can not and will not pass judgement on another as to how they live their life. For who am I to say what is right and what is wrong?

But slavery in the modern world does exist, even if it is civilised and between consenting adults.

James

Finding One's Self

2005-10-17T19:18:00.000+09:30

Everyone gets to a stage in life where one reflects on where one has been, where one is, and where one is heading. This self analysis can sometimes be a very daunting and traumatic experience, especially if one senses they have actually lost direction in life.

How one comes to the stage of reflection, depends on the person. For myself, it is generally triggered by the loss of a friend or lover. The more emotionally involved I was with the person, the more reflective I became with who I am and becoming.

Personally, I hate this stage I go through, as the reflection affects not only my own personal feelings, but also my relationship with family and friends. The frightening part is that the more I self-analyse my life, the deeper I get into the "finding one's self" phase which is similar to depression.

When I go through this "finding one's self" phase, the first thing that I focus on is the reason for the loss. Initially, like everyone else, there is the "why me" and "what did I do wrong" questioning. Although clouded by guilt [real or perceived] at the initial stages, I generally find that by focusing on that particular issue, the matter becomes clearer. Don't ask why or how, it just does. Somehow one's brain clears the clutter that surrounds the issue and gradually focuses on the problem.

By the end of it, I have the answer to that perplexing issue. However, the self analysis for some reason then moves onto the rest of my life - my friends, family and direction I am heading. It is this stage that I generally find the hardest to cope with, as I take a very analytical look at everything. With friends in my life, I look at the role they play and decide whether to cut ties with them or maintain them.

One of the things I look at is what impact they have on my life. Those that are of benefit to me, like being supportive and there for me, I maintain. My closest friends today are long term ones, with a couple of exceptions. They are part of my life because they care about me and are always there supporting me. This is regardless of whether or not they have pissed me off totally in the past. True friends are the ones who are willing to come up to me and say "Oi! Are you blind? Can you not see he is using you?" or "If you love him, tell him you idiot - or I will".

True friends are the ones that stand by your side ready to laugh with you, as well as cry; ready to take you by the hand and lead you into unchartered waters without expecting anything in return other than your company and friendship. From my perspective, true friends are willing to put the friendship on the line, if it means that their actions are actually for your positive benefit - which may or may not be obvious to you at the time. You get my drift?

With the work aspect of my life, that too gets analysed. A realistic look at my work and where it can potentially take me is made, and gradually implement the changes I need.

By the end of the phase, which sometimes can take up to 2 months, the changes are gradually implemented. And the feeling I get? Believe it or not, it's like being reborn again. As each change takes place, I myself change. The changes themselves are like a domino effect, each building on the change of the previous one.

I must admit, the beginning is the hardest, and the first couple of changes are murder - so to speak. But once I go through those, the rest become easier and easier.

So if your life seems to have reached a dead end, then take my advise. Find the biggest issue you have, go to your favourite quiet spot [like the beach], and focus on the problem. By the time you realise it, you are already on your way to "finding one's self".

James

Crying Is No Shame

2005-10-16T00:52:00.000+09:30

When will men learn that crying is no shame, but a natural emotion? Why is it that our culture has re-enforced into us that crying - either in public or private - is something we need to be ashamed of? Why is it that in Australia, and more specifically the western [pre-dominantly Anglo-Saxon] cultures have a tendency of looking down on men crying, whereas in other parts of the world the opposite is true?

Over the last few months I have the fortune [or misfortune, depending on one's perspective] to have situations where friends of mine have lost loved ones. And in each situation, the need to let out their emotions has been held back by cultural restraints. One friend lost a close friend to suicide, another lost his brother to cancer, while a third lost his lover due to illness.

In all three circumstances, all three refused to cry openly over their loved ones - even to their closest friends.

This I found sad, as an Australian of southern European origin, I have been raised to show that crying openly is not only a necessary part of the grieving process, but also encourages others around you to provide the emotional support one needs to cope with the loss. One needs only look at the grieving process that southern Europeans go through, and the amount of time taken to cope with their loss, that one sees that crying is therapeutic.

The mind set that we have in our society needs to change. Seeing friends go through the anguish of their loss, yet being afraid to talk about it, is not only heart wrenching for them, but also for their friends and loved ones. Personally, I believe that crying in front of friends is not a sign of weakness, but a sense of strength as it shows you that your friendship with others is sufficiently strong enough to not only show your weakness to them, but also that that "weakness" is a sense of trust in the person involved.

Maybe if we all cried a bit in front of our friends and loved ones, we would be better able to cope with the traumas that life throws at us. Who knows. But a man crying, in my books, is a strong man who trusts.

James

Gays Vs Lesbians

2005-10-14T18:38:00.000+09:30

There are divisions within society, some which we openly acknowledge and realise, and others which aren't as obvious. In the wider community, the division between heterosexuals and non-heterosexuals is quite obvious, with the heterosexual community generally placing all others into the "kinky" or "alternative" category. Within the homosexual community we ourselves have divided our peers into categories, the two main ones being gay and lesbian.

Over the last 30 years, we - as homosexuals - have fought for our rights to not only be acknowledged, but also in obtaining the same rights as the heterosexual community. We have had to fight to be acknowledged as "normal", as human beings, as simply individuals who breath, eat, hurt, cry, love and die - just like the rest of humanity.

Yet, I look out our community and sometimes wonder if all that fighting for equality has actually been a waste of time. I wonder sometimes whether we were better off as not being equal with heterosexuals, as being inferior in some way simply because of our preference for sexual partners.

The reason I think is, is because of something that I see quite regularly on the scene, which saddens me. My friends are a wide cross section from within our community, including the young and old, male and female. I take everyone as they are, accept them for who they are, and try not to pass judgement.

Yet time after time, I can not help but wonder if I am in the minority within our community. Many gays complain when the lesbians are around, whether at the bar, the nightclub or the pub. And by the same token, the lesbians complain about the gays.

Take for example a situation a couple of weeks ago. I was down at my local pub having a few beers with two close friends of mine. In the dining area, a group of lesbians were having dinner and celebrating. After the meal, they progressed to the front bar to enjoy the atmosphere and a few drinks. No major drama, no big deal. Ok, the pub is aimed at the gays not the lesbians, but hey - it's a free country.

Yet both my friends complained over their presence, as did a large number of the male clientele that was there. When I didn't voice my agreement over their opinion, they asked me why. My response at the time was quite simple - they are doing no harm and why should we not welcome them to the pub? Sure, it is a GAY pub, but hey, we - as gays - have invaded their turf in the past. When Beans Bar [a lesbian venue] was open, many a gay guy would go there to party. The rules that existed in Beans were quite simple - all are welcome but bare in minds its a LESBIAN venue.

This division which exists between the gays and lesbians on the scene is replicated within our own circle of friends. I look around at my gay and lesbian friends [both close and scene], and wonder, how many of them have close friends of the opposite sex? How many gay guys have close lesbian friends, and vice versa? And when I mean close, I literally mean socialising at each other's houses and doing the non-scene bit like lunch, coffee etc.

The unfortunate answer is not many. This in turn raises another question - why?

Whether we like to admit it or not, the homosexual community is sex-driven. Building a friendship is hard in the best of times, yet in the homosexual community, it is even harder. Friendships within our community are based on a number of factors, including the "potential boyfriend or girlfriend" factor, the "sex" factor and the "threat to my relationship" factor. With our lives being sex-orientated, friendships between gays is marred or inhibited by the "what can I get out of it".

Trying to build friendships with the opposite sex is even harder, not only because the "sex" factor is not there, but also because of the "he/she won't know any cute guys/girls for me to meet" so why waste the time and effort?

In pre-equality [and I use the "equality" word loosely here] times, gays and lesbians mingled even if only to maintain a "straight" look to the rest of the community. With us obtaining more and more rights, we seem to be segregating ourselves into two communities - gays and lesbians.

Which makes me wonder sometimes. Are we segregating ourselves to the point that one day we shall become no better than the heterosexual community was back in the past? Looking down on the other side and thinking we are better? Will our next fight be not over homosexual rights, but gay rights and lesbian rights? Or has that already started without realising it?

James

A Holiday Of Changes - Part 2

2005-10-12T08:35:00.000+09:30

It's been a week now since I have returned home, and my thoughts are no clearer than before. If anything, I am now even more confused as to what direction to take.

At work, I have learned that my work team is being merged with another one, resulting in a new supervisor - some one that I like and respect alot. And with this change, my desire to leave has somewhat been reduced to a "would be nice to find a new job". Yet mingled with all this, I have now also been offered a position in Canberra as well by a firm that I deal with at work. From their experience with me during normal day-to-day dealings [and from my past work experience], they want me over there as soon as possible.

Further, the matter has become even more confusing in that I am now being told that David wants nothing to do with me. Talk about a total turnaround by him. He has gone from liking me and telling the other guys what a "great guy" I am, to hating me and never wanting to see me again. The reason for this turnaround? No idea. He won't give any reasons. which has me totally confused.

Maybe its something to do with his past, or maybe he is realising something that he has so far in his life, failed to acknowledge. And that is, that he isn't bisexual but rather gay. This is not me "wishing" but rather based on his comments and actions during our talks - which I won't raise in here. From my past experience, bisexuals fall into two main categories - they are either gay guys who simply can not come to terms with being gay. therefore claim to be bisexual thus satisfying their sexual needs without admitting to themselves their true nature. Or, they are simply sex starved straight guys and will sleep with anyone simply to "offload", thus the reason most bisexuals that I have met are actually tops rather than versatile or bottoms. Only a small minority of bisexuals are actually "true" bisexuals - people who will commit to a person and remain loyal, regardless of whether their partner is male or female.

Either way, I can't see myself finding out as he doesn't want to speak to me, and I, well - don't have time for people who play games. If the others do find out, hopefully they will tell me, but in the end, I am moving on.

However his about-face has now left me in a situation where I need to re-assess my entire situation. Moving to Canberra for a job that pays more, will be good for me. Sydney is only a two and half hour drive away, Melbourne only five hours. Being in Canberra will allow me to not only start afresh, but also give me the ability to travel to cities I have never been to before.

Yet if I move, it will mean a totally new life with new friends and initially it will be lonely until I settle down. Sure, Loch and Anthony are there as well, but I can not rely on my social life revolving around them. They have their own life to lead, just as I would have mine.

So, in the end, I have some serious soul searching to do as to where I am going with my life. And that is the part which I hate - the uncertainty.

Reborn Again

2005-10-12T06:59:00.000+09:30

"Mirror Mirror On The Wall, Who is the fairest of them all?"

How many of us have read the fairytale when we were young? How many of us look into the bathroom mirror each day and somewhere in the back of our minds, does the thought "God! Is that me?" come up? How many of us take a good hard look at ourselves and think that it's time for a complete makeover?

Over the last three months I have been doing some spring cleaning with my clothes, and most of it has ended up in the garbage bin. Clothes that I had accumulated over time but rarely wore were simply filling up space in the wardrobe. What's left are my jeans, t-shirts and work clothes, items which I wear regularly. Everything else went into the bin.

Bit drastic one might say, but then one needs to discard things in life which are of no use any more. Whether they are clothes, personal items or even, in extreme cases, people one associates with.

Subconsciously I have been re-organising my own personal life and focusing on what I want to be and who I want to be. Part of this change has been brought on by a friend of mine whose opinions I value and trust. Together, we are both revamping our lives and our aims, and part of that is the remaking of our "public" image.

By this I mean how the people we see at work and socially will perceive us. For me, the change in clothing, attitude and imagine, are paramount. How others take it is of no real consequence as long as I feel comfortable with what I am creating for myself.

Will the changes be permanent or just short term? Can the changes themselves also give me a new perspective in life? And how will others perceive the changes themselves? Does it really matter what others think anyway? Will the changes take a life of their own and move me along?

Changing one's image in some ways, can take a life of their own and take one to a destination unknown. But then again, that in itself may not be a bad thing. Time will tell.

James

Age Should Not Be A Barrier to Friendships

2005-10-11T22:21:00.000+09:30

In our community, as in the general community, the age of someone can be a barrier in the establishment of friendships. As we all realise, the majority of our friends tend to be within our own age group with a few at either extreme. It is seen as "incorrect" for an older person to be [non-sexual] friends with an 18 year old and vice versa.

Phrases like "sugar daddy" and "sleaze" come instantly to mind for most people when they see an older male being friends with a younger guy. And yet there need not be anything involved other than pure friendship.

Over the last year, I have personally seen my circle of friends and social acquaintances expand to include people ranging from 17 up to 65. This has not been a deliberate attempt to expand my group of friends, but rather a natural progression over time.

These friendships have expanded my own horizons and perceptions, as well as those of the people I now consider friends. One of the most often repeated comment from the younger friends I have is how "young I act". This has changed their perceptions of older gay guys, in terms of one can be older and still be fun to be around with. My own perception of the younger guys has also changed. We tend to only focus on the young guys who are so focused on sex [and we see plenty of these], yet the majority of those I have met, tend to be quite celibate in their lives. Waiting for the "right guy" before jumping into bed with.

Yet this perception of the younger generation [17-25] being interested in "non-stop" sex, is the one the rest of the community tends to see. And as a direct consequence of this, some of the issues I had to contend with was the comments and insertions made by others in our community, especially as to whether these friendships were established on my part so as to get the guys into the bed. And the hardest thing has always been trying to convince others that there are no secret sexual motives involved. In the end, these comments have been ignored and gotten on with life and enjoying the friendship of others.

But the question needs to be asked. Why is it so hard for gays to be interested in someone on a purely friendship level without bringing sex into it? Are we that sex-crazed that friendship is something you have with people who are "ugly" or "not my type"? Are we that focused on sex, that we must chalk up another notch on our belt, so as to be able to say "I had him" and "been there, done that"?

I for one, do not have an issue with sex or friendship. I enjoy both. However in the end, it is the friendships that one builds that last the longest. Sex itself is something that is temporary, whether it is a casual thing with some acquaintance/stranger or within a relationship.

There is so much we can all learn from each other, if we only try putting aside the age issue. I for one, have now taken up bike riding and inline skating - things that I haven't done for ages. In return, they are learning the pleasures of having dinner parties and the like. Don't let age become a barrier to building new friendships in life ... the decision is yours.

James

In The Name Of God

2005-10-10T22:20:00.000+09:30

Okay, now that I have your attention please grab a drink and if you smoke, light up and read.

What the hell is wrong with people today? In fact what is wrong with our society? Ugh!!

I was born into a Greek Orthodox family which religiously [excuse the pun] went to church every opportunity we had. Having been raised in the country, church was something we went to when we visited the city. But, to church we went and my parents taught me that there is a god who loves his children. Further one should not do harm to another and accept people for who and what they are.

Now, years down the track I believe in a god but not necessarily in a Christian one. There is something out there that created this universe we live in, whether it is an almighty deity or whether it is simply nature - I don't know. What I do know is that whatever or whoever created this universe has plans of its own and humanity is one thing that would be only a miniscule cog in it's plans.

However, I continue to believe that each and every one of us have our own beliefs which I fully respect. For this reason I avoid discussing religion with people. You have your views and opinions, I have mine and the two do not cross. Yes, if the issue of religion is raised, I listen to their opinions and expect them to listen to mine, without judging either side.

But what really gets up my nose is those religious people who have the audacity to come knocking on my door at 9am in the morning trying to convert me! Hey - some logic people!! Have you thought of the fact that a lot of people do shift work and they may have only got home and crawled into bed, only to be disturbed by you? Or - and shock horror!! - have you considered the idea that if someone wants to change religions, they will do it themselves?

If your god thinks that I am not following the "right" religion, I am sure he would come down and tell me himself! Or at least send someone who is a bit more considerate than you lot.

Yes, most religions have the "spread the word" motto somewhere in the "holy" scriptures but I don't think the relevant "god" had the idea that his followers run around knocking on people's doors, disturbing them - and when told "not interested" - insisting on preaching!

I for one believe in a god of some sorts. I am more leaning towards "god" being nature and as a direct consequence - our selves. Thus we are all part of "god" and thus "god's" temples and churches are all around us. I believe that I am doing the right thing by respecting myself, respecting my body and respecting every one else. If I do the right thing, I really don't think that if there is a god out there who I don't believe in, is going to say "Tstst .. naughty naughty .. you did not believe in me therefore you can not enter Heaven/Nirvana or whatever".

Come to think of it, I think I have a better chance of entering Heaven/Nirvana/Whatever than those door-knocking pestering religious nuts!

There!! Had my dummy spit and now I am off to bed. So unless the next religious door knocker is cute and gay, the only comment they will get from me is the door slamming in their face!

James