London, England – February 2, 2016 – Fresh from its skirmish with Wikipedia over whether magnetic therapy is pseudoscience or effective alternative medicine, Magnetic Products Store (MPS®) has come out fighting with a magnetic bracelet giveaway to “brighten up someone’s Winter!”
Magnetic Products Store a leading seller of magnetic bracelets, is doing a late winter giveaway, of one of its magnetic bracelets, open to male and female entrants alike. The giveaway is being run from its Facebook page. [Click here if you are using a tablet, smartphone or other mobile device.]
“Late winter is a depressing time in England,” said MPS spokesman Phil Abrams, “because it’s still cold and rainy and the days are short, but Christmas and the New Year are behind us. Bright and shiny magnetic bracelets are a powerful antidote to the winter blues – regardless of the debate over magnetic therapy.”
The reference to “the debate over magnetic therapy” is understood to be a reference to the spat between the magnetic jewellery business and a Wikipedia editor who has consistently blocked and deleted any attempts to draw attention to studies indicating that magnetic bracelets and jewellery can have a palliative effect on arthritis patients.
Attempts to modify the Wikipedia page “Magnet Therapy“, to include references to a number of such studies have been reverted by the editor who stated ” We are not here to sell magnet therapy.” The editor argued that the statements from the medical studies to the effect that the evidence did not support magnetic therapy were the “key” statements, whilst those that said otherwise, in the case of osteoarthritis, were not.
After several unsuccessful attempts to include the qualifying statements from the relevant medical studies, MPS is now seeking to put the dispute behind them and is offering this winter giveaway of a man’s or woman’s magnetic bracelet, placing the emphasis on the brightness and aesthetics of the bracelets, rather than any contentious therapeutic or palliative properties. The giveaway result will be announced on February 6.
1) Using publicly available sources, calculate the number of Arabs and Muslims killed by Israel and Zionists and the Yishuv since the start of the modern Zionist movement.
2) Using publicly available sources, calculate the number of Arabs killed by their fellow Arabs and Muslims.
3) Now, to avoid the exaggerations that sometimes occur in these statistics, subtract 10% from the figure from item (2) and treat the revised figure as the number of Arabs and Muslims actually killed by their fellow Muslims.
4) Now calculate 1% (one percent) of the figure in item (2), subtract it from the figure in item (1) and treat THAT revised figure as the figure for the number of Arabs and Muslims killed by Israel and Zionists.
5) Now, based on these calculations answer the following two questions:
(A) How many Arabs and Muslims have been killed by Jews and Zionists since the start of the modern Zionist movement?
(B) How many Arabs and Muslims have been killed by their fellow Arabs and Muslims?
Please add your figures in a comment below and share the results with your friends. Also feel free to Like and link to this page here and in social media and bookmarks.
Please add your figures in a comment below and share the results with your friends. Also feel free to Like and link to this page here and in social media and bookmarks. Also feel free to mention it in your blogs and link to it, if you agree with its message.
There comes a time in a man’s life when he must put his dreams on hold and start working hard to make a living. Or rather, there comes a time in a man’s life when he realizes this fact. For me that day has come. (That it took me so long is another story!!!!!)
The Professional Copywriting Service is a London-based copywriting team offering a comprehensive range of copywriting services, including business writing, financial public relations, report writing, technical writing, advertising and ghost-writing.
The proofreading and copy editing services that I offer are quite wide-ranging, covering everything from ebooks for the Kindle and Smashwords, through print-on-demand books via CreateSpace and Lulu, to books for publishing houses, articles for scholarly journals, blogs, company reports, charity reports, text books, internet content, etc.
See yourself as the next Bob Dylan? Maybe you’ve got a songwriting partner and you want to become the next Lennon and McCartney? Or maybe you’re more of a Burt Bacharach/Hal David type? Or Holland-Dozier-Holland. Maybe even a Mark Knopfler?
Well it doesn’t really matter, because whether you’re into writing soulful ballads, funky hip-hop, heavy rock or enigmatic songs that defy categorization, this is the course for you!
Tamara Barschak is a pianist, composer, piano teacher, film-maker and all round creative person whom I have known for many years and she is making her years of experience and training in the creative music arts available to those who want to learn the art (and science) of songwriting. If you have ever dreamed of writing that great song that lingers – barely half-formed – in your mind, now is your chance to learn from an accomplished expert who has a vast range of experience in all kinds of music: classical, jazz, bosanova, blues, pop and rock.
Tamara is qualified and experienced in teaching all aspects of musicianship and music theory. The course – carefully devised by Tamara herself and based on her years of experience as a songwriter and music teacher – includes lyric writing, lyrical genres, musical genres, melody, metre, tempo, traditional song structure and variations of structure… i.e. those rare, exceptional songs that break the rules and get away with it!
Tamara has taught music students of all levels, ages and abilities and as some one who has learned from her myself – and written songs with her – I can attest to the fact that her diversity of range and background in music and teaching makes her the ideal teacher for the creative skill of songwriting.
“Creativity itself cannot be taught,” Tamara explained to me, when I first studied at her feet (figuratively speaking), “but if even the merest hint or spark of creativity is already there, it can be nurtured, fed, fueled and channeled by the teaching (and learning) of rules, principles and their inevitable exceptions.” And it is precisely in the teaching of these rules and principles – and the art of identifying the exceptions to those rules and principles – that Tamara most impressively excels!
This short but unparalleled course, which costs just £80 and requires no previous songwriting experience, consists of five sessions (1:00 – 3:30 p.m.) over the course of five weeks, starting on the 1st of October.
1 October: The Art of Lyric Writing
8 October: Writing a melody part 1 (notes, patterns, intervals, chord progressions and key signatures)
15 October: Writing a melody part 2 (rhythm, rhythmic patterns, time signatures, tempo and metre)
22 October: Preparation for the Students’ Final Songs (with coaching and advice)
29 October: Recording Students’ Songs
The course, which includes practical exercises and hands-on practice, encourages artistic collaboration between the students, as many of the most famous songs were written by duos or larger groups.
In the final session, students will record their songs and get a recording to keep and take with them.
This is a unique opportunity to fully explore one’s own creativity, compose a song from scratch and record it forever!
George Galloway – the man who praised Saddam Hussein at a time when the Iraqi dictator was known to be murdering his fellow Iraqis – has always denied being either an antisemite or a racist and has on a number of occasions threatened to sue people for calling him either. Yet he has recently (and not so recently) shown his true colours by making statements that attack people not for what they have done or even what they have said, but rather for what they born.
The first occasion was when he walked out of a debate with an Israeli, at Christ Church College, Oxford, claiming falsely that he had been “misled.” Galloway had already spoken in the debate, but when his eloquent opponent, Eylon Aslan-Levy, started his response with the words “We wanted peace, we got war. We mustn’t make the same mistake again,” the ill-mannered Galloway interrupted him by asking rudely “are you an Israeli?” Now of course, if Galloway had genuinely thought the question to be relevant, he could have asked it before, at the time when the debate was being arranged. He chose not to do so.
Whether he merely assumed that the person speaking for Israel would not be an Israeli or knew otherwise and chose to ignore it, I cannot say. But as soon as the opposing speaker used the word “we”, the rather excitable Galloway became agitated and interrupted to ask his obnoxious question – a question that no right-thinking person would have thought relevant. The opposing speaker innocently and honestly replied: “I am. yes.” At this point, Galloway got up and said: “I don’t debate with Israelis. I’ve been misled.”
Now first of all, it was Galloway who misled the organizers of the debate, by not stating his terms and conditions up front. Secondly, Galloway then walked out, refusing to participate in the debate any further. And this was of course, rather conveniently, after he had made sure to have his own say before the ostentatious walk-out.
But what is interesting is that at no stage did Galloway ask his opponent if he was an Israeli by birth or by naturalization. That means that Galloway was equally unwilling to debate with Israelis whether they be born Israelis or became Israelis by choice. Now of course, even if they became an Israeli by choice it would be silly to refuse to debate with them, because a debate – by definition – involves arguing one’s case against an opponent. And Galloway knew that he was there for a debate, so he knew that he would be facing a man of differing opinion. The fact that he agreed to the debate at all, meant that he was ready to face off with a person who held a different view to his own. But the fact that he walked out when he knew that his opponent was Israeli, without so much as inquiring if that citizenship was acquired by birth or by choice, means that Galloway was showing prejudice against a fellow human being because of a fact of that other person’s birth. (It does not in fact matter whether Eylon Aslan-Levy was born an Israeli or became one. The fact that Galloway didn’t ask, is sufficient grounds to characterize Galloway as a racist).
But could this have been a one-off? Well not if Galloway’s most recent outburst is anything to go by. In a recent speech he said with customary arrogance and malice: “We have declared Bradford an Israel-free zone. We don’t want any Israeli goods. We don’t want any Israeli services. ” Now if he had left it at that, – referring to “Israel” rather than “Israelis” and “goods” and “services” rather than people – he might just have got away with it. But Galloway – ever the bully – went on to say: “We don’t want any Israeli academics coming to the University or the college. We don’t even want any Israeli tourists.” By referring to people who possessed Israeli citizenship – again without specific reference to whether their citizenship was by birth or by choice (as adults) – he was showing prejudice towards people because of what they were born. And this is classic racism.
And for these reasons it is clear that George Galloway is a racist.
Cold Turkey is the story of two drug-addicted brothers, Lee and Mark, who kidnap a right-wing radio talk-show host and deliberately set about getting him addicted to heroin, after he has angered them by mouthing off about “junkies” and their lack of “moral fibre.” To some extent they are merely taking him up on his own hubristic posturing:
“You could kidnap me tomorrow,” he bragged, “shoot me up with smack till I’m hooked and I could kick the habit cold turkey!”
But when they take up his challenge, he fails to live up to his boast and his life spirals out of control. And yet their victory is a Pyrrhic one, as differences between the brothers come to the fore, forcing them to re-evaluate their own lives – culminating in Lee taking a most extraordinary decision.
I first had the idea of Cold Turkey while I was sharing a flat with a psychologically-dependent drug user in South London. Although he was an irritating chav, a thief and even, at times, a wife-beater (or at least girlfriend-beater), I also learned about his background and the events that turned him into what he became. I saw his dependency on the friend who got him into the drug scene – a sort of substitute older brother – and the vicious circle he had got himself into. I also saw his vulnerability, how that was exploited by others and the rage that sometimes flared up within him.
The characters in this story are by no means “based on” my former flatmate and his drug-using friends. They are, however, inspired by them. The real-life character was never viciously beaten by his father. But he was thrown out by both parents after their acrimonious divorce, because of his own behaviour and at one point ended up on the streets at the age of 12, when he was “taken in” (in both senses of the expression) by a young man who introduced him to drugs and took advantage of him sexually. (Ironically, they remain friends and drug-buddies to this day, except for moments when “Lee” goes into a rage – usually under the influence of alcohol rather than drugs.
I wrote this story to explore the minds of people trapped in a downward spiral of self-destructive behaviour. I have seen “Lee” off drugs as well as on. Unlike the brothers in this film, he does not “do needles” – although some of his friends do. In truth, he is not physically addicted to heroin or any other drug – or at least was not for most of the time I knew him. Like the character in the film, he has been to prison several times, for offences like stealing (to get drug money) and violence whether against shop-keepers or others with whom he has got into conflict, under the influence of alcohol. And like the character in the film, he has been off drugs, but has always relapsed and got back “on the gear” – usually as soon as he was out of prison. (NB he did not need methadone in prison – except on one occasion.)
The novel explores such questions as: to what extent are we in control of our own lives? Are we the captains of our souls or at the mercy of the winds of fate. Can one achieve anything alone or does one always need a friend? And are some friendships toxic?
Asking these questions in the context of the modern day problem of drug (and alcohol) addiction, we see the thin line that separates winners from losers and get a glimpse of the fragility of the lifestyles that some of us take for granted.