2013-05-24T12:20:03-04:00 Ellen Grace Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/author/index.php?author=ellen-grace-jones Copyright 2008, HuffingtonPost.com, Inc. HuffingtonPost Blogger Feed for Ellen Grace Jones Good old fashioned elbow grease. tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2432441 2013-01-08T11:28:37-05:00 2013-03-10T05:12:01-04:00

Ellen Grace Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ellen-grace-jones/
After Piers Morgan imposed his views and barely let his guests get a word in edgeways when discussing US gun control the other week, it was nothing - if not pleasurable - to witness him getting a taste of his own medicine on Monday night's CNN showdown with broadcaster Alex Jones.

Jones was the one who spear-headed the (half-joking) petition to deport Morgan from the States for attacking the second amendment and ever since Sandy Hook (and long before) has been outspoken about the rights of Americans to bear arms.

Yet watching Jones' hysterical performance I couldn't help feel he's his own worst enemy, and boy, did he shoot himself - no pun intended - in the foot. Jones, himself was actually a scatter-gun of point-after-point-after-point. Important points; the fact that the mega banks who've taken over brag that they're going to take away people's guns. The fact that the FBI's statistics report a 20% violent crime drop in 9 years. The fact that the US government was the biggest killer in the 20th Century. The fact that statistically where there's more guns there's lower crime.

He asked, why are we seemingly ignoring the huge problem of over-subscription of antidepressants which trigger suicides and arguably trigger mass shootings? Why do the US government ship guns into Mexico? Why are there so many anomalies over 911? And yeah, why doesn't Morgan return to the UK face the Leveson music?

But alas, any valid points Jones made were shot to pieces by his belligerent, manic tirade and, if anything, only gifted ammunition to those that seek to tar him with the 'loony conspiracy theorist' brush.

If you've ever listened to his radio show, watched one of his documentaries, there's no denying: the man knows his shit. History, geo-politics, economics; Jones is well-researched to the hilt and backs up his arguments with government documents and other evidence. To his credit; he never tells people what to believe and actively encourages his viewers to investigate themselves.

But rather than use his vast armoury of information and facts to express his argument coherently and eloquently to credibly 'win' the debate, his on-the defensive diatribe and inability to engage in rational discourse only served to make him look like a fool.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.2321309 2012-12-18T19:00:00-05:00 2013-02-17T05:12:01-05:00

Ellen Grace Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ellen-grace-jones/ Michael Moore and Piers Morgan began as unofficial poster boys for the action and now Mayor Bloomberg has weighed in, pushing for tighter gun control claiming, "The president and congress can and should address [gun control] at the same time they're reaching an agreement on avoiding the fiscal cliff."

Today, as a hungry pack of demonstrators circled the NRA's Washington HQ, it's looking likely Obama will attack the Second Amendment as the White House promised a comprehensive series of measures including gun control legislation.

I hate guns. I wish they didn't exist. But they do. In the wake of the Connecticut shootings this mass knee-jerk call to impose strict firearm laws is an understandable reaction. Unfortunately it isn't the right one.

If stricter gun control was the solution then cities with stricter gun legislation would be the safest, right? Wrong. Let's look at some facts shall we? Chicago boasts some of the USA's most draconian gun laws but 10 people were shot in Chicago on Friday alone. It's considered 'the deadliest global city' and the murder rate is 25% higher than last year.

Post-Dunblane when guns were outlawed here in the UK, six years later gun-crime had more than doubled. By 2009 gun crime had escalated by 89%.

Down Under, gun murders rose by 19% and armed robberies by 69% after a gun ban was introduced in 1997.

And thus the story goes.

Prohibition; in whatever form, does not work. It didn't work for alcohol, it certainly doesn't work for drugs and as evidence shows, will not work for guns either. All outlawing does is willingly gift supply and control to gang cartels and remove things from the hands of law-abiding citizens. Criminals and the mentally ill intent of murder or mass-crime will still be able to get their hands on guns, no matter what the law.

Adam Lanza broke three Connecticut gun control laws; had more been in place would not have made a difference. The shooting will still have happened.

The Newtown tragedy is a perfect example of problem-reaction-solution; an event which causes people to request the end result the powers that be desire. We can very clearly see a police-state grid being unrolled across the USA and beyond - is it easier to do that against an armed population or an unarmed one? Fundamentally gun control is not for the protection of people but for the preservation of tyrannical entities.

"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty." So said that nice little fellow, Adolf. In Nazi Germany, pre-Holocaust, gun laws were introduced which banned Jewish people from the manufacture or ownership of firearms and ammunition.

There is no doubt Obama will exploit this harrowing event to chip away at the Second Amendment.

The Connecticut massacre is undeniably tragic but what it has disturbingly revealed is that people are only outraged because it was not sanctioned by the state. As Obama wiped away his fake tear, I wondered, would he ever shed one were 20 Pakistani children murdered in a school by one of his drone attacks? Statism has a sickening dehumanising effect on how we perceive other humans that aren't close to home or 'like us.'

Sandy Hook is of course worthy of the sympathy it's been in receipt of, however the irrational way we collectively emote and seethe over one type of human loss whilst remain indifferent to others because it's somehow a bi-product of state-sanctioned imperialist war leaves a nasty taste in my mouth.

The unfolding weeks will be interesting. I reiterate: I detest firearms, I wish they did not exist. I'm the antithesis of a trigger-happy, gun-totin' shooter but to support the banning of them - as history shows - will only spell disaster.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.2249678 2012-12-09T19:00:00-05:00 2013-02-08T05:12:01-05:00

Ellen Grace Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ellen-grace-jones/ it's a doomsday whereby our planet is consumed in a Fukishima-on-steroids tsunami, but the reality is much different. Put your hysteria on hold.

In pure and simple astronomical terms this winter solstice represents the culmination of a 25,800 year cycle of the precession of the equinoxes. Every 72 years, our planet wobbles on its axis by one degree, hence the zodiac's meandering journey through the cosmos. On this day the winter solstice sun will align with the galactic equator. As 5th Dimension sung, this is the dawning of the Age of Aquarius.

In cultural terms the tiresome doom-and-gloom connotations stem from misguided interpretations of the calendar. It never meant, 'the end of the world', moreover, 'the end of the world as we know it.' "This time represents a shift of consciousness, not a literal catastrophe," friend and author of 2012, The Return of Quetzacoatl, Daniel Pinchbeck told me.

And he's correct, the Maya's intricate Baktun calendar tracked not just time, but the evolution of consciousness which can be measured in the form of a 13 stepped pyramid. For them the 21st signifies a tipping point of humanity's consciousness awakening into a more enlightened state. What was once hidden shall be revealed. 'Apocalypse' doesn't even mean catastrophe, it means the 'uncovering'. No, we're not going to wake up on the 21st and 'boom' we're all Buddha, it's a gradual process and looking around, we're in the throes of it now.

Every week, a scandal exposed here, government corruption uncovered there. We now see that fiat currency is fraudulent and (crony) capitalism is a broken, doomed model. Everything rotten is percolating to the surface, failing in front of our very eyes and there is a seismic shift in peoples awakening to the Machiavellian machinations of those holding the puppet strings. The global anger, uprising, dissent, protest and non-compliance in reaction to this is case in point.

But our awakening isn't simply socio-political and financial, it's spiritual too. "I think more people are awakening to their own connection to the cosmos and discovering their psychic nature," explains Pinchbeck. "We are also awakening to our responsibility for the earth, and the need to evolve new social practices that are cooperative and compassionate. I think this will lead to profound changes over the next decade as people self-organise to deal with climate change and other threats."

It wasn't just the Maya which pointed to 21 December 2012; the Hindu's Kali Yuga cycle also ends and the Hopi Indian's prophesied about this time too. But again, not an end date - a transitional one; a rebirthing. Like the oruborous, the serpent symbol which ate its tail, they knew life and man's consciousness was cyclical. Strange coincidence that ancient cultures knew about this time independent of one another? Or did they really know something? In our spiritually impotent technological race to the top, we dismiss ancient scriptures and teachings as myths and fantasy rather than having wisdom and relevance.

As Orwell's prophetic police state grid is expanding exponentially across the Western world, as we continue to invade sovereign countries and drone innocents under the false guise of 'humanitarianism', as the criminal banks continue their wealth transfer (theft?) from the poorest and vulnerable to themselves, as we allow swathes of the Amazon to be destroyed for oil development, it's time for change. Fast.

I am heading up the recently established London arm of the global Evolver movement. We are a growing community of people who are keen to help stimulate change, discuss ideas and drag seemingly esoteric topics kicking and screaming from the fringe to analyse them with a critical yet curious eye. We will be hosting events and talks in the New Year. I invite anyone who is interested in exploring what's really going on behind the big curtain of global society to visit our website or join us on Facebook and Twitter.

It's not doomsday knocking on our doors on the 21st, it's just the world's wonder and woes trying to wake us from our rat-race and reality TV comas.

Anyway, to summarise; no, they didn't just 'run out of stone'.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.2038784 2012-10-29T19:00:00-04:00 2012-12-29T05:12:02-05:00

Ellen Grace Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ellen-grace-jones/
Let's get that 'R' word out of the way first, shall we? Any discussion on Icke will inevitably prompt those reptilians to rear their scaly heads. That's understandable and a reason he's been a ridicule magnet for so many years. I am not going to defend every intricacy of every claim Icke makes. That would take forever. Moreover, get to the heart of why, much to the chagrin and derision of many, he only continues to rise in popularity.

In 1991, post-Wogangate, Icke was laughed out of town but rather than sink in sea of humiliation and shame the former sports journalist got back on his horse. For those whose knowledge of him begins and ends at 'shapeshifting lizards' he has spent the last three decades as a full time researcher travelling to and speaking in over 55 countries. To date he's published 14 books. He calls himself a 'dot connector' and seeks to get to the underbelly of what makes our world tick behind the big curtain.

So. In terms of his increasing audience and outreach, is he just a very canny snake (or reptile?) oil salesman whose bizarre offerings naive, crazy people willingly lap up? Or does - perish the thought - Mr Icke actually talk, you know, some sense about things and people are recognising that?

It seems the latter could very well be the case given much of what Icke has talked about for years continues to manifest as truth; he predicted the financial crash of 2008, the increase of natural disasters after the millennium and has been saying for years that Jimmy Savile was a predatory paedophile. Yet, of course, endured endless flack for it. Icke is being proven right again and again so maybe it's no wonder his audience only continues to grow.

One only has to throw a cursory glance around at society - governments lie, our media illegally hack into phones; establishment corruption is rife. As a global populace we are rightly becoming more jaded and disenfranchised with those who supposedly serve us and from whom we seek information about the wider world. Corporate media is plummeting and independent media flourishing. Given the increase of personal epiphanies and snowballing distrust of reining authority, that Icke's work (and the work of many of his researcher peers) resonates with so many is no surprise.

I was one of the many who scoffed and laughed at David Icke's early theories. Daft man. Wacky ideas. Consign him to the loony bin.

Then I began to investigate his recent work. Then investigated what his work investigates. Radical it seems at first, but the further down the rabbit hole you go, the quicker your overcome your cognitive dissonance, the more you independently study what Icke picks apart and analyses (the economy, religion, politics, human history) you realise that, bloody hell, perhaps this man could have a point. Many, in fact.

Is he eccentric? No doubt. Is he right about everything? Possibly not, however Saturday's Wembley Arena event was a serious indicator that after decades of being a soft target and the butt of endless jokes, his research and ideas are being taken seriously and for one 'nut job, deluded conspiracy theorist' that's a lot of people to have hoodwinked.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1954302 2012-10-10T19:00:00-04:00 2012-12-10T05:12:02-05:00

Ellen Grace Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ellen-grace-jones/
Much like the gold plaque on Savile's Scarborough home (upon which someone boosted his CV by adding 'paedophile' and 'rapist' to career achievements of 'entertainer and philanthropist') the removal of his headstone is symbolic of the public mood and the appropriate gesture to fellow deceased in neighbouring plots. As the gravestone trundles to its new resting place - a nearby landfill - Scotland Yard is sifting through 120 potential leads.

Now whilst it's crucial the public and press don't descend further into a pitchfork rattling witch hunt smacking of Brass Eye's Paedogeddon, the pan-UK fury at such an emotive revelation is understandable. As more victims speak out it's becoming possible that Savile could have abused the lives of many young women, but also, if the allegations prove to be true, by-and-large abused the trust of a nation who enjoyed his programmes and sponsored his charity work. This national betrayal has only exacerbated the outcry and uproar. For all his shell-suited, cigar-puffing eccentricity, it turns out Savile could have been a deceptive, cunning, fraud.

Yet, what has been depressingly inexcusable and needs to be tackled head-on is the outrageous questioning of, "why cast aspersions against someone who cannot defend himself?" and "why didn't the women come forward before?" - suggesting they're somehow money-grabbing story sellers only coming to the press and police now. These are dangerous questions demonstrating a fundamental ignorance of both the bigger picture and past societal norms.

Let me answer them: as much as Sir Jimmy Savile is the chief protagonist in this tragedy, it does not begin and end with him. As more and more names are thrown into the mix, the entire BBC needs to be investigated and those potentially culpable brought to justice. How far down the rabbit hole does this allegedly vile behaviour go? Did Savile have accomplices? Were top brass complicit in covering up? Implying justice should not be pursued simply because one of the players is dead is myopic at best and an insult to the victims at worst.

As for women not coming forward before, how would one 14 year old schoolgirls' word stand against the saintly, philanthropic, powerful - and importantly - untouchable King of Entertainment? One with enough money and connections to silence any critics with a cursory flick of his jingle-jangled wrist.

Let's not pretend it wasn't a different time back then. From the recent testimony of DJ Liz Kershaw, Sandy Toksvig and Janet St Porter, gropings came with your morning coffee and sexist jibes were common place. Astonishingly, on Monday ex DJ Mike Smith dismissed this behaviour as "practical jokes" and "schoolboy joshing". Now whilst there's a marked difference between systematic, conscious grooming of underage girls and overzealous wandering DJ hands, what Smith laughs off confirms a blind acceptance of rotten behaviour endemic in the system.

Molestation ain't right, whatever the scale.

Thankfully, BBC Director General George Entwhistle announced an outside body will conduct an independent investigation on Monday's Radio 4 Today Programme. However, the BBC's heel-dragging, shelving of the Newsnight investigation and failure to explain why (despite widespread rumours) Savile's conscious exploitation of power was never halted only stokes mounting claims of an attempted cover-up.

The truth will generally always out and there's no denying the inevitability of Savile's abuse revealing itself posthumously. We were fooled. Behind the canonised, altruistic persona lay a devious, predatory opportunist. Despite the public wrath, a calm, legitimate, hysteria-free inquiry is necessary. Let's hope it will bring justice to those who deserve it.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1527350 2012-05-20T19:00:00-04:00 2012-07-20T05:12:15-04:00

Ellen Grace Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ellen-grace-jones/ really have reason to celebrate? With ruthless austerity cuts and London sitting eerily under the shadow of a police state Olympics, there are many who'd rather spend the jubilee fashioning a guillotine in their garden shed than flag-waving Ma'am and Co.

Greece, Spain and Ireland are collapsing, suicide rates increasing, but never mind eh old chap, let's crack out the Pimms and have a jolly old knees up in favour of a democratically unelected, divine-right-to-rule leader.

Over the 2-5 June duration we will see her Madj' buoyantly floating down the Thames on a flotilla of historical ships from across the Commonwealth, a Jubilee concert at The Mall (which the Beeb have declined to confirm spending on this modest summer fete) and oh, let's not forget the guest list: there's that nice man, Hamad Al-Khalifa, the tyrannical Bahranian ruler who controversially dined with Ms W earlier today.

As much as we'll all enjoy the bonus bank holiday piss-up, it's presence will dramatically impact the economy with an estimated £1.2 billion loss on the economy. The entire jubilee celebrations are costing an eyewatering £1.3 billion, over £9.5 million of which is funded by the taxpayer.

Whilst thankfully the taxpayer portion remains minimal in the all-round royal circle-jerk's expenditure, it begs the question: how can any of the public and private spending be justified when so many are suffering and having their means and quality of life eroded?

"Councils up and down the country and wasting public money on these celebrations whilst simultaneously cutting jobs which is hard to justify" fumes Graham Smith, CEO of Republic. "All of this pageantry will come at a huge cost to the public for no return and it will have a negative impact on the economy. Hundreds, maybe even thousands of our supporters will be going down to the banks by the Tower of London to protest against the pageant."

Smith has a marked point and it seems you don't have to be a staunch republican to acknowledge the cost to local authorities. Manchester City Council spent £40,000 on a jubilee banquet and garden yet only two weeks before the HRH's visit the council approved its 2012/13 budget and second year of its £170 million spending cuts programme. A total of 2,000 job losses at the council were confirmed as it announced the details of the first year of its cuts plan in 2011.

A glance around at public opinion illustrates people are no longer the forelock tugging, cap doffing subjects we're expected to be. Woking Council were branded 'mad' back in February as they announced their plan to spunk £27,000 on gifting each child in the borough a life-enriching, welfare-nourishing, ahem, commemorative mug.

And let's not forget how quickly Michael Gove's hair-brained proposal of the taxpayer funding a £60 million relaunch of Britannia sank like the proverbial doomed vessel it was.

One could argue the spectacle is a beacon of fun and hope amid all the doom-and-gloom but surely not when so much better-spent money is being haemorrhaged into the - fundamentally meaningless - proceedings? The nation is surrounding itself in pageantry, patriotic imagery and misty-eyed sentimentality - but it's all an amorphous, nebulous carnival serving as a hypnotic distraction from harsh reality and a reminder to remember our place in serfdom.

Billing itself as the "biggest and boldest anti-monarchy protest in modern times" Republic are staging an anti-monarchy protest at the Thames Diamond Jubilee Pageant. "We must question and reject the idea that we should all be brow-beaten into a fawning view of 'our marvellous monarch'. And we must put into practice our view that those who hold public office should be open to challenge and scrutiny" states their manifesto.

There's no denying Ma'am has shaken many a hand, snipped many a ribbon and does indeed believe the entire world smells of fresh paint but it appears we're slowly dissenting against the cultural indoctrination of venerating pomp and circumstance and ceremony. Especially when the world is falling apart at its seams economically, socially and environmentally.

Whether monarchist, anarchist, worshiper or agitator the GBP could do well to use the Jubilee as pause for thought, turning its back-slapping Imperialist introspection outwardly and seeing the greater issues both home and away.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1475385 2012-05-04T19:00:00-04:00 2012-07-04T05:12:04-04:00

Ellen Grace Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ellen-grace-jones/ experiments which promulgate Darwin's 'survival of the fittest' theory. Scientists claim we humans continue to be subject to the forces and whims of natural selection like other species.

"We have shown advances have not challenged the fact that our species is still evolving just like all the other species 'in the wild,'" posited Dr Virpi Lummaa, from the University of Sheffield's department of animal and plant sciences. "It is a common misunderstanding that evolution took place a long time ago, and that to understand ourselves we must look back to the hunter-gatherer days of humans."

The study, however, was nebulous in terms of expressing precisely what 'evolutionary changes' they found from the church records of almost 6,000 Finns born between 1760 and 1849.

An interesting experiment and indeed correct in that we are still evolving, however to attribute it to the Victorian, matter-based, Darwinian model of evolution is backward-thinking and flawed given the recent leaps and bounds in metaphysical sciences and physical historical evidence disproving linear evolution. The ideology we randomly mutated from ocean slime to our knuckle-dragging neanderthal long-long lost cousins to our current incarnation is one that's been dogmatically accepted into mainstream evolutionary hegemony without challenge until recent years.

"If you take Darwinian theory, make a 'scientific' principal out of it, put it into political action, then you have something like Nazi Germany" states the pioneering Dr Bruce Lipton, author of Spontaneous Evolution. Lipton believes it's 'cooperation not competition' which are the hallmarks of most natural orders.

Speaking in context of the current human-related environmental destruction of the planet, "Much of this is related to the concept of us having arrived here as accident, when in fact it's the opposite, there was purpose and design in the process. The relevance is that when we bought into the Darwinian theory we bought into a way of life that's based on survival of the fittest, but the actual theory of evolution is survival of those that cooperate."

But if Darwin was wrong, that beardy fella on a cloud must have made us, right? Well, no.

The latest science suggests we are intelligently designed - not by some sentient humanistic being from on high - moreover a higher, energetic, source intelligence. Einstein's Unified Field theory equation was completed in 2007. The breakthrough proves everything: matter (which derives from energy, which is what we're made from) all natural laws and processes link to one underlying, unifying consciousness - aka, God, Source, Allah, Yaweh - pick your favourite.

According to John Hagelin, leading particle and quantum physicist, "Everything that's been discovered about the universe in modern science for the last 3 centuries can be systematically derived from the Unified Field's compact expression. The self interacting dynamics of unity at the basis of life's' diversity."

"The space between things isn't empty, it's full" claims maverick physicist Nassim Haramein whose groundbreaking expansion of the Unified Field theory is changing the face of physics as we know it. "We're bathing in energy which is the fundamental source of all creation. This was known by ancient civilisations but was lost due to the advancements of physics. My theories are starting to show the source of everything, all the material world, is mostly space. It's the medium that connects all things."

Quantum physicist Amit Goswami PhD supports the existence of a God consciousness, "The evidence for God is within us, but to see it we have to be subtle. To live it, we have to grow. Mystics, contrary to religionists, are always saying that reality is not two things - God and the world - but one thing, consciousness. The problem with science has always been that most scientists believe that science must be done within a different monastic framework, one based on the primacy of matter. Quantum physics showed us that we must change that myopic prejudice of scientists, otherwise we cannot comprehend quantum physics."

The problem with the Darwinian vs Creationist altercation is because it's so polarised. Atheists feel obliged to cling onto the Darwinian model because until now the only answer was a religious, faith-based one which they negate. Trouble is, in our logical, left-brain thinking society we view religious and ancient texts as literal rather than metaphorically encoded, hence their denunciation. For the sake of its remembrance, truth was often encrypted in fables, myths and legends. The highly-charged, energised space between things Haramein speaks of is what the ancients - and religious - call spirit.

One explicit way in which mankind is evolving for sure is in terms of our consciousness. From the Arab Spring, to #Occupy, to other measured dissent, there is a huge global shift and awakening to the corrupt, control system matrix we've been locked into for so long.

The Maya, who were acute astronomers, mathematicians and scientists knew this and their precise Long Count calendar not just tracked time, but evolution of consciousness. The much discussed end of it being December 21st 2012. Contrary to Hollywood fear-mongering, it doesn't connote the 'end of the world', moreover the transition into a more enlightened, evolved age.

Engineer and scientist Maurice Cotterell studied the Mayan cycles of human evolution and discovered they corresponded remarkably with his sunspot cycles of magnetic emissions. "Research was carried out confirming modulating magnetic fields caused genetic mutations in developing cells in test tubes." Begins Cotterell. "Here we have the mechanism whereby the sun's radiation affects the magnetic field of the earth then the magnetic field of the earth shuttles up the genes."

Everything is energy - including us. Life is the interaction of magnetic vibrational fields and our evolution is subject to the cosmos, not random selection. There have been peak sunspot emissions and coronal mass ejections in 2012 so it's little surprise humankind is awakening.

Unlike Darwin, the Maya, ancient Hindus and Hopi Indians recognised evolution/time as cyclical. There is overwhelming global, physical evidence that vast, advanced civilisations preceded us: the technology in which to create, many of today's engineers assert we do not possess.

Off the coast of Yonaguni Japan, India and Cuba there are giant sunken megalithic sites and pyramidal structures. In Bosnia Europe's first pyramid was discovered and dated to 10,000 years plus. Geologist Dr Robert Schoch has accurately dated the Sphinx to be 7-9,000BC - throwing our mainstream historical timeline into chaos and in need of serious re-writing.

Despite our spiritually-impotent, techno-worshipping race's arrogance that we're the height of all that's ever been, we are not actually the apex of human evolution, as Darwin's linear theory would have us believe. Primordial soup was never our ancestor. Dr Lummaa's archaic suggestion we should, "look back to the hunter-gatherer days of humans" to understand ourselves is dangerously reductionist. Yes the past can inform us, but by limiting our evolutionary learning using an old-world paradigm will only hinder progress. We can waste time searching for Darwin's 'missing link', but it will never be found.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1403331 2012-04-04T13:34:31-04:00 2012-06-04T05:12:02-04:00

Ellen Grace Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ellen-grace-jones/ Daily Mail.

In case you've been living under a rock for the past 48 hours, on Tuesday self-confessed 'award winning TV producer, journalist and writer' Samantha Brick took the the DM to pen a sympathy-begging woe-is-me confessional about, "Why women hate me for being beautiful". Never a bridesmaid, declined promotions, our pitiful heroine laments the hard-life of a knock-out stunner. We see shots of Brickie and her gun-toting, beardy, tubby French hubby (FYI ladies: she advises us marrying a Frenchie will mean make sure you keep thin!) posing around their Franco-homestead.

Nothing too out-of-the-ordinary, right? Well given her entirely nondescript yet not-unattractive fizzog and figure, venomous incredulity ensued on the DM comments board, with over 5000 scathing comments and counting.

"April Fools day was on the 1st love!" Joked one poster. "I hate to break it to you, but you are a very ordinary looking woman. Judging by the article it's your cringeworthy self centered personality that people don't like. I am embarrassed for you" Sniped another.

Rather than let the storm of public hatred - which would better be directed at the decline of our economies or impending erosion of our internet freedoms - die down, the Mail rather connivingly gave Brick a longer piece of rope from which to hang herself by allowing her to pen a follow up response to her backlash audaciously entitled, "This bile just proves I'm right". Obviously seeing the excruciatingly high page impressions (and thus ad revenue) for her first article the Mail couldn't help but declare open season on Brickie again.

In her astonishingly naive response (or as I like to call it, Operation: Damaged Brick Control) she claimed she, "Even refaced the idea by explaining to the editor that I was fully aware I was setting myself up for a fall." Whilst it's fundamentally pretty damn spiteful for the DM to take advantage of her utterly misguided ego, Brick was willingly - bafflingly - complicit in her own downfall.

Brick continues to myopically mistake genuine caring sympathy for wanting-to-get-in-her-panties when a kind gent offered her some coffee; "While I was tearfully dealing with the emails and calls outside the supermarket, a young man approached me, offered to park my car and even get me a coffee. He could see I was having a tough time - and yes, my looks had helped me out again. " Girlfriend, please.

Sigh, I wouldn't like to truly speculate but it does seem very likely Miss Brick could be teetering somewhere along the scale of Narcissitic Personality Disorder - her comments, claims and delusions are textbook NPD, confirmed furthermore by her inability to listen to what many commenters were saying in the first place.

The latter aside, trolling articles such as these are beyond transparent and a carefully orchestrated exercise in both misogyny and exploiting vulnerabilities.

1) Take underwhemingly plain woman with obvious concepts of self-worth way above her station

2) Give woman platform from which to spout deluded boastings and divisive catty female stereotypes

3) BRING ON THE BACKLASH!

Feminist writer and friend, Sian Norris intelligently wrote on her blog that Brick's acquired nasty comments (unsubtly suggesting that she was in fact something of a beauty-free zone) were, in fact, the wrong way to respond, "As soon as we criticise a woman by bringing it back to whether she is attractive or not, then we are buying into the lie that the most important thing about a woman is whether she fits the beauty ideal."

Whilst indeed correct, the fact is that by making such bold, shameless assertions about her appearance coupled with astonishing arrogance, Brick literally laid down the gauntlet and in doing so welcomely invited others to scrutinise it. They're repulsed not just by her not-so-pretty-actually looks but by her overall attitude.

The sad thing here is that the issue of beautiful women experiencing hostility and alienation is one worthy of attention and addressing. As someone who's been on the receiving end of more than a few frosty cold-shoulders due to not really being that much of a back-end-of-a-bus-chaser myself, I can attest it is a very much present - and unpleasant - phenomena.

However rather than actually do this in a considered way (interview numerous sources, offer case studies, suggest what this means for modern feminism etc) it's a shame Brick simply chose to brag unprovable anecdotes and lacks the self-awareness to see that it could be her obnoxiously conceited attitude which has seen her perma-ostracised from girlfriends as opposed to her 'beauty'.

In doing precisely this she shot herself in the foot and invited the cold, unforgiving scrutiny of the GBP. But then I'm sure the Mail's commissioning editor would never have wanted Brick to, God forbid, write an intelligently researched, insightful article. A sensationalist, female claw-sharpening piece will always be the DM's modus operandi. Let's face it, we've all been trolled.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1392215 2012-03-30T16:25:11-04:00 2012-05-30T05:12:01-04:00

Ellen Grace Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ellen-grace-jones/
With all the subtlety of The Simpsons', 'Yvan Eht Nioj (Join The Navy)' Katy Perry's new video for her single 'Part of Me' is a flagrant and disturbing exercise in military propaganda, explicitly targeting young women.

After seeing her boyfriend locking lips with another lady, a distraught Perry catches a glimpse of an army recruitment sign quoting, "All women are created equal. Then some become marines."

Then, female pride duly swallowed: cuts hair, binds-up boobs, surrenders BlackBerry for boots, pow-pows some rifles, shimmies along assault courses and dances 'neath a giant star spangled banner whilst singing, "This is the part of me that you're never gonna ever take away from me."

Perry daubs on warpaint whilst using her cosmetic compact: oh-so cleverly implying signing-up is the urbane lifestyle choice for the cosmopolitan lady. The message is very clear: those fella's may do you wrong but the army is your lover and the State is your friend.

Feminist writer Naomi Wolf recently called for a KP boycott, writing on her Facebook, "It [Perry's video] is truly shameful... I would suggest a boycott of this singer whom I really liked - if you are as offended as this glorification of violence as I am." Partly correct, she forgets to add, 'falsification of reality'.

Heroic themes of camaraderie and valour + underpinning emotive heartbreak narrative = thoroughly romanticised, sanitised and deceptive presentation of true military life.

Perry herself claims, "This is one of the most aggressive videos I have ever done. It is an affirmation of strength, so I wanted to go the strongest route I could." Whilst it could appear 'pro-women' on the surface with all its gung-ho, who-needs-a-man? attitude, the video's twisted conceit of signing-up as a man-hating expression of revenge is sickeningly irresponsible given the irony that so many women in the military become a 'camp slave' to their male comrades.

Yes, behind the glossy, faux-empowering veneer of Perry's video, lies a dirty truth about the reality service women face. Last year 3,158 sexual crimes were reported within the US military, of those cases only 529 reached the courtroom. They're more likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than killed on enemy lines. Female toilets even feature signs instructing them not to go alone at night. One in three service women are raped. Yes, one in three.

Marines are programmed into becoming killing, dehumanized, empathy-free automatons, is it any wonder many commit these wicked, conscience-free acts?

Sexual abuse aside, let's not forget the deadly vaccines, the toxic, life-reducing depleted uranium weaponry, no death benefits if killed - sure, US military life really is a bundle of loyal comradeship and effusive high-fivin' teamwork, right? Contrary to what most join-up for, marines do not fight to defend country, they end up working for the UN, NATO and globalist corporations in imperial resource-grabbing wars - sadly, nothing to do with honourably serving ones nation.

KP's Army porn and the other recent blatant war ad psyop, Kony 2012, suggest the Military Industrial Complex are getting pretty trigger-happy with troop recruitment and foreign occupation. As economies implode and overseas military interventions are on the increase, these propaganda pieces serve as timely commercials for an army (literally) of fresh new, brainwash-able recruits. Whilst the ongoing message in Western mainstream media is that Syria, Iran and Uganda are bad guys, we're all being prepped that intervention is essential.

Militarisation themes in music videos are nothing new - more troublingly - within those of female pop singers. For her Hard video, Rihanna turned drill sergeant in a barren, nameless Middle Eastern province and Beyonce's battle against riot troops in her Run The World (Girls) video is set against a dystopic war-torn backdrop. Police state programming is alive and well.

As Edward Bernays, the godfather of public relations and US's chief psychological warfare expert wrote in his prophetic 1928 book, Propaganda, "In almost every act of our lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons [...] who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires that control the public mind, who harness old social forces and contrive new ways to bind and guide the world."]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1342354 2012-03-14T09:49:23-04:00 2012-05-14T05:12:01-04:00

Ellen Grace Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ellen-grace-jones/
One would have to have a heart of stone to not be moved by the plight of poor Jacob, the young Ugandan who stars in Kony 2012, the 30 minute documentary by charity Invisible Children which went viral this week. With 72 million views and counting, Kony 2012 exposes the evil atrocities by militia chief, Joseph Kony's rebel group, the Lord's Resistance Army which kidnapped children enforcing them into child soldiery.

Slick, big-budgeted, persuasive - and indeed - sensationalist it is hard at first to doubt the altruism and sincerity from the filmmaker, Jason Russell. Filmed in 2004 and released to little attention in 2006 Kony 2012 was recut and released (to the tune of millions of dollars worth of backing) on the 5th March this year.

Cleverly targeting the international youth demographic, the film is an impassioned call-to-arms. It ropes in celebrities and influentials to join the crusade in begging the State for intervention. We see heartstring-tugging footage of Russell discovering young Jacob in Uganda, pledging as his words repeatedly echo, "We are going to stop them..."

But when you go a little further down the rabbit hole, there appears to be an altogether more sinister agenda behind Kony 2012, far, far from the philanthropy it purports. Establishment fingerprints are all over it, it's so well choreographed and styled there is little that smacks of humble grassroots uprising. In truth, Kony 2012 is nothing more than an emotive war propaganda psy-op exploiting people's empathy and designed to get the public backing an occupation of Uganda whilst simultaneously lining the pockets of Invisible Children. Audaciously, deceptively selling international military intervention under the guise of 'humanitarianism', the film serves to drumbeat for war and Western Imperialism at its worst.

Kony 2012 documents how their social media 'Invisible Community' gained a groundswell of global donations and youth support thus enabling Ugandan schools to be opened and lives to be rebuilt. So far, so benevolent right?

Well, no, actually. After all the touching propaganda, what do Invisible Children offer as the solution? The film cleverly persuades viewers into believing that because US government 'doesn't care enough about Kony', they will only take you seriously if you buy a $30 Kony Kit containing posters and other 'get Kony' ephemera so his name will be everywhere and Uncle Sam won't be able to ignore the bad man any longer. And what do they purport to do with the funding? Why to fund, train and arm the Ugandan Army of course! The same Ugandan Army which rape, loot and pillage equally as much as the LRA and even recruits ex LRA child soldiers!

"It's undoubtedly hell on earth for those involved," Begins historian, economist and geo-political expert Dr Webster Tarpley. "But what are Kony 2012's demands? They say the Ugandan Army must be strengthened! Are they nuts? The Ugandan Army is party to the biggest genocide in the world since WW2, which was the Congo War, killing 7-8 million. Uganda invaded Congo and carved out the country."

That Kony himself is one hell of an iniquitous fella is not under question. It's that Kony 2012's dubious solutions to the problem only seem to further Western colonialist, corporate political agendas rather than the blighted Ugandan children. Joseph Kony is, in the big grand scheme of things, a two-bit, nobody warlord who's not been in action since he went into hiding in 2006. His atrocities in Uganda have been partly enabled by President Museveni - someone whom Clinton is a big supporter of. Given Museveni is committing far worse acts than Kony (even coming in third in last year's 'Worst of The Worst Tyrant' list), why Kony's highly bankrolled witchhunt isn't extended to Museveni too is at the very least, cause for serious questioning.

The film simperingly acknowledges, "All this was funded by an army of young people who put their money towards their belief in the value of human life. They gave a few dollars a month of what little they had." Yes, IC, Indeed they did.

Why then has a beyond paltry 32% of money raised gone to direct services in Uganda?
Why then does Invisible Children's accountability and transparency score two our of four stars on Charity Navigator?
Why then do it's directors allegedly receive salaries of up to $160,000?
Why then is Invisible Children Inc without an independent and external auditor?

A bit fishy, eh?

But, of course, what it all really boils down to as usual, is oil. Oil and whatever can be mined. In early 2011 at least 2.5 billion barrels were discovered along Uganda's border. An October 2011 report concluded it is also rich in cobalt, gold, iron ore, steel and other minerals. Whether consciously complicit or politically appropriated, Kony 2012 is furthering Western and United Nations neo-colonial self-interests masquerading as altruism. Whilst churning out gung-ho, 'power-of-the-people', 'let's turn the system upside-down' youth-appealing maxims, Kony 2012 simply plays lip service to what the US and UN actually want: hi-jacking other country's resources.

"The common denominator of all these African wars," claims Tarpley, "Is really that British and US want to drive the Chinese out of Africa, in particular this strategic important area as it's one of the main concentrations in the world for minerals and raw materials."

Complex, international, geopolitical humanitarian issues have been reduced to a, 'let's wade in and get the bad black man!' mentality. It's all very White Man's Burden.

What does the Kony 2012 phenomenon say about us? How readily we place faith and trust in a viral YouTube video, without further investigation into just who and what we are funding - however benevolent yet naively misguided our efforts are? It certainly taps our mood for social justice. For all its well-engineered blackmailing and shrewdly packaged marketing of 'war as humanitarian' to the anti-war left, if one good thing comes from the Kony 2012 (aside from the 32% that actually reached Uganda) it's that the young generation are capable of pulling together for a greater good and that philanthropy is alive and well.

That many of Kony 2012's youth demographic are becoming aware of the scam illustrates an awakening to a profound level of political and social consciousness. When this hits critical mass, there will be nowhere for the truth to hide and thankfully, further pulling together for an even greater good.
]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1311633 2012-03-01T19:00:00-05:00 2012-05-01T05:12:02-04:00

Ellen Grace Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ellen-grace-jones/ Blue Peter as part of my school's skipping team and winning the year six sports day sack race. Let it be said - I won't be bothering the Team GB Olympics squad anytime soon.

Not that I'll be losing any sleep, however, since it appears the 2012 Games are increasingly being revealed as a sick, corrupt feeding-frenzy for the 1% to line their coffers at the expense of the already struggling general populace. The private traffic lanes, the wealth flaunting, the taxpayer-footed VIP tickets - it's an athletic orgy of entitlement for a select minority.

Sure the sporting spectacle and its grandiose ceremonies are enjoyable, but peel away the Lycra, steroids and weepy national-pride and you'll reveal an ultimately rotten event which serves only its politicos, VIPs and corporate, earth-screwing, behemoth sponsors - Coca Cola, MacDonalds, Visa, Nike et al, you know who you are.

Len McCluskey, leader of Unite has got both parliamentarians and Olympocrats' panties in a bunch. On Tuesday McCluskey vocalised a proposed strike over their rejected pay deal for London Underground staff. His stance was that the continued attacks on public sector workers were, "So deep and ideological" that targeting the games would be justified.

"Our very way of life is being attacked. By then this crazy Health and Social Care Bill may have been passed, so we are looking at the privatisation of our National Health Service. I believe the unions, and the general community, have got every right to be out protesting." He added.

Earlier this week Cameron tried to convince us McCluskey's strike was, "Unacceptable and unpatriotic" while Clegg bleated, "At a time when we can showcase to the world that we are positively and optimistically putting on this fantastic event, he wants to bring people out on the streets."

Unpatriotic you say, Cameron? Just a shade hypocritical from the man behind the rather unpatriotically shafting of the working and middle classes, the vulnerable, students, the NHS, pensions - hell, just about any of the 99%. Clegg could also do well to note it's hard for said disenfranchised 99% to feel buoyantly 'positive and optimistic' when their very way of life is being dismantled by yourselves and the banking cabal you serve.

Forget the jingoistic bluster, hype and propaganda. People are angry and are no longer the blind, flag-waving serfs we are expected to be by the governing elite. Contrary to Cameron, Unite's proposal to co-opt the games is patriotism personified and whether or not the strike will be executed, its proposition is is something most should be getting behind. Given that sick and vulnerable patients will lie stranded in ambulances whilst a cavalcade of sponsors, dignitaries (perhaps even the odd athlete) speed by in their Mercs along one of the VIP lanes, London's transport system is already pretty screwed, strike or no strike.

Dow Chemical's £7m Olympic Stadium wrap sponsorship now hangs over the games like a noxious cloud of macabre gloom. Despite India's threat to boycott the games over Dow's liabilities with the 1984 Bophal disaster - causing the deaths of up to 15,000 - the lobbying to LOCOG to drop it fell on deaf ears. Last month's resignation-in-protest of Olympics sustainability body commissioner, Meredith Alexander underscores everything: "I believe people should be free to enjoy London 2012 without this toxic legacy on their conscience." She claimed.

Officially the biggest volunteer programme since WW2 (now there's a clue) like some neo-sporting Stasi, an army of 70,000 unpaid 'Games Makers' (codeword: 'Games Slaves') will spend a minimum(!) of 10 days toiling away - gratis, of course - to assist the farcical festival in running smoothly. Fortunately Seb Coe and his trough-swilling Olympic bureaucrat chums won't be working gratis: Coe and Paul Deighton, LOCOG CEO, earned a total of £365,507 and £777,964 respectively in the financial year 2009-10.

Lucky for some, eh?

Officials totally overlooked these games slaves - I mean, makers, accommodation needs and now many face the prospect of nowhere to reside in the capital for the event. Oversight? Or Indifference? Either way, sadly many of the willing apparatchiks will remain oblivious to their exploitation. In times where youth unemployment is at an all time low this is a vulgar, disgusting scheme, but fundamentally unsurprising given jobseekers are being forced into unpaid labour for globalist corporations like Tesco and Sainsburys.

Even if the games go ahead strike free, the police state level of security will render it closer to Hilter's 1936 Berlin Olympics than the high-spirited, fun-spirited athletic celebration they'd have us believe. The obscene, absurd security (SAS riverside bases, 12,000 police, 20,000 security guards, 300 MI5 agents) will not be deployed to protect us from 'terrorism' (unless false-flag, of course) it is there to combat the uprising masses. Security spending - which has rocketed from £213 million to £553 million - has been paid for by us to be used against us. This seemingly illustrates the games are indeed an exercise of authoritarian elitism.

As Martin Luther King once said, "The ultimate tragedy is not the oppression and cruelty by the bad people but the silence over that by the good people."

Should the unions strike it will cause some inevitable sabre-rattling from disgruntled commuters and games-goers, but that's a small price to pay for an internationally humiliated government and a significant vindication by the silenced 'good people'.

Should they not, I say, to those manning buses and ambulances: #OccupytheVIPlanes]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1297256 2012-02-24T04:54:50-05:00 2012-04-24T05:12:02-04:00

Ellen Grace Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ellen-grace-jones/ London Fashion Week, following this season's spectacle I cannot help observe how it's changed over the six years I've been attending. Oft, for the better, but also, regrettably, the worse.

LFW has never operated in the slick, highly bankrolled stratospheres of Paris, New York or Milan and has always been about fresh, creative new blood. However 2008's recession threw LFW headlong into a micro-crisis. The decline of abundant gift-crammed goodie bags and decadent post-show parties aside, it was the designers that really felt the financial pinch, and thus, their ability to secure funding for costly catwalk shows faltered. With venue hire costing upwards of 30k (that's not including production costs or models) increasingly more had to get enterprising about how to showcase their collections - if at all.

2010 saw the British Fashion Council's inaugural 'digital schedule' where imagination-rich, cash-poor designers could present their work via an artsy film rather than a pricey show. "This is a significant step in developing our digital strategy," claimed Caroline Rush, CEO of the BFC. "Enhancing designers' experience and reach through London Fashion Week is an important area of development for the future." This gave bubbling under upstarts like Cassette Playa, Danielle Scutt and J W Anderson a platform they wouldn't have otherwise afforded.

In 2008 less than 5% of designers held modest salon shows, this season it was 40% - many of whom were larger, established designers like Richard Nicoll. So the good news is that by way of their proliferation, salon presentations that were once ignored pre-recession have superseded their 'puny and irrelevant' taboo.

Somewhat ironically however, the diminishment of catwalk shows is inversely proportional to the fashion blogosphere explosion and in turn, rampantly eager LFW attendees. Back in the day LFW was only the preserve of a kinda semi-elite coterie of press, buyers and VIP's, however this new-fangled digital publishing democracy meant everyone and their mother was now a 'fashion writer'. Whilst this created a wealth of unique, intelligent fashion commentators, for every Susie Bubble there was a hundred self-serving narcissists with an even bigger platform from which to attention-seek.

Symptomatic of the Big Brother-esque 'anyone can be a star' mentality, many of this new lens-hungry, solicitous tribe do not attend LFW to produce imaginative, enlightened trend reports. The lesser-spotted blogger will be commonly observed preening around Somerset House in their most outlandish attire to get 'style-papped' for one of the many street style snappers ready to thrust their camera upon the most outré and vainglorious before they whine to long-suffering PRs about their measly 'standing' ticket. I know one self-entitled, self-styled 'stylist' who, upon requesting show tickets for the very first time demanded, unashamedly, 'front row seats'.

There is no better illustration of this blogger-takeover than the wrath of infuriated Grazia editrix, Paula Reed, whose second row view of the 2010 Galliano couture show was obscured by pubescent blogger Tavi's gigantic hair bow. Who were all these cheeky young upstarts?? How dare they hijack our 'frow' seats??

I pity fashion PRs. They are now caught between a rock and hard place with seating arrangements these days, more often than not faced with the publicity-gaining conundrum of, hmmm...

A) Credible journalist from respectable publication

or

B) Flash-in-the-pan blogger du jour

This line-blurring between legitimate press member and amateur self-appointed journo caused a brouhaha amongst the BFC, whom, for a while weren't sure what the hell to do with the blogger invasion and an ever-expanding press area. A separate 'blogger' registration was swiftly implemented in 2011 and bloggers found themselves banished from the press area, in exile around the cobbles of Somerset House, noses pressed up against the window, glumly looking on as press members chugged their Vitamin Water.

Celebrities have always attended fashion shows since, well, Yves Saint Laurent was popping those Xanax. Now we have random members of TOWIE. This season, as I took my seat I found myself whispering all too often to my accomplice, "Who the hell is that?" as paps wet their panties over Made In Chelsea rejects. Today's LFW 'frow' is peppered with indiscriminate, disposable variables of: celebuspawn (Geldofs) faux-reality nonsense (see above) and chart-bothering popstrels (Nicola Roberts, Pixie Lott). Dark times.

I like to think London Fashion Week serves as a kind of clothes-centric microcosm of the macrocosm of society. Its incarnations, evolution and attendees each season reflect the flighty preoccupations culture places on hierarchy, artifice and worth. Which, given the wealth of design talent showcased, is a real shame. Will the blogging phenomenon implode? Possibly. There are only so many 'look-what-I'm wearing-today-and-got-in-my-goodie-bag-at-this-party' blogs one can consume. As for the future of LFW? It will continue to magically bend and flex around the needs of those who consume it. ]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1273134 2012-02-13T10:40:11-05:00 2012-04-14T05:12:01-04:00

Ellen Grace Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ellen-grace-jones/ Daily Mail headlines, much sniggering ensued about - hoho - the irony of the publisher's political persuasion.

According to the Brock University academics, conservative politics serves as a kind of 'gateway' into prejudice against others and basically those with low childhood intelligence were susceptible (read: doomed) to grow-up as racist, God-fearing homophobes.

Leaping at the opportunity to cock a snook, the usually brilliant Charlie Brooker took to his column to pen the hilariously titled, When The Daily Mail Calls Rightwingers Stupid, The Result Is Dumbgeddon. Accusing the Mail of purposely trolling their readership, all Brooker really proceeded to do was lazily single out isolated dumb righty comments left by Mail readers beneath the article. Even as a lefty myself, Brooker's article kinda smacked of smug, "Hehe look at all those stoopid rightys" left-aggrandising.

Instead of cherry-picking comments which supported his rightys-are-dumb agenda, what Brooker could have done well to observe was that most of the Mail's highly rated green arrowed comments were actually in support of the left.

Which brings me to the the seeming decline of newspaper's diehard left-right, black-white readerships. Online newspapers (as opposed to those, you know, old fashioned papery things that flap around on the train and make your fingers grubby) virtually render their reader's political leaning obsolete given their ease of access digitally. In those olden days when one had to consciously schlep to your local newsie to buy your paper you were ostensibly faithful to a single publication. A staunch righty would march out for his Torygraph or Daily Mail and proud lefty his Guardian or Independent, but now one can traverse multiple papers with digital ease and thus: their core readership - whether left or right - is ultimately diffused.

Whilst the papers themselves retain their socio-political paradigm, their consumers don't.

Last month the Mail Online kicked the New York Times off its leading online newspaper perch, reaching 45.3m readers in December 2011. Is this figure entirely made from Bible-thumping, BNP worshipping knuckle-dragging righty's? I think not. Contrary to what much of the media would have us believe, the right aren't all belligerently jingoistic patriots and the left aren't all bleeding heart liberal socialists.

What the Brooker vs Mail vs Their Righty Readership debacle illustrates is that the childish hair-pulling and one-upmanship on both sides of the political spectrum is, unfortunately alive and well and in these unsettled times we operate in, perhaps dangerous.

From the evidence of what our political parties carry out once elected, more and more are awakening to the fact that the left-right wing political paradigm is little more than an illusion to keep us occupied with bickering and squabbling against each other rather than turn our attentions to the corruption that operates within both persuasions.

Liberal Obama was voted in under a euphoric sea of hope and change - we were awed by the propaganda and hearts and minds globally put faith in their new hero. He'd bring home the troops! He'd close down Guantanamo! This was the peace-loving-right-on-hipster-pres' it was cool to love. Nearly four years on and what do we have?

Guantanamo remains open and the Obama administration is haemorrhaging even more than Bush on military spending. While everyone was out partying on New Years Eve he snuck in the terrifying, unconstitutional NDAA act and passed a bill authorising $662 billion in military spending for 2012. A Gallup poll conducted last September saw Obama rated 'same' or 'worse' than his trigger happy predecessor.

When Clegg threw a volte-face on the Lib Dems tuition fee stance after morphing into ConDem coalition, the incredulity of lefties was palpable but given the proliferation of political flip-flopping, Clegg's actions were unsurprising. What have the ConDem coalition as brought us? Cuts to the most needy and vulnerable under the guise of austerity whilst simultaneously safeguarding banking buddies (Fred Goodwin's 'Sir' withdrawal was a token, meaningless gesture) and throwing ourselves gung-ho into imperialist, unecessary overseas conflicts we cannot damn afford.

Despite what their manifesto's may pledge, most Western politicians - Tory, Labour, Republican or Democrat - do not operate for the left or right they claim to represent, moreover their banking and capitalist corporate paymasters and lobbyists. Given how much more apparent this is becoming, at every election we still - bafflingly - show surprise and outrage to politicians back-tracking on promises they possibly never intended to keep.

Cognitive dissonance is hard to overcome but the sooner we collectively do it, the sooner the myopic, right-left mud-slinging stops.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1259810 2012-02-07T19:00:00-05:00 2012-04-08T05:12:01-04:00

Ellen Grace Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ellen-grace-jones/
Yes we all love a spot of moral outrage and thanks to naughty M.I.A's, ahem, 'finger malfunction' during Grand High Priestess Madge's Egyptian-Greco-Roman Superbowl spectacle, under the terms of M.I.A's contract, she now faces a fine to the tune of hundreds of thousands levied by the United States' Federal Communications Commission. Ouch.

Given the track was mimed and pre-recorded, evil side-eyes should be thrown at other parties for allowing this to happen rather than M.I.A herself. In a playground-esque blame game of 'I didn't do it, he did!' the NFL finger-pointed at NBC, "The NFL hired the talent and produced the half-time show," they cried! Whilst NBC are framing the NFL, "There was a failure in NBC's delay system. The obscene gesture in the performance was completely inappropriate, very disappointing, and we apologise."

M.I.A's camp just blamed nerves. Right. Cue Operation Damage Control.

Sure the bird-flip was pretty ill-judged - but when you book a provocative performer like M.I.A what did they expect? Given the utter degeneration and hyper-sexualisation of our current crop of female pop performers (Rihanna, Katy Perry, Gaga et al - you know who you are) in terms of debasing, offensive, inappropriate performances, M.I.A.'s middle-finger salute was little more than a cheeky nose-thumbing.

Now don't panic, I'm not gonna get all Daily Mail on your ass wailing, "Won't somebody please think of the children??" I'm no prude right-winger but this moral outcry over a daft rebellious gesture serves only to illustrate how Western society's collective moral compass is seriously askew. If we can froth and pant and seethe over a one second gesture yet simultaneously, gluttonously, ravenously consume toxic pop imagery damaging to impressionable young girls then I have to wonder what the hell is up?

The Parents Television Council accused the NFL of booking "performers who have based their careers on shock, profanity and titillation. Either the NFL and NBC will take immediate steps to hold those accountable for this offensive material in front of a hundred million Americans, or they will feebly sit back and do nothing."

I do wonder, how many of it's members have taken their daughter to a Nicki Minaj concert.

The recipe for an archetypal MTV music video now goes a little something like this: take one large slice of hooker-ish attire, mix throughly with a dollop of gyrating and crotch-flashing, add a splash of ghetto-chic, serve it up with S&M overtones and optionally season well with some dark, satanic symbology thrown in for good measure. Yummy!

A new pop star's contract is more Faustian pact than record deal and it frightens me how dumbed-down and culturally-opiated the West has become to accept this as the norm. Music videos are a hypnotic portal of lethal influence: the current pop landscape is awash with over-sexualisation, dehumanisation/transhuman, mutilation/ritual and militarization /police state themes. Clever purposeful programming to debase and disassociate us from social norms.

The age-old retort of, "It's not the pop star's fault it's the parents for letting them see it" is moot. That there should be parental responsibility is not in doubt - it goes without saying - but is it possible for parents to police the TV, internet, radio and magazine stands at all times? I think not. This imagery is omnipresent, pervasive and corrosive whichever way you look.

Anyway, all the above aside, Madge's turgid Gimme All Your Luvin' song was frankly more offensive than M.I.A's mid-finger-flip. Madonna's talent has always lied in hijacking a subculture before it permeates the mainstream and intelligently bringing it into our consciousness. For all her commendable gymnastic ability (homegirl sure worked those moves) her last few albums have been a case of idly rent-an-already-huge-star rather than appropriating a bubbling-under trend making it your own. It's literally a case of cool-by-association 'If I can't beat 'em nowadays, I may as well rope 'em in to make me cred.' Madge now appears more lazy coat-tail rider than the radical pop-pioneer she once was.

Maybe she only has herself to blame? After all, she flaunted those overtly sexual vibes in a pop arena first (albeit with subversion and wit) thus opening the floodgates for the new blood to follow, pushing her sexual agenda - both worryingly and potentially - to the point of no return.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1249311 2012-02-05T19:00:00-05:00 2012-04-06T05:12:02-04:00

Ellen Grace Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ellen-grace-jones/
Anyway, we're long overdue an outburst from the ugly daughter fearing, fat hater and in true KL style, he just delivered...

In talks about his recently launched 'affordable' KARL line with Vogue's Hamish Bowles, this time he's throwing ad hominem style assertions at the middle classes. Pitched as a cheaper-than-Chanel, pricier-than-his-H&M-collaboration, Unkle K's eponymous new collection caused a-buzz when it went live on Net-a-Porter last week.

When asked by Bowles to explain his decision to pop out a mid-price range Lagerfeld explained, "The middle class has not have enough class, that I think about the middle class."

Okay Karl, so you're on a self-elected crusade to make the 'middle' classier? Does he perceive those mortals not Chanel-clad to be floundering in a style-less sea from which he will rescue us with £245 sequin leggings and £95 cotton totes with his visage silhouetted upon?

Hmph...

Perhaps if Kaiser Karl tweaked the curtains - hell, even taken a stroll out of the ivory towers of Chanel and took a sniff around, he could do well to note this actually, already-quite-stylish-thank-you-very-much 'middle class' of which he patronisingly speaks is in rapid decline globally. His delusion knows no bounds.

As our economies implode under the careful, insidious orchestration by the banksters, the Western 'squeezed middle' tumbles lower and lower down the economic food-chain. The net worth of the middle fifth of American households has plunged by 26% in the last two years and the income of the median American family, adjusted for inflation, is lower now than in 1998.

With fewer and fewer job-prospects for recent graduates, inflation and tax-hikes it's bye-bye bi-annual-holidays - and crucially - disposable clothing income. Alas those halcyon days of a guilt-free £400 credit card splurge on one of your sleeveless biker jackets, Mr L, are long gone.

KARL launched internationally late January to much hype (hyperbole?) including a KARL app, pop-up shops and - hilariously - a 'Find Karl' maze game. One can't help conjure images of the ponytailed octogenarian abandoned and lost amid a labyrinth, desperately searching for his trademark perma-shades. Or something. Anyway, there are some OK pieces in the largely monochrome and silver collection. The black and white Blanca PVC/cotton shirt at £175 and metallic Batya blouse at £145 could well be wardrobe main-stays, but sadly, If this was indeed an attempt to bridge-gap between his H&M and Chanel collections then style-wise it certainly rings closer to the former than latter.

Averaging around £300, the footwear is seriously under-inspired, closer resembling bog-standard Faith/Office heels than anything around their own unjustifiable price. I'll save another £100 for a pair of Louboutins, ta Karl.

There are some seriously preposterous elements, however: most of all the £125 metallic Lagerfeld-esque silver collars. Memo to Karl: young women don't have your multiple-necks which need tucking into giant bespoke collars. Then again, given the faux-leather £70 versions have sold out on net-a-porter, perhaps they do...

The bottom line is thus: if indeed our hero did intend to drag the middle-classes up by the scruff of their necks from sartorial doldrums with KARL, instead of eye-wateringly priced gimmicky items (some, as tasteless as his poorly timed and observed remarks) a few more enduringly stylish pieces wouldn't have gone amiss. After all its hype, bluster and praise, I cannot help feel the lacklustre KARL collection is more emperor's new clothes than the squeezed middle classes.]]>