a2ed.com

composed and produced by, ed
album cover by, ed

The fourth track - 'rem....' (rem 4) - of eds backalley band's, REM album

Rules that came into force a year ago require any British citizen who wants to sponsor their non-European spouse's visa to be able to show they earn at least £18,600 a year, rising to £22,400 to sponsor a child, and a further £2,400 for each further child. 

A Home Office spokesman said the rules had been designed to make sure those coming to the UK to join their spouse or partner would not become a burden on the taxpayer and would be well enough supported to integrate effectively.

"High-value migrants would not be refused because their British spouse or partner was not employed," he said.

"They can meet the income threshold by having cash savings of £62,500 or through their own private income, for example from investments. We have also introduced greater flexibility for those holding investments to liquidate them into cash in order to meet the rules." - bbc

The deal is simply this. Either the British spouse is capable of supporting the non-EU spouse, or the non-EU spouse is capable of supporting the British spouse....and economy. Besides this being pretty much racist as it does not apply to EU citizens, it can also be seen as an effort to acquire ‘foreign financial aid’ from the excluded whom want to be included.

This is basically charity or 'foreign aid' that is being expected from 'high-value' migrant spouses that, in effect, subsidises the responsibilities and continuing fiscal irresponsibilities of the British elite.

If you look at the income threshold expected of migrant spouses of British citizens - £62,500 savings or private income or investments - one might not be blamed for thinking that the British government are hoping that migrant spouses can contribute to the support of the British economy, government, and people as opposed to the British and EU citizens themselves.   

How many Brits have £62,500gbp in savings, or likely to have that in a lifetime for goodness sakes. This is quite the impoverished nation when you look at the people. For instance, a £50 note is not something you see very often - whereas in singapore, $50 is as common as cockroaches. This is basically charity or 'foreign aid' that is being expected from 'high-value' migrant spouses that, in effect, subsidises the responsibilities and continuing fiscal irresponsibilities of the British elite.

ed

The Canon sx270 HS (this doesn't have wifi or GPS unlike the sx280). Just arrived by post an hour ago from Amazon. Had my blended breakfast of weetabix, walnuts, raisins, milk and yoghurt....yummy....and then got down to opening the box.

It's quite a nice camera actually. For some reason, I thought it would look crap. I was wrong. The grey-black version has a subtle, understated, straight-forward, no nonsense, and sleek and confident feel to it, and i like that. It is priced cheaper than the other colours....don't know why. I got it for 204gbp.

It's got a nice weight, or 'heft' as photographers like to call it. It's metal as well. Though if you got the blue or the red, it's going to look quite plastic because of the combination of the shine and the colour. But it's great in the grey-black combo.

Too bad it doesn't shoot in RAW though. If it did, i would surely keep it till it conks out. So, for me, an upgrade in the future is on the cards based on this point alone. Canon left out the RAW format, amongst others, so that people would do just that...capitalist sons of ....... Anyway, if you don't do photo-editing or digital art with photos, or print really big sizes - like i might do - this camera is pretty much perfect with its JPEG pics.

Another minor quibble i have with it is that there isn't room for my thumb to rest in the rear and you might end up triggering the some button-activated function behind. I wonder if Canon could perhaps stick the buttons and dials at the side instead of the rear....hmmm.

Some have whined about the lack of a touch screen. And others have whinnied about the focusing point (metering) being dead-centre and not movable. I don't find either a problem. When i use my Nikon D700, i prefer to lock focus and then recompose instead of clicking the focusing point around with the dial. Quicker that way. This camera allows you to lock-focus with a half-press and recompose. I like that. As for the absence of a touch screen. I'm not in danger of confusing this for a tablet, nor do i feel the need to touch-navigate it. Do my settings, and just shoot. Simple, and straightforward.

Not having the ability to share directly to social networking sites is another minus-point. The sx280 has WiFi, but no direct connectivity to social networking sites. So i went for a sx270. Again, Canon obviously left out this functionality to give people a reason to upgrade.

It has a great 12megapixels which is just about perfect for the 1/2.3 sensor size of compact cameras - hence, less noise, less noise-reduction blurring used by the camera on the pictures, and great low-light shots. The 12mp and Digic 6 processor used in this model is said to be the perfect combo. So, great.

I'll do test shots and vids at the Pet Shop Boys 'Electric Tour' concert at the London o2 Arena on the 18th of this month and post them up thereafter. The 20x Zoom would certainly be sufficient.....even if one was seated way back and up high like i was at the Depeche Mode 'Delta Machine tour' concert I went to on the 29th of May at the o2 Arena. Even if seated at the back, you'd be able to get right on the stage with a 20x zoom. But i didn't have this camera back then, so boo hoo. Looking forward to using it at the Santana concert next month at the Wembley Arena too.

Pros: 12megapixels, Digic 6 Processor, 20x Zoom (25mm-500mm)

Cons: long-winded sharing, ugly-looking (in my opinion), larger than competitors

Conclusion: I got it. A great concert/general use camera.

In looking for a camera for the upcoming Pet Shop Boys 'Electric' Tour concert at the London o2 Arena on June the 18th, i looked at the Sony WX300, Sony DSC-HX50, Panasonic Lumix TZ40, and the Nikon s9500, and Canon SX270. I settled, most happily, with the Canon sx270. It's just too bad that i didn't get this camera for the Depeche Mode 'Delta Machine' Concert (image below) i just went to last week on the 29th of May, also at the London o2 Arena.

No, i'm not a silly Canon 'fanboy'. I go with quality, not brand loyalty. The cameras I've used so far are the Nikon F4/F5/F6/D700, the Mamiya 7II, and this is my first Canon, albeit a compact. But the combination of specs in the Canon for a compact basically beats the competition by quite a bit from the sample shots i've seen at 100% view. At small print sizes or viewing on computers, etc, the difference between any of the aforementioned models aren't significant. However, this is going to be more obvious if you're printing larger than the normal 'consumer' sizes.

The following are the points i considered.

12MP

..........

The camera not having more than 12 megapixels is a BIG plus point as that means less noise > which in turn means less noise-reduction being used on the photo by the camera > which means that images look quite sharp when you view the image at 100% instead of looking like a watercolour/smudged.

That is important if you're going to print larger images. In other words, in terms of image quality, it is going to beat all those compact cameras with 1/2.3 sensor-sizes sporting higher megapixels. Don't fall for the marketing ploy that more megapixels = sharper images. That is simply NOT true.

In low-light conditions, this camera is going to produce better quality images than, say, the Nikon s9500, the Sony WX300, or the Lumix TZ40 - all of which screws up the images by offering higher megapixels which in turn leads to more noise, which in turn leads to more noise-reduction/blurring used to make the image acceptable. Sony is said to be the worst for this range of cameras.

Digic 6

............

With the improved Digic 6 processor, which Canon has strangely debuted in this compact camera - instead of, say, in its HX50V 1200mm zoom camera - we are also promised less noise. So, less noise because of the 12megapixels + less noise because of its Digic 6 processor. Low-light shots are going to be quite impressive, even when shooting with higher ISOs.

Higher ISO means letting in more light so that the image is brighter even in low light. Generally, shooting in higher ISO also means more noise is introduced. The combo of 12mp and the Digic 6 processor means that even with higher ISO shooting, there will be less noise than can usually be expected when shooting this way.

20x Zoom

.................

That's 25mm to 500mm zoom. And it is Optical zoom, not Digital zoom. That means the zoom is going to be sharper. Of course you have the option of zooming past the optical limit to the digital zoom, but i wouldn't normally use that as it degrades the quality of the image/video significantly.

Anyway, the 20x zoom is really great for a camera this small. Of course, if you want even more zoom, you can go for the Canon HX50v which offers 1200mm zoom. For an idea of what that means, you can zoom on the moon until the moon just about fills your entire frame. And it's sharp too! And the HX50v also offers 12megapixels which is perfect for its 1/2.3 sensor size - though i'm wondering why Canon didn't increase the sensor size given the significantly larger size of the camera body so that more pixels can be thrown in.

Misc

........

The Canon Powershot SX280 comes with wifi and GPS, and the SX270 does not. That is the only difference. Sharing to social networks with the SX280 is via the Canon Gateway and from accounts, you cannot share directly to social networks like you might with, say, a tablet.

For myself, i went for the SX270 as immediate sharing is not important to me. I could bring my tablet along and wifi the images on the camera to it and then upload, but i don't see the need for that either as i'm not a journalist, and i prefer to post-process my photos as well. The price difference between the two is about 30gbp.

There has been a large increase in anti-Muslim incidents since the murder of a British soldier in Woolwich, an inter-faith charity has said.
Faith Matters, which runs a helpline, said they had received 162 calls since Wednesday's attack, up from a daily average of six.

A number of people have been charged after allegedly offensive comments were made on social media websites.

Drummer Lee Rigby was killed near Woolwich Barracks on Wednesday.

Shortly after his killing, 28-year-old Michael Adebolajo was filmed by a passer-by saying he had carried out the attack because British soldiers killed Muslims every day. - bbc

The UK is preparing for weekend clashes with right-wing extremists and copycat terror attacks after the killing of British soldier Lee Rigby in Woolwich.

Police have arrested three people ahead of planned protests in Newcastle.

The English Defence League and Newcastle Unites are both holding marches and demonstrations in the city centre on Saturday afternoon. - ibtimes

Oh crap. Why did all this nonsense have to happen now. I've got a DM concert to get to on the 29th. Now, I'll have to think twice as i might be a victim of this 'backlash' given I'm not white, or pinkish white, or whitish pink, or whatever colour 'white' people are supposed to be. But then again, I'm Caucasian like them. Just a brown-tinged one that is. But I think that argument will be wasted on the EDL.

Well, the Left in the UK did warn that all this might happen before Britain joined America in their war on those who dared to do to them that which they do to others via embargoes, the Israelis, puppet governments and tyrants (which includes that git Saddam). The British Left, of which I'm a supportive part, certainly had commonsense with regards to this issue. You hit people, they are going to hit back. Plain and simple. So leave them alone. All hail commonsense! Calling them 'terrorists' isn't going to change that fact. It might enable us to have short-term memory with regards to our sins, but we have sinned nevertheless. That isn't a justification of terrorism, but commonsense.

It's best we stop using the word 'terrorism' as it simple means 'very very bad people' and relieves us of the need to wonder why these 'very very bad people' do what they do because 'very very bad people do very very bad things' and it is as simple as that.

Now what these prats whom are behind the anti-Muslim backlash are doing, in effect, is protecting the right of the western elite to to knock others without the need to worry about consequences. History shows whether I'm talking nonsense or not. I abide by the inductive theory, that is, I allow an impartial appreciation of facts to formulate my opinions.

If anyone wants to allege that I'm 'supporting terror' or any such nonsense, just one simple question, 'who started first', and 'who continued to do so' till all this happened. The answer to it will reveal who the 'terrorist' is, or what coaxed the 'terrorist' out of the woodwork.

The aim here isn't to point fingers, but for all guilty parties to realise the error of their ways and say, 'sorry mate, i've been a twat, so i promise not to be one again'. It's simple really. For anything to be resolved, we need honesty and remorse. That isn't a 'support of terrorism', it is a support for peace based on respect for all.

Not asking these discomforting questions is that which incites 'terrorism' as it allows one side to do what they do so that the other side will react the way they do.

It's best we stop using the word 'terrorism' as it simple means 'very very bad people' and relieves us of the need to wonder why these 'very very bad people' do what they do because 'very very bad people do very very bad things' and it is as simple as that. This is the scientific age mate, there is a reason for why people do what they do. Many have moved on from the belief in the 'devil', but now want to revive him in the form of 'terrorists' who do what they do simply because they are evil, like the devil. There is a reason, a cause, and an effect. If we don't want to consider that, then we open ourselves to allegations that we don't want to think about that because we might then realise that we played a significant part in starting it all.

The aim here isn't to point fingers, but for all guilty parties to realise the error of their ways and say, 'sorry mate, i've been a twat, so i promise not to be one again'. It's simple really. For anything to be resolved, we need honesty and remorse. That isn't a 'support of terrorism', it is a support for peace based on respect for all. Not asking these discomforting questions is that which incites 'terrorism' as it allows one side to do what they do so that the other side will react the way they do. Think about it.

For goodness sakes. Now who do i look for for a refund of my DM tickets.

A soldier killed in a suspected terror attack in south-east London is expected to be named later, while two men remain under arrest in hospital.
The soldier's family have been informed.

Shortly after the killing in Woolwich, one man - his hands covered in blood- was filmed by a passer-by, saying he carried out the attack because British soldiers killed Muslims every day. - bbc

The following are comments by ed at various locations.

...

Don't ask me whether i support the 'terrorists' or the 'west'. The only side i'm taking is the commonsense one. Now all we have to do is to figure out what that is. Hope you can help.

The War on Terror' is just a clash between two peoples resulting from two conceptions of what nationality means. One believes in a sense of family based on geographical boundaries, and the other, one that transcends it.

The day the UK joined Americas war on those who took the americans to task for doing unto them what the americans wouldn't want done unto themselves, I could only shake my head with disappointment - being quite the Anglophile most of my life.

That made all that transpired thereafter 'retaliation'. I may not like it. But it is what it is. Logically speaking that is.

....Though I'm sure it is most self-absolving and comforting to think that the west were just sitting there minding their own business when the big bad turburned wolf came over from the middle-east and started lashing out at them. Wish that were true, then right would be so easily distinguished from wrong, and we can know for sure that the term 'terrorist' has been accurately applied.

...

I don't support what happened in Woolwich, just as i don't support that which incited it.

...

The best defence against war/terrorism is to not cast the first stone.

...

The BBC reporter reporting on this said that the attacker was 'Muslim in appearance'. Later, he said that he was just quoting the police. My question is, what is 'Muslim in Appearance'. Perhaps people ought to take a trip to Mecca, and realise, like Malcolm X did, that Muslims come in all shapes, sizes, appearance, and fashions.

For myself, i thought the bloke looked like a rapper.

People might think I was a Muslim - though i'm Catholic. Perhaps i ought to invest in a big-ass Crucifix and dangle it around my neck. But then again, i'll have to watch out for those atheist fundamentalists whom are staunchly against religion.

...

What i'm going to say about the Woolwich attacks is going to be quite disconcerting, but it's logical, so has to be said.

As i said to an English friend of mine in town the other day, if there were enough Indians in the UK during colonial times, would the British military have massacred as many as they did in India? Or would the British elite have caused the deaths of millions of Indians in their demand for cash crops. No. They would be fearing a backlash by Indians living in the UK. Hence, they would be more mindful of what they do elsewhere given the fact that they do not have a 'safe zone' behind their borders to retreat to after doing what they do overseas right.

Globalisation challenges the comfort zones of pre-globalised periods where people always had the option of taking cover in foxholes delineated by the nation's borders.

Given the fact of globalisation, and the increasing movement of peoples from all over the world to all over the world, people anywhere are deprived of the 'safe zone' option. In other words, Globalisation is straining against the fetters of the nation-state's idea of the Family.

I take this as an opportunity to take on a more vigilent and responsible role in checking on the activities of our democratically elected governments.

This whole 'terrorist' thing is just an attempt by the global populace to contend with the phenomenon of globalisation. Basically, globalisation challenges the comfort zones of pre-globalised periods where people always had the option of taking cover in foxholes delineated by the nation's borders. Given the fact of globalisation, and the increasing movement of peoples from all over the world to all over the world, people anywhere are deprived of the 'safe zone' option. In other words, Globalisation is straining against the constraining fetters of the nation-state's idea of the Family.

Predictably, people are choosing the easiest option and calling for, 1) the expulsion of those whom maintain cross-national allegiances, 2) demanding that foreigners become 'moderate' as opposed to 'extremists'. With regards to number 2, the two terms can be paraphrased with moderate=nationalised and extremists=transnational. Like i wrote just after 11/9, "the War on Terror' is just a clash between two peoples resulting from two conceptions of what nationality means. One believes in a sense of family based on geographical boundaries, and the other, on that transcends it."

In other words, to be 'moderate' is to basically mean that one severs all connections with those they see as brothers and sisters though they may not share the same nationality.

However, this is a one-sided argument because the UK, for instance, did not see a problem joining the americans in their 'war on terror'. So i have to wonder why they think it a problem when some British Muslims joined their counterparts in other parts of the world in their 'war on (western) terror'. The west, i have to say, is being petulantly juvenile about this whole thing actually. I take this as an opportunity to take on a more vigilent and responsible role in checking on the activities of our democratically elected governments.

That's it for the logical take on the Woolwich attacks. I wrote the above not because I agree with it, but because I can't prove it to be wrong.

Live Long and Prosper. Nanu Nanu.

ed

David Beckham left the pitch in tears as he completed the final home match of his 20-year career.

"I want to say thank you to everybody in Paris - to my team-mates, to the staff, to the fans," Beckham said as he addressed PSG supporters after the final whistle.

"It's been very special to finish my career here. It could not have been any more special.
"I just feel that it's the right time [to retire]. I feel that I've achieved everything that I could in my career.

So this ball-kicker is tearing because he's playing his last game before retiring. Yeah right. Crying because of the great memories of earning millions for kicking around a ball, and getting the religious worship of millions of juvenile-minded 'fans'.

Some idiots even praise this guy for his charitable donations. Who cares what this git 'donates'. If i rob you of all your money and then 'donate' a portion of it to charity, are you going to kiss my ass too?

If we don't talk about what can be justifiably earned, the 'charity' of these parasites is borne of anything but justice.

If i rob you of all your money and then 'donate' a portion of it to charity, are you going to kiss my ass too?

If you think about it, if people weren't stupid enough to give billions to their royalty, celebs, economic elite, etc, we would have found a cure for cancer, ended global poverty/hunger/starvation/etc. These parasites and their unthinking fans form a symbiotic union that keeps all of us bemoaning the consequences of our oversights.

The 'celebs' of these times serve as the bridge between the economic elite and the peasants - that means YOU - whereby the masses have someone to identify with so that they would take more kindly to the oppressive political and economic elite. It's a simple logic. If we don't mind according money and privilege to celebs we can identify with, we become more likely to never mind the power and privilige of the rest of the oppressive elite either. You could say that the celebs you worship are the Public Relations department for the elite who run the entire system.

If we don't mind according money and privilege to celebs we can identify with, we become more likely to never mind the power and privilege of the rest of the oppressive elite either. You could say that the celebs you worship are the Public Relations department for the elite who run the entire system.

If you don't question the billions you give to your loved celebs because they do what you love, then when you do question the rest of the elite who exploit you, you'll only question them for how they do it, but not the billions they get from you whilst they do it. Hence, your resistance to them will inevitably become less vociferous, if at all.

The first thing celeb-worship does is to present as alright the fact that they are laughing their way to the bank with the money that can be used to end much of global suffering in a month or so. Once that has been achieved, people will cease to question the money hoarded by the rest of the topmost elite - which serves as the basis of their power over you.

It's just like how the so-called royalty of the past, and of the present in some locales, ally themselves with the Church so as to present themselves as holy, or holier, than thou. But the difference between the saints of the past and the present is that those of the past stand for self-sacrifice, whereas those of the present stand for greed. You cannot expect the Congregation of Fans of these days to appreciate these points.

When are people going to get smart.

ed

composed & produced by, ed.
genre: dance

Recent Articles	Recent Comments
Recent Posts Thumbnails Blogger Widget	Powered by Disqus

eds Backalley Band: REM 4 (rem....)

Non-EU migrant spouses expected to support British population

Canon sx270 HS. First Feel.

Camera Review: Canon Powershot SX270/280 HS

Post-Woolich Anti-Muslim Backlashes and Depeche Mode

The Myth of 'Terrorism' and the Woolwich Attacks

Why David Beckham can Fuck Off

eds Backalley Band: Salah al-Din

ed