Author: R J Adams

American ladies, take note! A study last year from a team at Portsmouth University, in Britain, suggests women may be heading for saggy breasts by jogging without suitable bras. Researchers found that when a woman jogs her breasts move in a 3D figure of eight.

Now, being a man, I’m not sure if “3D” refers to the movement, or bra size, but either way it does nothing to keep the average female looking pert, especially as for every mile a woman runs her breasts bounce 148 yards.

According to a BBC report:

“The report found each breast moved independently of the body by an average of 9cm [3.5 inches] for every step taken on the treadmill.

With the average breast weighing between 200 and 300 grams, [8 and 10 ounces] this movement puts great stress on the breast’s fragile support structure…….”

So, take note all you sporty ladies out there. Next time you go jogging make sure you’re well supported. An ordinary bra only reduces bounce by about 38%, but a proper sports bra can decrease the springiness by two-thirds.

Or, as an alternative, there are a plethora of caring males out there always happy to jog alongside and offer a supporting hand, or two.

Well, we can dream, can’t we, lads?

BBC report HERE.

Filed under: Suspension prevention

While General Petraeus tries to persuade Americans the war in Iraq is being won, the Iraqi people themselves need no US general to help them make up their minds. A thorough and revealing poll of Iraqis organized by the BBC, ABC News, and the Japanese TV company, NHK, illustrates vividly the feelings of the Iraq people towards the invaders, their “surge”, and whether they should stay or go.

Anyone who has followed the Iraq bloggers during the war is better informed than most of the true situation in that country. One of the best was Riverbend of the blog, Baghdad Burning. She won awards for her writing, justifiably so, and then, quite suddenly it stopped on April 16th 2007 with a final post informing that she and her family had reluctantly decided to leave Iraq.

Nothing more was heard of Riverbend until just a few days ago, September 6th, when we learned she and her family finally managed to leave Iraq and had arrived safely in Syria.

Almost one in every six Iraqis have fled their homes since America, with the British trotting along behind, invaded that country in 2003. A total of over four million people.

Such figures are not part of General Petraeus’ report.

While we hear daily in the media of the dreadful losses to US troops in the country, and antiwar protesters harangue Congress to “bring the boys back home” to prevent further losses, hardly a soul cries out about the real reason America should get itself out of Iraq; the sheer hell-on-earth suffering it has caused to millions of innocent Iraqi men, women, and children.

If, the BBC/ABC/NHK poll figures are correct, and there seems little doubt they are, then between 70% – 80% of Iraqis believe all American forces should leave the country immediately. Given that George W Bush initially invaded to depose Saddam Hussein and “bring freedom and democracy” to Iraq, should America not then heed the democratic process? Iraqis have spoken, overwhelmingly, in favor of an American withdrawal.

Where is George W Bush’s democracy now?

Filed under: Oil or democracy?

“I, George W Bush, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim September 11th, 2007, as PATRIOT DAY………in witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand this fourth day of September, in the year of our Lord two thousand seven…..”

It is fitting to remember the innocent lives lost to the antics of religious and political madmen six years ago today. Terrorism, just like any government-sponsored war or military incursion, takes its toll mainly of the innocents. They have no wish to be involved. They may even hold views sympathetic to those of the perpetrators. Their only aim is to live in peace with all around them, and are unable to grasp why others fail to display similar feelings.

George W Bush has declared today – PATRIOT DAY.

Webster’s definition of “PATRIOT” is:

“one who loves his or her country and supports its authority and interests.”

And what, you may ask, is wrong with that?

At first glance, probably not a lot, but what if the “authority” and “interests” within that country become at odds with the views of its populace, or the interests of other nations? Is it still “patriotic” to defend the authority of a government obviously out of step with its own people, or inflicting suffering on other innocent nations from misguided or illegal acts?

Adolf Hitler and 1930’s Germany were condemned by history for their nationalistic political regime, whose principles were encapsulated in the Nazi Party.

Webster’s definition of “NATIONALISM” is:

“a sense of national consciousness exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups.”

Is a nationalist the same as a patriot?

No. But there’s a very fine line separating the two. On which side of that line do you stand?

Today’s American administration is not patriotic, it is nationalist. Those members of the Project for the New American Century – including Vice President Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Zalmay Khalilzad, I. Lewis Libby – are not patriotic. They are nationalists, just as surely as any member of the Nazi or Fascist governments of Germany and Italy pre-WW2.

Which side of the line are you on?

In the best traditions of George W Bush, his nomination of “Patriot Day” comes as no surprise. He could have chosen “Remembrance Day”, or simply, “9/11 Day”, but the chance to gain political points was just too unmissable. He, and his advisors, knew there were plenty of Americans still stirred enough by false pride to jump on the name as symbolic of the Great American Struggle for freedom and democracy for all, whether they want it, or not.

There’ll be plenty in this country saluting the flag; proclaiming America the greatest nation on earth; supporting, from the bottom of their hearts, the government and troops presently attempting to inflict “Americanism” on other sovereign nations…….

But, wait! Isn’t that “NATIONALISM”?

According to Webster’s definition, it is.

On which side of the line are you standing?

Filed under: Bedfellows