0 com

The Splendid Thief!

Few people do realize the difference between the art of stealing and plagiarism. For a starter, let me simply add that plagiarism, to whoever doesn't know, means stealing the works of an artist, whether a musician, a poet, a photographer or a painter.
Let's try to point out few factors that are perhaps causing this phenomenon to grow:
First and foremost, the Internet; one of the main drawbacks of the Internet is that you can find anything and everything you need online, it's like everything is provided, but nothing about the real author is given credit to.
Second, we have the withdrawal of the appreciation of art in some societies, that some people steal without knowing that stealing art is just like stealing money, it's worse; your ideas are spread with no credit, you're an astonishing, robbed artist. How poor is that?
In a better society, stealing art can get you sued. See? Think about it. Think about your likeness to the things you see, hear or read, they impress you, right? Think about the effort done in this.
I never realized how plagiarism would feel until I saw couple of my friends struggling to prove the ownership to their works. It pissed me off, as if I were the author, I read their work in other sites, given no name to, I could put myself in their shoes-if I did that, I'm going to feel raged!
However, the art of stealing isn't hard to master. It implies stealing but not stealing, taking ideas to inspire, making them your muse, only to help you. Or giving credit to things that need it-either way, the author must be named, even if unknown or forgotten to you, it's not hard to say "copied", "inspired" or even "stolen".
Whatever silly thing you do and publish online will get credit, even if you don't believe in it, and when it is plagiarized, you will love it, you will appreciate it, because after all you're the master of your own ideas.
Bottom line is, be a proud, splendid thief!
0 com

I Breathe Writing!

I'm writing. I'm writing like a crazy writer who is overflowing with muse, who writes like tomorrow is not coming, as if I need to tell the world the things that matter, and the things that don't.
I write because I want to, not because I have something to say-and wisdom only comes as I go by. Because I believe a pen is mightier than a sword. Because, life? I can portray it in the emotions I write with, and the words I spell. I can create something right now that will change the world, and if I want to, I will, I can, because I believe!
Words are my best friend, they run in my veins like blood, rushing so hard at times of inspiration, and at times of writers' block they're still there, assuring me that there's always muse to come, I just need to open up my heart so that my blood will be flowing again with powerful words. Even words that resemble silence and stillness speak to me more powerfully than words that resemble destruction and misery.
I write because I believe in Charles Peguy's words: A word is not the same with one writer as with another. One tears it from his guts. The other pulls it out of his overcoat pocket.
I write as if I sing, as if I paint, as if I live..I breathe words that only resemble me.
I write because I'm alive, and I'm alive...because I write!
0 com

Able Was I!

I found this to be pretty damn smart!


One French Republican, by writing and analyzing, has produced the following:–












Which, being arranged in the form of a sentence, gives,

"Napoleon on o leon leon eon apoleon poleon"–which is the Greek for

"Napoleon, being the lion of the people, was marching on, destroying the cities!"

– Appleton Morgan, Macaronic Poetry, 1872

0 com

Between bottled water and tap water

Ever since the phenomenon of the Dasani bottled water was on, I actually started suspecting, but not because of the water, because of the bottle itself. Plastic bottles are usually not healthy when used a lot, since many of them are actually recycled. So anyway the question is on: Bottled water or tap water?


Here's the article I found online about both..


Bottled water does not contain any harmful chemicals, but some people (especially environmentalists) are wondering if the production process puts unnecessary strain on the world resources. That’s because bottled water production uses a lot of fossil fuels. The bottle is made of plastic, which must be melted at a high temperature (using machines powered by electricity or gas) and then once it has been filled, it must be delivered (a process that once again relies on fossil fuels. Many bottled water cases are also made of plastic wrap and cardboard which help prevent the contents from being crushed or developing leaks during the transportation process.

Furthermore, the plastic bottles are often discarded and are rarely sent to recycling centers. So there are millions of plastic water bottles that are left in landfills, or even more sadly, thrown into the oceans and rivers by trekkers or vacationers. Like most plastics these bottles take a long time to degrade and will often release toxic fumes.

Environmentalists feel that this is an environmental hazard that can be completely avoided if people did not buy into the marketing myths sold to them by manufacturers, who claim that their water is safer and better than what people would get from the tap. However tests show that whether the water was from some Swiss spring or from the faucet in the kitchen there is hardly any difference in the taste or the quality. Tap water is also very safe because groups like the Environmental Protection Agency have strict rules about water safety and they make sure that water treatment plants are regularly tested.

Source: Brainz
2 com

If you hate reading, Read this!

Few days ago I was talking with a friend about people who hate reading; it's just so sad that some people prefer going out with friends and receive more fun than to read a book and learn how to give and inspire others.
So, I picked some reasons that would make you indulge with the world of readers:

1) The smell of a book to a reader is like the smell of the rain to a dancer.
G.R Gissing said: "I know every book of mine by its smell, and I have but to put my nose between the pages to be reminded of all sorts of things. "

2) A book is about words and emotions: words are for the brain and emotions are for the heart. It will teach you how to use your brain once, but never neglect your heart's desires.

3) At least there is one beautiful idea, in every book, that needs to be spread, if you want to change the world, a book is one of your guides to it!

4) If you find relish in reading, you'll find relish in writing (Of course if you try).

5) A book teaches you to look into the details of everything, be it ugly or beautiful. It will teach you to describe every tiny thing in the world, with a thousand words.

6) It will also teach you how to look at the big picture. E.g if it's a novel, the descriptions of the protagonist, the eyes, the walk, the body figure, the attitude and etc. will help you visualize the character, each person according to their imagination.

7) If a book resembled a part of your life, be it bad or good, your one thought will be "I'm not alone".

8) Buying an expensive book will force you to read it, and you'll gradually fall in love with it, and finally learn the beauty of spending money on things other than technology.

9) It's the most useful hobby that will broaden your imagination and the way you look at the world around you.

10) And finally, sharing a good book is like sharing your life's lessons written on paper, by someone else, who doesn't know about you, but who somehow felt the same way you did while writing.

Remember this: "Books let us into their souls and lay open to us the secrets of our own. "
0 com

Here's something to remember

I'm here to talk about the Gulf War and the Depleted Uranium Effect, so for a starter:
"To be exposed to radiation from uranium, you have to eat, drink, or breathe it, or get it on your skin."

I don't know why but I really want to talk about this issue, that has been long, long forgotten.
I don't know why do we, Egyptians, hate Iraqi people that much, if it's for something then it's because we're shallow and could never be more superficial. How can you even say these words "ya 3am da America 7alal feehom"..? I mean..what?? Are you by any means serious?
Okay here's a thing: We're on the borders with Palestine..when was the last time we sent them aids? Did we ever try? Look at what people are calling us. Karma is always there you know!
Let's take this Iraqi issue as briefly as possible :
1-Effect of Uranium:
Normal functioning of the kidney, brain, liver, heart, and numerous other systems can be affected by uranium exposure, because in addition to being weakly radioactive, uranium is a toxic metal.
That's in addition to causing cancer, vomiting, diarrhea, albuminuria, chronic fatigue, rash, ear and eye infections, hair and weight loss, cough. May be due to combined chemical exposure rather than DU alone.
Worst of all: DU remains radioactive for about 4.5 billion years.

2-Consequences of the war:
  • On May 2002, 159,238 veterans have been awarded service-connected disability by the Department of Veterans Affairs for health effects collectively known as the Gulf War Syndrome.
  • There were photos of infants born without brains, with their internal organs outside their bodies, without sexual organs, without spines, and the list of deformities went on and on. There also were photos of cancer patients.

Take a look..
  • Cancer has increased dramatically in southern Iraq. In 1988, 34 people died of cancer; in 1998, 450 died of cancer; in 2001 there were 603 cancer deaths. Boys and girls were suffering from leukemia. Most of the children die, the doctors said, because there are insufficient drugs available for their treatment.
3- Geneva Convention and International Humanitarian Law:

  • The fourth Geneva Convention affords protection to civilians, including in occupied territory.
(The bulk of the Convention deals with the status and treatment of protected persons, distinguishing between the situation of foreigners on the territory of one of the parties to the conflict and that of civilians in occupied territory. It spells out the obligations of the Occupying Power vis-à-vis the civilian population and contains detailed provisions on humanitarian relief for populations in occupied territory)

International Humanitarian Law:
  • A lawyer with the International Educational Development/Humanitarian Law Project said: there are four rules derived from all of humanitarian law regarding weapons:
  1. Weapons may only be used in the legal field of battle, defined as legal military targets of the enemy in war. Weapons may not have an adverse effect off the legal field of battle.
  2. Weapons can only be used for the duration of an armed conflict. A weapon that is used or continues to act after the war is over violates this criterion.
  3. Weapons may not be unduly inhumane.
  4. Weapons may not have an unduly negative effect on the natural environment.

"Depleted uranium fails all four of these rules."



And here is the map of the places of DU testing, victims and misuse.
And lastly:
  • "The cause of all of these cancers and deformities remains theoretical because we can't confirm the presence of uranium in tissue or urine with the equipment we have." Said a British-trained oncologist in Iraq.
So do you really want to remember something? There are a thousand forgotten casualties on our Earth.
0 com

End War?

Here's something I couldn't actually fathom, nor does it convince me. But it's quite interesting that someone had all this hatred for war.
Check it out..a little long but very intriguing!

Tesla inherited from his father a deep hatred of war. Throughout his life, he sought a technological way to end warfare. He thought that war could be converted into, "a mere spectacle of machines."

In 1931 Tesla announced to reporters at a press conference that he was on the verge of discovering an entirely new source of energy. Asked to explain the nature of the power, he replied, "The idea first came upon me as a tremendous shock... I can only say at this time that it will come from an entirely new and unsuspected source."

War clouds were again darkening Europe. On 11 July 1934 the headline on the front page of the New York Times read, "TESLA, AT 78, BARES NEW 'DEATH BEAM.'" The article reported that the new invention "will send concentrated beams of particles through the free air, of such tremendous energy that they will bring down a fleet of 10,000 enemy airplanes at a distance of 250 miles..." Tesla stated that the death beam would make war impossible by offering every country an "invisible Chinese wall."

The idea generated considerable interest and controversy. Tesla went immediately to J. P. Morgan, Jr. in search of financing to build a prototype of his invention. Morgan was unconvinced. Tesla also attempted to deal directly with Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain of Great Britain. But when Chamberlain resigned upon discovering that he had been out-maneuvered by Hitler at Munich, interest in Tesla's anti-war weapon eventually collapsed.

By 1937 it was clear that war would soon break out in Europe. Frustrated in his attempts to generate interest and financing for his "peace beam," he sent an elaborate technical paper, including diagrams, to a number of Allied nations including the United States, Canada, England, France, the Soviet Union, and Yugoslavia. Titled "New Art of Projecting Concentrated Non-Dispersive Energy Through Natural Media," the paper provided the first technical description of what is today called a charged particle beam weapon.

What set Tesla's proposal apart from the usual run of fantasy "death rays" was a unique vacuum chamber with one end open to the atmosphere. Tesla devised a unique vacuum seal by directing a high-velocity air stream at the tip of his gun to maintain "high vacua." The necessary pumping action would be accomplished with a large Tesla turbine.

Of all the countries to receive Tesla's proposal, the greatest interest came from the Soviet Union. In 1937 Tesla presented a plan to the Amtorg Trading Corporation, an alleged Soviet arms front in New York City. Two years later, in 1939, one stage of the plan was tested in the USSR and Tesla received a check for $25,000.

Tesla hoped that his invention would be used for purely defensive purposes, and thus would become an anti-war machine. His system required a series of power plants located along a country's coast that would scan the skies in search of enemy aircraft. Since the beam was projected in a straight line, it was only effective for about 200 miles — the distance of the curvature of the earth.

Tesla also contemplated peacetime applications for his particle beam, one being to transmit power without wires over long distances. Another radical notion he proposed was to heat up portions of the upper atmosphere to light the sky at night — a man-made aurora borealis.

Whether Tesla's idea was ever taken seriously is still a mater of conjecture. Most experts today consider his idea infeasible. Though, his death beam bears an uncanny resemblance to the charged-particle beam weapon developed by both the United States and the Soviet Union during the cold war.

Nonetheless, Tesla's dream for a technological means to end war seems as impossible now as it did when he proposed the idea in the 1930s.


Source: A Weapon To End War