Friday 26 February 2010

noteworthy

nomelette
2 eggs
2 spring onions
2 tbsp spoons cooked chickpeas (tinned or fresh)
3 tbsp milk
cheese
butter

butter in pan
chop onions and put them and all other ingredients in bowl and whisk well
put in the hot butter pan
cook until almost all cooked
put cheese on top of omlette in pan
cook for a little more til cheese melted
fold omlette in half in pan and serve on plate
nom nom nom nom

choconut cake

2 tbsp marg
4 tbsp golden syrup
2 tbsp cocoa
4 digestive biscuits
rice krispies
6 blocks white choc
6 blocks milk choc
6 blocks dark choc
desicated coconut

mix marg and syrup in microwave or over pan of water simmering
add cocoa to melted stuff
add digestives and approx double the amount of that of rice krispies or til the mix is tough
put it in a tray and push it into the corners tight with spatula
melt chocolate in nonstick pan over lowest heat possible
dont mix the choco just allow it to melt
once melted scoop it ontop of tray stirring little so you get a marbled effect
sprinkle thick layer of coconut ontop, put in fridge for a few hours

Friday 19 February 2010

Lies about the Union

I am so fed up with hearing absolute slanderous lies about the origins of the Anglo-Scottish Union that I am going to clarify this matter and then refer anyone else who vomits about a pile of crap about their take on it here.

Firstly the Union of the countries of Scotland and England took place in 1707. This was an incorporating union of the PARLIAMENTS, and the final stage of union that has taken place until present. The Union of the CROWNS did NOT take place in 1707, it took place in 1603 and represented a DYNASTIC union where the countries of Scotland shared a monarch only and each country retained its own parliament. So:

1603 - Union of the Crowns (dynastic)
1707 - Union of the Parliaments (Incorporating)

Ok, I'm glad we are now clear on this matter.

Secondly, the view that (as I heard to eloquently put yesterday) "As a result of the failed Darien scheme, Scotland went 'cap in hand' to England for union, due to poverty" (Curtosey University of Strathclye Architecture Department)is but one arguement. It is NOT conclusive. Darien is NOT the reason for union. POVERTY is not the reason for union. The union is NOT for economic reasons. Anyone who has to explain why a union came about in 1707 should simply repeat this word for word and save themselves looking ignorant:

"The 1707 union came about for NUMEROUS, VARIED reasons, including economic, social and political factors. The most important reasons for union are debatable according to the perspectives of different historians".

Most often people who want to say things like "the union happened mostly for economic reasons, there were a few wars going on at the time, but yeah - economic reasons" (Curtosey University of Strathclyde Department of Sociology) are really just looking to show what impact the union had on something else (i.e. architecture, education &c.) so should therefore just repeat the above quote. If they feel the actual reasons for Union are important to what they are studying then they should enroll in a proper history class on the union with a proper scholar who researches the topic themselves. Otherwise don't preach unresearched arguements which are not backed up by the evidence, and which you probably gained half from your out-dated high school history education from the 60s and half from some ill-informed TV programme you saw on BBC2. Possible economic reasons for the union do exist. However so do other reasons, and I personally would stress the importance of political considerations in assessing the reasons for the union. Let's just think about this on the most basic level for a moment. I'm sure that most would agree that late seventeenth/early eighteenth century European states were interested in expanding their power. I'm sure that having an empire was a thing most states would seek for the political and trade benefits associated? Well, assuming you agree this, why would England agree to a union with Scotland if there was nothing in it for them? Let's see - according to our economic reasons perspective, Scotland's failed attempt at empire - darien - had created a small country with poverty rife. Why would England want this country if economic factors were the only ones of real influence over the union? HMMM... could it be that there were some other political considerations given the European and international context? I'll let you decide after you read the bibliography. In addition to that, if England accepted the union because Scotland came "cap in hand" to England this would assume that the country had some sort of philanthropic desire to help the country next door. I'm sure any semi-educated person would find this hard to believe given the time frame we are talking about.

I wont go into the other reasons for union here. Suffice to say I have spent a YEAR considering this in much detail and involving many archival sources and still I am unclear in my mind what the reasons for union were. This is why it is so enraging to see someone who hasn't lifted a research-based academic history book in their life spouting a pile of shite about how Scotland waved byebye to all her money on a boat to Shitsville, South America and then England kindly saved our poor poverty stricken country from a hell of its own making. SCREW YOU. People wonder why Scots are defeatist? People wonder why Scots will assume defeat in popular sporting events and savour one tiny win as the miricle of the century? People wonder why this country has an inferiority complex and chip on the shoulder nationalist attitude? Start by telling the history of the place properly!! If it is drummed into people that Scotland couldn't survive as an independent country anymore and had to get on her knees and beg to the English to save it then no f-ing wonder Scots dont think they can win a football game. I'm so fed up with these myths based on absolute bollocks that some idiot heard off the television.

The uninformed beleifs of people as mentioned above not only make what I am doing and have been doing seem pointless and meaningless, but disgrace the work of the historians out there researching this topic and putting a life times work into something that some idiot will ride roughshod over without another thought.

One final word of warning: Information on historical topics on the Radio, Television and in the papers is BIASED. It will usually be based on the research of one person, if any person, and this shows ONE VIEW of MANY VIEWS. Treat with CAUTION.

If you are really interested in learning about this topic enough to converse on an intellectual and informed level about then I suggest you read these two books:

Allan I. Macinnes, A Union for Empire

Chris Whatley and Derek Patrick, The Scots and the Union

And once you have read them consider the conficting opinions and read what is in their bibliographies including the primary material.

If this sounds too hard then I stress - REPEAT AFTER ME:

"The 1707 union came about for NUMEROUS, VARIED reasons, including economic, social and political factors. The most important reasons for union are debatable according to the perspectives of different historians".

Tuesday 16 February 2010

Pancake Day Recipes You Will Love Or Your Money Back

HELLO PANCAKE DAY! what Tuesday? PANCAKE Tuesday!

So, I just made a fully-pancake-based dinner of two courses that took me all of 30 minutes to do. I think this is blog worthy. Politics? Ponderings? Soul Searching? CUT.....PANCAKESSS!!!

Anyway here are the recipes and even though pancake day is coming to a close and you may not keep black pudding in your freezer like I do (cause you are mentally ill I guess :P), I am sure a savoury pancake main course and sweet pancakey dessert will appeal on days other that today. Hey, maybe I will repost this on Pancake-Eve next year.

Savoury Spanish Meaty Pancake Spectacular (for want of a more succint name)

Serves 2
Prep time 15 mins
cook time 15 mins

Sauce
2 linked sausages
2 black pudding slices
1 can chopped tomatoes
1 tbsp tomato puree
4 blocks of cacao/ 70%+ dark chocolate
1/2 tsp chilli powder
1 tsp lemon juice
oil to cook

Pancake Batter
120g Self raising flour
1 egg
1/4 pint of milk
handful of chopped chives
pinch salt
pinch black pepper

To Serve
grated cheese
sour cream

Making the Pancake Batter
1. Beat the egg in a bowl
2. Add milk and mix.
3. Add flour and mix well.
4. Add pepper, salt and chives and mix.

Making the sauce
1. Chop black pudding and sausages into small chunks and fry with a little oil in a pan until cooked.
2. Add tomatoes and mix.
3. Add chocolate, chilli, lemon juice and tomato puree and mix
4. Simmer for 10 minutes to vapourise the extra moisture and condense the sauce until it is thick like chilli is, stirring periodically to prevent sticking.



Cooking the pancakes
1. Add a little oil to a frying pan on a low to medium heat.
2. Pour in half the pancake batter to the middle of the pan.
3. When the first side is cooked little bubbles will appear around the 1/3 of the pancake nearest the edge, at this point flip the pancake WITH A SPATULA (to prevent it going on the floor).


4. Cook the other side until lightly browned. Remove from heat.


Serving
Place the pancake on the plate and spoon the sauce in the middle. Add a few spoonfuls of sour cream to the top and sprinkle with grated cheese. TA DA! Savoury pancake tastiness for all (well, 2).

Scotch Pancake Stack Dessert
Ingredients
120g Self raising flour
1 egg
1/4 pint of milk
30g caster sugar
small pinch of salt
Blocks of white and milk chocolate
Syrup (Golden or Maple)

Prepare batter
1. Beat the egg in a bowl
2. Add milk and mix.
3. Add flour and sugar and mix well.
4. Add salt and mix.

Cooking the pancakes
1. Add a little oil to a frying pan on a low to medium heat.
2. spoon small amounts of the batter into the pan in 2s or 3s. I suggest 2 desert spoons of mixture in 3 places or 3 dessert spoons in 2 places, depending on the size of your frying pan of course.
3. The first side will be done once bubbles on the top of the pancake. Flip the pancakes to the other side and cook until lightly brown then remove.


Serving
1. Stack your pancakes on a plate (diet=1 pancake sensible=2 pancakes hungry=3 pancakes greedy=4 pancakes heartattack=5+ pancakes)
2. Add blocks of chocolate on top of the pancakes (and in between layers if you like). If the pancakes were straight from the pan the choc will melt, otherwise heat in microwave for 10 seconds or so)


3. drizzle syrup over the stack.


ENJOY! mmmmmmmmmm

Friday 12 February 2010

I don't give a shit about expenses


Is anyone else sick of hearing about MPs expenses and how absolutley CORRUPT it is that MPs are sticking their hands in the "public purse"? Everyone loves a good scandal and especially when it has, apparently, personally affected them, but this is just ridiculous. Like anyone who goes on about theiving MPs would choose the moral high ground. Here is a little case study. You have to travel for your job and you are given the ability to claim back the expenses for your trip. This includes cost of travel, accomodation and all other things necessary for your upkeep while on the job. Say the small print is ambiguous, and it doesn't state that you can't book the more expensive hotel, it doesn't mention anything about which class you should travel in, and it doesn't say you have to eat cheap takeaway rather than a pricey restaurant.... am I going to find you sitting in the Travel Lodge eating Burger King after a 12 hour journey on Megabus? Didn't think so.

You see, the people who get all up in arms about this expenses scandal are hypocrites. They forget the one fact of human nature that really can't be ignored - greed. Human beings are GREEDY. I'm sure as Thomas Hobbes wrote of the right to self-preservation he knew this would end up applying to both self defence against the knife weilding maniac and sneaking those extra couple of apples from your neighbours tree. I mean, come on, who isn't greedy? Who doesn't want more? Especially if it was handed to you free?

MPs claiming expenses is no different to anyone working in a job with the benefits of having to travel or even just dining out, and you don't see anyone complaining about buisness meals racking up tabs of thousands of pounds. No of course not, because that didn't steal money from your own pocket, did it? Get a grip. Firstly, did it actually come from your pocket? Do you actually pay taxes? ponder that if you will politically reactive students of government. If you do pay taxes, why the hell should you be allowed to decide that those in the private sector can squandor money in anyway they please just for the sake of it but that MPs can't own a second home? I mean, take a random company...Tesco, for example. You buy groceries at Tesco (lets say). You give them the money that contributes to their profit in order that the shop remains open and continuing to provide you with the products and prices you like, am I right? So is it then right that Tesco management could allow it's higher up employees to waste that money in the above mentioned ridiculous ways when MPs can't even have a decent commute?

Basically my point is that people will take all that they can. The only thing stopping them is their own conscience, and even though people have different levels of how much is added benefits of the job and how much is exploitation, the only way to stop them taking is to make regulations. THERE WERE REGULATIONS. How would you like it if you read up on law and saw that it was ok to let your dog poop in the park as long as you scooped the poop, only to find out that a change of heart decided dogs arent allowed to poop in parks and a retrospective fine will be levvied for all who have ever done so. You were acting withing the law when you did it weren't you? So why are you being fined?

Leave the MPs alone. 1) it is futile, money spent by MPs is nothing compared to the amount tax payers lose funding junkies and the lazy "underclass" who refuse to get a job (note: this does not apply to all on benefits, just the ones who don't deserve it) 2) it is a media spaz attack. the uneducated mass find it far easier to engage with politics when the papers can make their cartoons and put up pictures of gordon brown wiping his forehead in a manner not dissimilar to those found in the gossip magazines 3) I seriously doubt that you would neglect to collect your free house if offered it in a completely legal way merely for doing your job consistently.

I'm sure your outrage makes you feel better about the small ways your greed manifests itself, for lack of bigger opportunities.

Monday 8 February 2010

I could squish them I love them so much


At the start of 2009 stuart and I decided it'd be a good thing to have a dog. Without going into the details it didn't work out. Instead we got ourselves into being parents to two kittens. I was out at pets at home buying gerbil stuff probably. Having floated the idea of cats instead of dogs I looked at the notice board in there and saw an advert for kittens - tiger tabby and black ones. So call stuart/call ad number/go to cash machine/work out address and all of a sudden I had two tiny tabby kitkats in a giant cardboard box seatbelted into the back of the c2 and was driving along London road wondering how it all happened so fast.

These two little blobs of fluff with heads that looked 2x too big for their miniscule stripey and spotty bodies came to be called Molly and Maisie and I fell in love. Not only that but it was, and is, the kind of love where you know you are so dependent on it that if anything bad was to happen you would crumble, again.

As they grew up they became completley unique, two opposites that complement eachother in a way no less than perfect. Molly appeared the more brash one, from the start not afraid to claw up onto your knee and stare into your eyes with an inquisitive, yet adorable, glare. Molly is shorter in both height and length than maisie, a "cobby" cat as the cat books say, with little eyes and a wee bit of a belly. She still looks like a kitten, and still acts like a kitten. She is the epitome of a domesticated mog, lazing around the house, playing with toys casually or with the sweet ecstacy of a pre-adult being. Molly has bullseyes on her flanks, one of which is now a bit deformed having grown back in from the operation she had being spayed. Molly will walk over to you and gently headbutt you when she wants to be patted. She is always stretching, and always sleeping. She reaches her head up and sniffs your face when she hasn't seen you for a while. She is innocent.

Maisie is different in all ways. At first she seemed to be shy and retiring but it was more likely that she was quietly emersing herself in the new environment and making a plan of domination that would be rolled out in the proceeding weeks and months. And that she did. She is the queen. Long, tall and thin with an oriental figure and head, giant almond eyes and oversized pointy ears, a long elegant nose and hundred different moods. Maisie is feral, but at the same time extremley domesticated on her own terms. Any toy that squeaks, anything that moves sporadically, anything that in anyway resembles anything that could be caught, and Maisie has devoured it. Maisie knows exactly what your doing, and thinking, and how to exploit that. She is of superior intellegence, she knows when she will get the attention she wants and how to persuade you to give it. Rolling on the floor in the sunshine, showing off her spotted belly and creamy chin, making prrew noises and periodically looking at you through big black eyes. Everyone goes to her. And then she will probably play fight you. She even knows how to play fetch.

Basically I love these two little beings more than nearly anything else in the world. Their life is so calm. It is intensley satisfying to be able to provide for them, with little effort, the environment that makes them so completley happy. Whatever your mood they can provide the silent, unimposing companionship that you don't completley notice, but without which your current location seems like the lonliest place on earth.