The Mitchell Bruvers.
Quite a lot of interest in Blunkett's new job across the 'blogosphere'. He's to replace Littlejohn at The Sun, carrying the right wing torch. Apparently Blunkett's column is to be in the Thursday edition, rather than Littlejohn's Tuesday slot, for some reason.
Personally, I don't think most bloggers were genuinely interested in the story, they all just wanted to use it as an excuse to mention Rebekah Wade, and more importantly, her other half.
Why?
Because his true talent has been revealed, of course. That boy can throw some shapes:
http://media.putfile.com/EastEnders---Mitchell-Brothers-Kung-Fu-Fighting
Censorship of the press?
I have just been over on Blairwatch, and pledged to publish the bomb Al Jazeera memo if indeed they can make it available to us. The list of those who are willing to publish it is large, if you'd like to have a look at it click the link:
http://www.blairwatch.co.uk/node/603http://resistanceisphutile.blogspot.com/2005/11/with-friends-like-these.html
Too smart for it's own good.
Wasn't sure whether to post this. I had intended to ever since this morning's fruitless results, but reading Leo Hickman's article in G2 today about mouse traps discouraged me. He'd stolen my thunder. Still, while acknowledging Mr Hickman, I eventually decided to go ahead anyway.For the third day in a row, I woke up and rushed to the kitchen in anticipation of finding a mouse in the trap I had set, door firmly closed behind it. And for the third day in a row I found nothing. Perhaps I shouldn't have allowed my hopes to rise only to be struck down by another defeat. But each day had seen a little improvement in my technique.
Firstly, I had set up the trap and left some cheese in the bait compartment at the back. The next morning revealed no sign of any interest from the enemy.
Second time around I left some oats by the front of the trap to lure the enemy in, thinking maybe the cheese lurking deep in the trap had gone unnoticed. What was really unbearable the next morning, even more than the absense of the rodent, was the absense of the oats. The little bastard had mockingly hoovered up the oats around the front of the trap and scarpered.
So, I thought, it knows this is a trap, designed to capture it. Quite clever, for a creature with a brain the size of a pea. Then it occurred to me: I hadn't scattered oats all the way down the trap.
Maybe the enemy, contrary to popular belief, doesn't like cheese.
So accordingly I poured oats all the way through the little tunnel of mouse-doom that had thus far been a flat disappointment. This time I was confident.
Sure enough, the oats had been eaten, alright. Eaten nearly all the way up to the very end of the trap,
just before the door trigger mechanism.
Bastard.
The moral of the story?
Don't buy 'humane' mouse traps. Nothing that has caused me such distress over the last couple of mornings can ever be described as 'humane'.
Now I think back to when I was in the shop asking if they sold traps, I am filled with suspicion. The woman behind the counter, who had hitherto seemed like a lovely, pet loving type, almost barked back: "
humane traps, we only sell
humane ones". While she fixated me with her cold, accusatory glare, one of her minions scuttled off somewhere and returned a second later, placing one of the devices on the table.
A little unsure of whether
humane traps were actually going to do the job, I looked to my girlfriend in silent plea for help, or instruction.
"Five pound fifty"
The icy stare directed straight at me.
"That's it, that's the one. Five fifty. We only sell
humane traps. Once you've caught it let it out on the common."
As we walked back home I decided yes, why the need to kill the poor mouse? This was much better.
I now realise that bitch at the pet shop had always known the device was useless, and that she actually likes to see herself as the unsung hero of the mouse world. The queen of rodents. By selling these 'humane' pieces of junk she ensures the continued success of the rodent invasion into our homes. Not only that, but it's a nice little earner too.
Anyway, I'm going to get a real trap and execute the enemy. If it hadn't been so smart, I would have let it out on the common.
British businessmen murdered in Iraq.
After the tragic deaths of Arif Ebrahim and Sefudin Makai I hope British Muslims will stop making visits to Iraq for the timebeing. I realise Najaf and Karbala are holy sites revered by Muslims, but the country is simply too dangerous right now.
Men with young families especially need to take heed and remember they are responsible for not just themselves but their loved ones as well. The murder of these poor men was appalling, if others do not learn from it future deaths will be ones that could have been avoided.
I'm not a celebrity, let me in there!
Celebrity, to me, used to mean somebody famous. Oh how the times are a changin'. Some of the 'stars' of ITV's
I'm a Celebrity Get Me Out of Here are so past Z list they'd need the Greek alphabet to accomodate them. Get them out of there? They were banging the doors down to get IN there.
Sure, I know about
Blue, the cheesy boyband that once crooned over the 'Hip Hop beats', (ahem) and
Atomic Kitten, but aren't the sums far greater than their parts in both cases?
And if I quickly chuck in David Dickinson and Sid Owen's name I've just about mentioned all the members of the team I could actually recognise.
The rest must have got lost on their way to a Channel 5 reality show and somehow ended up in the ITV squad instead.
But let's not get into too much analysis of how famous any of these people really are. The point is I can't imagine why anyone would be interested in watching them talk about nothing in particular for thirty minutes (or is it an hour?) every night. I've tried watching it twice now and couldn't last longer than a couple of minutes.
There does seem to be a bit of a formula when choosing candidates for the show.
And because of this, I am able to intelligently and accurately conjure up a brief statement that will serve equally well as a description of any previous series, or a prediction of any future series:
Sitting round the campfire, cheesy has-beens attempt to rekindle public interest in their past chart successes (or failures). In the charts of contempt, they rank fairly highly, beaten only by the small collection of 'eccentric' toffs, intent on showing Blighty just how jolly good their brand of fun is. When the 'bushtucker trial' takes place, somebody screams while eating a bug, being showered with gunge, or undertaking some other challenge usually reserved for CBBC and Pat-with-the-long-hair's Funhouse.
Still seems a bit long, it needs editing.
OK, this will be better.
I'm a Celebrity... description/prediction take 2:
Shit.
Saddam: I had to take the stairs!
Shock horror, Saddam has been arguing with the judge today, reminding him of his Iraqi nationality and allegiance to the sovereign. Well, there's not much else he can do really, is there?
The Charles I routine apparently degenerated into complaints of not having a pen and paper, and a broken down elevator meaning he had to take the stairs.
I wonder if he will accept his fate with the same dignity displayed by Charles who, on the morning of his execution, asked for an extra layer of clothing so the cold weather would not cause him to shiver before the executioner.
Not that I expect any 'dignity' from an evil murderous tyrant, of course.
Irving = Icke.
Oh, how the world works in mysterious ways.
Notorious British Nazi apologist David Irving has been banged up in a Viennese jail. For those that don't know, Irving has famously argued that the Holocaust was a 'fantasy' and that Hitler had in fact somehow endeavoured to protect the Jews.
Bit of a wanker, then.
As you might imagine, anyone classifying themselves as 'liberal' has for one reason or another taken offence to Irving's views over the years.
So it may surprise you that the liberals of Austria are the ones opposing his incarceration, citing his rights to freedom of speech, while the Austrian government that, according to the Guardian, has the worst record of all when it comes to bringing Nazi war criminals to justice,
enforces the strict ban on any denial of the Holocaust.
I really laughed when I read this:
(Irving) was barred from the country but, an inveterate risk-taker, he flew from London to Basle in Switzerland this month, rented a car and drove to Vienna.The idea was to meet up with a bunch of student radicals from an extreme right fraternity. Their hobbies include dressing up in funny clothes and little pillbox caps, then drawing blood by slashing one another's cheeks in fencing duels. They've been at it since Bismarck's day.Speaks for itself, really.
The photo's for the benefit of those who are unfamiliar with the pillbox hat.
The thing is, the liberals petitioning for Irving's freedom have a point, don't they? There is a side of me that thinks the only people capable of creating a liberal, just democracy are brutal authoritarians. But the reality is freedom of speech means exactly that. To martyr a man like Irving seems not only potentially inflammotary but also self-contradictory.
No society is ever going to be flawless. But in all honesty I think modern democracy is by far the best option as yet discovered, and so it must be taken whole heartedly, no half measures. Irving is scum, but if he really wants to go and dress up in 'funny clothes' and play sword fights with a bunch of goons perhaps the best idea would be to just ignore him, rather than put the spotlight on him.
Irving has written a variety of books on the war, which have been published and advertised as 'real' accounts of those dark years.
But the reality is they come off looking like the works of a nutjob, offering his 'insight' into the world, which will (never) change your way of thinking forever.
Well, I'd prefer him to continue looking like some Nazi-loving version of David Icke rather than a 'political prisoner', championed by liberals who protest for his right to spout abhorrent views that they themselves detest.
Edit:
Well, the comparison may have been well observed, but it was also, it seems, a little slack. A Nazi-loving version of David Icke would, in fact, be David Icke. The following quote comes from one of Icke's books:
why do we play a part in suppressing alternative information to the official line of the Second World War? How is it right that while this fierce suppression goes on, free copies of the Spielberg film, Schindler's List, are given to schools to indoctrinate children with the unchallenged version of events. And why do we, who say we oppose tyranny and demand freedom of speech, allow people to go to prison and be vilified, and magazines to be closed down on the spot, for suggesting another version of history?
Scary stuff. If you're interested in any of this check out this link:
http://www.livejournal.com/users/jimminyjack/7374.html
George Best dies, aged 59.
George Best has passed away this afternoon at the age of 59. After the dust has settled and the tragic elements of Best's life are forgotten, he will be remembered for his sheer brilliance on the football pitch. Best recently expressed hope his drinking would not come to define him after his death.
But his iconic status was gained by his unrivalled sporting genius, and it is that genius which has remained at the heart of the contry's fascination with Best.
We can only hope that the excesses of the legends lifestyle are not completely forgotten, that they might serve as an example to young stars in the future who find themselves thrust into a world of money and glamour.
May he rest in peace.
Livingstone: part 5.
In my previous blog I was beginning to have what looked like a mini-series of Ken Livingstone features. I hadn't actually intended on continuing with the Ken-bashing but the man really is too much.Over on
http://www.samizdata.net I just read that the cost of staging the Olympics is set to double. No surprise actually, we all knew it would happen.
But read this:
The city's mayor, Ken Livingstone, assured Tony Blair and Gordon Brown that any overruns would be met by Londoners.Yeah, I was beginning to think we could do with a huge increase in council tax too. Apparently the new estimates would equate to a £1000 increase per household, which I find unbelievable, frankly.
Snow big deal.
Honestly, I can't understand all the fuss. ITV's midday news programme featured so many photographs of snow people had sent in I thought I was watching some kind of holiday in Canada show or something. What's the big deal? The 'Pulse' section where people are invited to call in with their views on the burning issues of the day was dedicated to a bit of snow. I would have thought the imminent death of George Best was a worthier topic. There was one shred of entertainment value in it all though.
One woman thought, like me, it was a silly waste of time to call in to a news programme to discuss the weather.
How do I know?
She called in to a news programme to tell us what a waste of time it was calling in to a news programme to discuss the weather.
Benedict doesn't want Peter Pan to grow up.
Being brought up a Catholic wasn't all bad. I maintain a belief in God to this day, and value things such as kindness, honesty, and dedication. Although my parents instilled me with these values and I give them all credit, it is true that being brought up with a religion can help cultivate these character traits.
But there were things about the Catholic teachings that, with hindsight, I do not believe were all that helpful for a growing child. For instance, we were taught that God and our loved ones who might have passed away were always watching us; the implication: Behave.
The 'mind forged manacles' of a constant self policing, almost paranoid state of consciousness were not what I would call a healthy playground for the adolescent experience.
As I grew and began to discover the world through different routes I became increasingly aware of the friction between the opinions I was forming and the mindset of the Good Catholic. One by one, belief in things I had been taught eroded. Inevitably, I eventually moved away from the church completely, feeling it was not for me.
I now wonder if my own experience could in effect be viewed as a microcosm of Humanity's relationship with the Catholic church itself. Once we were told the Sun rotated around Earth, which was flat. Then along came the opening of the eyes and the church had to forget that little nugget of worldly knowledge.
The same with Adam and Eve, and all the rest.
At this point I should acknowledge the American blogger, whose name I cannot remember, who still does believe the earth is flat and that anybody who disputes this is a blashphemer. Honourable mentions to you, sir.
Sure enough, one by one, people have had to adapt their formerly staunch beliefs to accomodate the knowledge they have acquired. Nowadays you hear people arguing the church was never really against homosexuality in the first place, it was all a big misunderstanding. This might wash in the Anglican church, which was only formed in order to make life a little easier by changing the rules anyway. But in the Catholic church it doesn't really work.
And so in recognition of this, Pope Benedict sticks to his guns and sends out a message telling the church it has a duty to eliminate the homosexual element of the priesthood.
Well, maybe it didn't sound quite as 'Terminatorish' as that.
But you get the idea.
As I read the story in today's paper, I had to laugh when it said 'gay activists reacted with dismay'. Dismay? You mean they thought the Catholic church was actually about to send a letter to Elton John, commending him on the example he sets for youngsters?
In consideration, I would suggest Benedict has realised that with each little concession, each little accomodation of New World thinking, the church is getting nearer and nearer to becoming an adult that has opened his eyes fully. An adult that has done that will do away with the things of his childhood (I'm sure that comes from some old bible parable) and move on to a better understanding.
The solution?
Like the American blogger whose name I can't remember will tell you - close your eyes.
Michael Jackson: Idiot.
Yet more fun on Planet Wacko: Michael Jackson has been exposed as an anti-semite as taped phone conversations containing some distinctly anti-semitic comments were aired on Good Morning America.
In the recording Jackson is heard calling Jews 'leeches' who are out to 'make a lot of money'.
As opposed to repeat offending child abusers who are out to make a lot of money.
The luck of the Irish.
Yesterday's legislation of a bill granting fugitives in Northern Ireland freedom from prosecution is yet another example of Labour's confusing stance on terrorism. The bill of course faced huge opposition from everyone but Sinn Fein and Labour themselves, who described the move as 'a necessary step'.
Among the fiercest critics were the DUP, apparently unaware that many terrorists in Northern Ireland are of a Protestant persuasion.
As always, when analysing what the government is really saying it's important to shed the jargon, cut the crap.
So here's my understanding of it, correct me if I'm wrong:
Irish Protestant terrorist- let's just overlook that last little word, shall we?
Irish Catholic terrorist- the scum of the earth, but times change, and we need to find new ways for peace.
Any Muslim who may or may not one day plan to become a terrorist- lock 'em up, officer.
With friends like these...
Heard the one about George Bush wanting to drop bombs on Al Jazeera in friendly Qatar?
No?
Apparently there was a punchline in there somewhere.
Maybe the bomb would have been the punchline.
Are we honestly expected to believe that Bush's comments to Blair were in jest?
Okay, enough of the question marks. Yesterday's Daily Mirror quoted an unnamed government official as saying the threats were 'humourous, not serious' which is a pretty good joke in itself. It's no secret that Washington can't stand Al Jazeera seeing as they have bombed the station before:
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/nov2001/jaz-n21_prn.shtmlOne little ray of light to come out of this story is Tony Blair's stance on it all. When the President
suggested bombing the network Blair's response was reportedly concrete, a very definite 'no'. Whether excessive use of conciliatory hand gestures formed part of the response remains unconfirmed, although I'd like to bet it did.
It's just a little reassuring to hear that Blair isn't just Bush's hand puppet, ready and willing to carry out monkey face's bidding. Let's face it, if bombing a TV network in a an allied territory is the little tyke's idea of a joke, someone needs to make sure he doesn't get hold of a box of matches.
Oh wait, I guess he already did, didn't he?
Death too easy?
So shamed former glam rock star Gary Glitter could face the firing squad in Vietnam if found guilty of having sex with a twelve year old girl. By some accounts, the pervert's been hopping from country to country in search of underage 'bed friends' ever since his release from jail in 2000.
There's no doubt he has sexually abused and permanently scarred children, it's just the number of children that is unclear.
Apparently Glitter had previously faced child sex allegations elsewhere in south east Asia, and for some reason decided to set up home in Vietnam, a country which carries a death sentence for child rape. Probably not a good move for someone like Glitter.
Incidentally, it's no wonder he has been heard moaning about his moniker, saying he prefers to be called by his real name Paul Francis Gadd. Glitter states that the stage name has too many unpleasant connotations (I guess he's not really talking about cheesy seventies glam-garbage here) but the real reason is obvious. Who would want to be known by the name which has universally become known as slang for the arse? And that was
before his perverted sexual habits came to light. Since then it must have been unbearable.
But I digress.
The thing is, with a monster like Glitter the death penalty would perversely (pun intended) become the tool of the liberal. Only a liberal who usually opposed capital punishment would grant him such an easy escape. There are others who would suggest far worse forms of retribution. Pub debate on the topic last night offered up a variety of tortures that could have been employed in favour of a quick death.
There are governments in the world that would probably have read a transcript of last night's pub debate as though it were a lilly-livered modernisation of their constitution.
Even the good ol' U S of A like to indulge in a little torture, so long as it's never really acknowledged.
So maybe the death penalty wouldn't be so extreme in Glitter's case after all. For the most part I oppose it (I think) but don't really want to get into a detailed look at the pro's and con's here.
I just think perhaps death might be called for when we are talking about the rape of infants, which a twelve year old really is.
"Oral sex gives you cancer"
Just reading through today's G2 in the Guardian, and saw this headline. Thought it fitted in quite nicely with the last post in a way. Yet another danger to our health has been identified, albeit from a non-Labour source. I can't remember the name of the group that carried out this research but apparently oral sex has a link with the human papilloma virus (HPV) and that in turn has been linked to cancer. The article however did note that both smoking and drinking were far more likely causes of any development of cancerous tissue in the mouth. Thank God for that. I've already kicked the nicotene habit, and as I said, drinking for all its faults at least can be a good iron source. I think alterations to our sexual activities are a bit much, especially when I'm a one-woman guy.
Keep your iron levels up.
Guiness, they say, is good for you. Lots of iron. Forget "an apple a day keeps the dentist away" (or was it doctor?) or "carrots help you see in the dark". Of all the classic medicinal anecdotes, I hear the Guiness one most often. But then, I do work in a pub.
Shreds of truth buried in misleading packaging, these types of anecdotes have long featured in motherspeak, although the Guiness one is of course more at home slouched against a sticky bar somewhere. It is at this bar that the words of advice will be bandied around throughout the evening, more out of mock defence of drinking habits than a low level ambition of becoming a GP.
Yes, it seems we're pretty fond of these little pearls of wisdom which contain less scientific importance than their frequent appearance in everyday speech would suggest. However, I was nonetheless surprised to see New Labour's propaganda machine indulging in some irrelevantly accurate medical advice of their own.
As we learn that to qualify as a binge drinker you simply have to sink four pints in one sitting, those helpful Labour boys warn us that binge drinking can in fact lead to an eighty pound fine.
Now, unlike some, I think the current trend of health based propaganda is a not entirely evil thing. Damn those bastards, I've heard people say, force feeding us graphic messages of what smoking can to do us. They've even attacked salty, fatty food. Well, as someone who has pretty much quit smoking (all but the
occasional one when drunk) after five years of trying, I was actually appreciative of the fatty deposit imagery which made me look away in disgust.
However, I really can't imagine the next time I'm buying that fourth pint that the threat of the fine will have the same effect.
Let's face it, the people receiving these fines will have likely far exceeded the four pint mark. This is Britain. Dominika, a Polish bar maid who lives with four hard drinking, vodka loving Polish lads tells me she cannot understand this country where people drink eight, nine, ten pints everday in the pub.
It is hard to know what to do about the drunken violence on Friday nights. Not that I
want to work later, but I do think increased drinking hours will eventually have a positive effect. Eventually. But the eighty pound fine? Have a laugh.If the threat of mutilation or death does not prevent people drink-driving, the loss of an average Friday night's budget will never prevent them just drinking.
Besides, people will wonder, what's all the fuss? Guiness is good for you. Lots of iron.
Those in glass houses...
Death penalty world map.
Color scheme: Blue: Abolished for all crimes
Green: Abolished for crimes not committed in exceptional circumstances (such as crimes committed in time of war)
Orange: Abolished in practice
Red: Legal form of punishment for heinous offenses.
Posting about the former metropolitan police chief's case for the death penalty, I started thinking about the use of capital punishment throughout the world. Firstly I should say that I am undecided about the issue and hope this post does not lead you to think I am actually anti-death penalty.
This map of the world shows which countries still employ the death penalty as a standard practice for heinous crimes. Interestingly, both China and the US still use the death penalty. In the light of recent news from Italy (and subsequently Spain, the UK, and various other countries) that the US has been known to stop off on Italian soil en route to countries that have not forbidden torture with prisoners on board, Bush's urges to China to improve its human rights record had me laughing..
As head of a country that still executes its prisoners, a country which is torturing muslim prisoners abroad, and a country which is currently occupying Iraq with a vicious insensitivity that has seen countless innocent civilians murdered in cold blood by its soldiers, Bush might do well to stop throwing such big rocks from the window of his glass house.
Obviously he is right about China, a country with such appalling secrets that no amount of accelerated growth will turn it into a truly modern and thriving state. But having read personal accounts of US soldiers who have served in Iraq, detailing how widespread the exceptionally cruel treatment of Iraqi civillians is (stories of children being shot in the street are particularly gruesome) Bush definitely needs to get his own house in order, too.
Lord Stevens calls for death penalty.
Is the life of a police officer more valuable than the life of a lesser mortal? Lord Stevens seems to think so. Writing in the News of the World yesterday the former head of the Metropolitan Police argued that 'killing a police officer
is different' from killing anybody else. Justifying his view, Lord Stevens noted that officers of the law 'are people you and I have elected' to enforce the rules of our society and protect us from those who break these rules.
It would be foolish to completely disregard the point, it is true that police officers sometimes take great risks in order to protect society from the evil minority. I definitely did
not elect them to do this, as I haven't known any officers personally since my teenage days and anyone getting paid to enforce the law did not get helped into that position by me. But still, I realise what Lord Stevens is saying here, to a degree.
However, there are many in society who undergo no small risk to their personal safety or well being for the good of others, should they not also benefit from Lord Stevens' umbrella of privilege? That a man who has seen many a murder in his time and has always maintained an anti-death penalty stance should now reverse his opinion because a member of the police has been killed is outrageous. What about firemen, I wonder. The murder of an off-duty fireman in a street robbery would presumably only require ten years behind bars in order to be compensated for.
Even that is not the real point. When a person applies to be a police officer they do so knowing the risks. They do not become 'special' members of society who deserve any different treatment to the rest of us. Any death is of equal importance, and the police view that the murder of an officer is somehow worse is a telling one. After the Broadwater Farm Estate riot of 1985 where police constable Keith Blakelock was killed there was huge outcry. To this day, telling someone you think the death of PC Blakelock was tragic but not exceptional is guaranteed to result in horrified expressions. A resident of the estate appeared on the news some time ago asking why he should feel more grief for Blakelock's death than the death of a member of his community.
Until the police force realise that they are not some kind of ethereal enforcers of justice located somewhere between God and the rest of humanity they will continue to suffer the contempt of many and the mistrust of even more.
