Resistance is Phutile

New job.

2006-09-07T14:21:00.000+01:00

Thankfully, I've landed myself a nine-to-five. Got a job with the probation services which is located reasonably close to my home. The only snag is that initially the role is temporary, although I'm told it's ongoing and likely to be a few months at least. Still, I'm not about to jack my pub job in straight away without any guarantees and so my hours will be more like nine-to-midnight for a while. Obviously, I hope to keep blogging but it might prove difficult.

At last.

2006-09-06T12:02:00.000+01:00

Finally found a dentist who will accept new patients. I've been in quite a lot of pain the last few days. I know I need a couple of fillings, but I think there may be some wisdom tooth trouble as well, even though I seem to remember them coming through years ago. Scouring the Streatham area proved fruitless, so I went for a hike all the way through Tooting and near Balham, and still nobody would accept new patients. Is it the time of year?

When I came across the surgery that have booked me in for next week I couldn't believe they were just 5 minutes down the road from my house. Only £15 for the check up too, the private one further down said 50.

Betablog

2006-09-05T11:42:00.000+01:00

Fucking unbelievable. I switched to Betablog, after reading all about it and the many benefits promised by Blogger. They neglected to mention that once I had switched, I would no longer be able to post a comment on any non-beta blogs. Thanks for telling me, you bastards! Apparently, that "feature" is "coming soon". What a load of bullshit.

Livingstone, part 7.

2006-09-05T10:38:00.000+01:00

Joan Smith, the Independent on Sunday:

"Lord Baden-Powell, founder of the Scouts, had a theory about young men going through a period he called the "rutting season". He meant this in relation to sex, but I find the image of males locking horns with other males coming to mind with increasing frequency in relation to the Mayor of London. Though he is no longer in the first flush of youth, shall we say, Ken Livingstone is about as open to civilised debate as a rutting stag; last year, a Jewish reporter from the Evening Standard who annoyed him found himself compared to a concentration camp guard. Then it was the turn of the Reuben brothers, a pair of Jewish property developers who were told by Livingstone to "go back to Iran and try their luck with the Ayatollahs".

Now with much stamping, crashing, and breaking of branches, Livingstone has burst from the undergrowth to savage Trevor Phillips, chair of the Commission for Racial Equality. Phillips's offence? He has questioned the meaning of multiculturalism, challenging the notion that the Notting Hill Carnival is a triumph of this much-discussed phenomenon. Speaking on BBC radio last week, Livingstone claimed Phillips has become so right wing "that I expect soon he'll be joining the BNP".

Actually, Phillips's point was that the carnival is a one-0ff, a great party that doesn't represent the everyday culture of most of London's communities. This seems to me uncontroversial, as well as raising an important question: what is multiculturalism? These days, everybody is so busy taking positions - right wing columnists blame it for everything from mass immigration to terrorism, while the hard left denounces anyone who questions it as racist or fascist - that it's hard to know what the word means. Phillips's pronouncements on the subject are robust - earlier this year he suggested that Muslims who want to live under Islamic law (sharia) should leave the country - but more coherent than anything the Mayor of London has come up with.

Livingstone's take on mulitculturalism certainly isn't mine. It's a form of relativism that allows him to park his values when they're inconvenient and embrace religious extremists with repellent views on women and homosexuals. Living in a society that has abolished the death penalty, Livingstone welcomes to London a cleric whose website discusses whether death is the appropriate penalty for gay men, and appears at public events with an academic who refuses to call for a ban on the hideous practice of lapidation.

Of course, multiculturalism is about respecting difference, but it isn't about recognising no boundaries. I am very happy to live in a heterogenous society where we don't all have the same skin colour, wear the same clothes, eat the same food, follow the same religion or vote for the same political party. Underlying all that, however, there has to be a common set of vaues, which we recognise through respect for the rule of law. Most Roman Catholics, for instance, oppose abortion but accept that it's legal in the UK and, unlike in the US, they do not attack doctors who perform terminations or blow up abortion clinics.

In fact, the biggest threat to multiculturalism does not come from organisations such as the BNP but politicians such as Livingstone who refuse to have this debate, seeking to close it down with accusations of racism and Islamophobia. The UK is a diverse society, but it won't remain so if millions of ordinary people feel they're not allowed to criticsie the minority who hate gay people, treat women as second class citizens and support political or religious violence."

Couldn't have said it better, apart from perhaps pointing out that while Phillips may have been "robust" suggesting Muslims who desire the rule of Sharia law should leave the country, he was also right.

EcoDave to the rescue!

2006-09-05T10:23:00.000+01:00

David Cameron is right to question why environmental concern has always been attributed to the Left, as though Tory voters couldn't care less about green belts and ozone layers. Realistically, the idea is absurd. It's much easier to imagine Middle England's middle class, middle aged mum caring a great deal about the trees in her garden than it is her less affluent inner-city counterpart who hasn't a garden to speak of.

That's not to say those without financial comfort are incapable of caring for our environment. The orange recycling sacks that seem to step out from my road's gateways on a Friday morning like soldiers up for inspection testify otherwise.

But certainly there can be no case for assuming centre-right voters are somehow less inclined to think green than Labour Lambeth's residents.

Cameron calls for a cross-party effort towards achieving ambitious goals in the drive towards a more environmentally friendly Britain. And if he wasn't making such impressive political gains with this environmentally aware approach, he might even deserve applause for attemtping to detach the issue from politics altogether.

RDA - Alcohol.

2006-08-30T13:23:00.000+01:00

In mind of the recommended weekly alcohol intake we are advised to adhere to, I thought I'd document the number of drinks I have each day this week. Hopefully the excercise might make clear to me whether I'm drinking more than what most people would deem normal or not. I suspect "most people" drink a shitload and hopefully somebody will reply telling me I'm well within the norm. I won't make any efforts to drink more or less than usual, so this should represent a typical, organic week's worth of boozing.

Anyway, Monday was as follows:

A pint of Stella, a couple of bottles of Corona, a double Tia Maria and coke, and a shot of Corky's.

Tuesday:

Five pints of Guinness and two bottles of red wine.

I'll update this tommorrow, safe to say I haven't had anything this early though.

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

Well, five double Jack Daniels and coke's and a pint of Guinness went down pretty quickly when I was working last night. I just read a pint is equivalent to two units, I'd thought it was one.

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

Not sure how many drinks went down on Thursday really. I'd estimate between 12 and 14 pints of Guinness, which is not something I do regularly. Might have tipped the scales the wrong way when I tally up the week's units though. Woke up to find six hardback Catherine Cookson novels on the floor near the living room. No idea where they came from.

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

If I remember rightly...

Friday: three Jack Daniels and coke's and a pint of Guinness.

Saturday: one pint of Stella, two bottles of Polish lager, seven pints of Strongbow and a strawberry Daiquiri.

Sunday: one and a half pints of Guinness, a half of Fosters, bottle of Stella and single Jamesons.

Err...

Went and calculated the amount of units consumed in the last week, and it came out at 94. Seeing as the limit is supposed to be 21 I guess I have the answer to my question. That's a pretty sobering thought. Will abstain from drinking for at least a week while I contemplate these results.

Monarch passengers.

2006-08-24T14:49:00.000+01:00

Understandably, there has been considerable outcry at the treatment of the two young Asian men attempting to get a flight home to Manchester. However, in an interview on BBC breakfast this morning, the two concerned displayed a more rational approach than many others who have chosen to comment. While it is deeply unfortunate that this incident happened in the first place, it will do no good to label the actions of the nervous, non-Asian passengers as "disgraceful" and "racist".

Many people, myself included, do not feel entirely at ease with flying in the first place. My return flight from Spain in July was a pretty horrible experience, as I was sure something was wrong with the plane. Looking out of the window terrified me, even though on the flight at the beginning of the holiday I had been fine, and enjoyed looking down on the sea below. It's inexplicable. But that's what comes with boarding a plane.

In these times of heightened fear, when the public is constantly warned to be vigilant, and told they are always facing the imminent threat of Islamic terror attack, we can hardly be surprised people are scared of anything even remotely like what they imagine to be the face of the threat.
You wouldn't expect anyone to get onto a plane with their family if even the slightest possibility of danger had been hinted at.

Misguided, yes. Irrational, certainly. But these were not the actions of racists, merely of people unsure of whether they are safe or not. The reality is none of us know.

Pub grub aint all bad.

2006-08-23T11:33:00.000+01:00

Lucy Mangan writes in today's Guardian how pleased she is that Gordon Ramsay has come to save pub grub. I never knew it needed saving. Undoubtedly, there's some rubbish out there. If you have ever eaten a meal in a Wetherspoons pub you'll know that.

I actually worked in a Hogshead kitchen once and will admit the food did not represent the height of culinary possibilty. On the other hand, it wasn't anything like the atrocious stuff they serve up in Wetherspoons. Still, neither of these franchise's can be seen as real pubs, anyway.

I can't help thinking Mangan just doesn't know what signs to look out for before she eats in a pub. Firstly, word of mouth. If a pub serves up really good food, you'll hear about it. If you've just stopped for a quick pint in an unknown place and fancy a bite to eat, just see if others are eating, and snatch a glimpse of their food before you order. I love eating out, it's one of my favourite ways to spend an evening, and obviously a pub is not generally the place that springs to mind when thinking of where to go. Having said that, my all-time favourite place to eat is a traditional English pub called the Cricketers, which also houses a Thai family who take care of the food side of things. The food is the nicest you'll ever taste, so good I'd move into the place if I could, even though it's in the middle of boring, generic Kingston Upon Thames.

And what about pubs that do a carvery? I know one that does the nicest roast dinner you're likely to find for miles, including in any restaurant.

I'm not suggesting all pub food is good, but it's a bit unfair to write it all off as shit.

Not that I'd object to accompanying my Guiness with a lunch cooked up by Gordon Ramsay, of course. Even if he is a bit sad with his little "campaigns" (get women cooking again; cook more English food; whatever) in a desperate attempt to attract publicity and keep up with Jamie Oliver's school dinners and cooking in Italy bit.

Tuition fees.

2006-08-17T10:40:00.000+01:00

What a surprise, the formerly tumescent university application levels have gone down this year. Ministers dismiss it as a "blip", but the figures speak for themselves. As a student, I had to pay £1,100 annually in tuition fees, an amount which has trebled for today's aspiring learners. Contrary to the BBC report this morning, three years of shelling out three grand will not result in nine thousand pound debts. The reality is people will owe a substantially larger amount than this.

And for what?

Personally I am satisfied with the fruits of my labour. A university education helped cultivate my adult perspective and, I trust, will result in a higher earning potential than the industrial estates of my teen years offered me. Yet still I find it difficult to reassure others who left university in despair, seeing nothing but sales jobs, and low paid work open to school leavers, ahead of them. The truth is there is no guaranteed route to financial success. This is particularly true now when courses like physics are shunned in favour of media studies and film studies. Of those who did not go on to higher education, some will find wealth, some not. The same is true of those who got their 2:1.

It might sound absurd in this day and age, but I think the prerequisite for satisfaction at the end of a degree course is actually a hunger for knowledge, rather than a mapped out economic future. The question: how much are you willing to pay to appease that hunger?

Creationism.

2006-08-16T10:53:00.000+01:00

The growth in popularity of "Creationism" perplexes me. Sure, I know that the majority of religious people refuse to view evolution as the 'how it was done' that doesn't disqualify the 'why it was done'. But I remain baffled when it comes to people actually learning this stuff in favour of evidence based teaching in our schools and universities. Supporters argue there is no reason to doubt Creationism. Well, aside from the abundance of reasons they appear to ignore, they're actually doing a pretty good job of dismantling their own case here. No reason to doubt, in this context, is eclipsed by no reason to believe.

What responsible adult would encourage younger generations to become people who abandon rational thought and consideration of evidence? I don't think we really want to take our society back down it's own path to maturity, to times when logic was the slave of the pious. In yesterday's Guardian, a young law student argued against the plausibility of evolution, citing the Qu'ran as evidence. A LAW student! We can only imagine what indictments she might one day draw up as prosecuting attorney, or ludicrous scraps of "evidence" she might cling on to in court.

I mean no disrespect to any religious types. But if it comes down to a choice between a secular, rational society and a deeply religious one immersed in unsubstantiated belief, I know which I'd choose.

The inclusion of Creationism into the syllabi of some institutions has further been defended as healthy, in that it encourages students to question. After all, why should we swallow without scrutiny the Darwinist history of man, the argument goes. Young minds should apply an inquisitive approach even to such established schools of thought as this. True, indisputably. So why then should those students not also ask the same questions of their own religious-based beliefs? If they did, they'd find that Creationism runs out of answers a lot faster than evolution does.

Job Hunting.

2006-08-09T11:41:00.000+01:00

Who would have thought job hunting could take up so much time?

I used to be able to take a walk around in an afternoon and land myself a job in time to sink a couple of pints in the pub before dinner. Of course, they were always factory, warehouse, labouring, or pub jobs. Now I'm trying to get something a little more rewarding it's much more of a challenge. Which is alright, obviously. I love a challenge, according to my CV.

A friend who works in telecommunications assures me there's a good chance he could land me a job with his company, which would pay quite well. Considerably better than everything else I've looked at anyway. Thing is, telecommunications is not exactly what I had imagined myself going in for. I was always stuck between wanting to be a journalist and wanting to work for a public body, serving society in some way. God knows if I'd be any good with telecommunications, although my mate insists I wouldn't have any problem.

Is the better money worth changing direction for?

Random book advice.

2006-08-08T13:23:00.000+01:00

Thank God for the second hand book shop on Streatham Hill. For two quid a book you find some real gems in there. Recently I've picked up about twenty titles I'd previosuly sought after for a fraction of the price I would have paid. Compared with Bookends up on Tottenham Court Road, the shop in Streatham is a book lover's paradise.

He's new to me but if you ever see a Niall Griffiths book it will be worth picking up. Sheepshagger is what brought him to my attention and it's powerful blend of coarse, expletive-ridden dialogue and intensely colourful, almost poetic narrative affords the book a rare quality that sets it apart from much of what I have read recently. Wreckage is also looking pretty enticing although I have not started to read it properly yet.

So the moral of the story is this: go and buy a book by Niall Griffiths.

The Break Up.

2006-08-03T11:47:00.000+01:00

Sat down with my good lady last night and watched The Break Up. Perhaps a risky move when all I wanted to do was relax and enjoy the only night off I've got this week. See, watching somebody on screen point out all the little things that happen in relationships can easily lead to your other half being reminded of a selection of your past crimes.

Still, the gambled paid off. Needless argument-archaeology was kept to a minimum and overall the film was reasonable. Entertaining enough, anyway. The only snag was the realisation that we'd just committed ourselves to a couple of hours of watching people argue. Let's face it, it's no fun sitting with a couple whose seething (temporary or otherwise) contempt for each other has stubbed out any regard for the comfort of those around them. I almost felt envious of Gary and Brooke's friends who only had to endure the rows for the length of the scenes they were involved in.

The film does feel a little bit like missed opportunity. Despite some well observed insights into the murky world of petty grudges and volcanic disagreements into which many relationships descend, there was no real reason to care about what happens. Aniston and Vaughn are nice enough, but a tad bland and unbelievable. The comic figures thrown in to inject some humour into the 105 minute argument were almost irritatingly perfunctory, although Gary's best friend's obsession with murder and violent revenge made me chuckle.

Brooke's ridiculous gay, musically incapable, martial artist of a brother was basically Ned Flanders with a black belt and in the final analysis just another notch on the bedpost of Hollywood's affair with the good-for-laughs homo.

Did I start this post by saying the film was ok?

Well, if you're expecting some kind of thought provoking analysis of the modern day relationship you'll probably be disappointed. But I wasn't. It was just something to switch on so that I could switch off, really, and in that task it fared pretty well.

I feel it's a bit odd ignoring the world of current affairs in my recent posts, particularly in the light of what's happening in the ME. But right now time is short for me as I work long days and spend the other hours looking for better employment. As things are, I don't really want to blurt out some ultimately ill-thought out remarks about matters of such gravity in the ten or twenty minutes I get to focus on RIP in the mornings. Which is not to say I fancy moving into the world of film critique, so Johnathon Ross can relax a while yet.

Grumpy Londoners.

2006-08-02T11:03:00.000+01:00

Stood in the bakers a minute ago, I felt a nudge in my back. It felt like the kind of nudge a friend might give as they crept up behind you to say hello, so I thought I was about to find a familiar face.

Nope.

Instead, a sullen stare meets my investigation. Offering no explanation, the nudger left it to me to speak first. "What?" He pointed towards the counter: "You're being served." It's not that he barked this response at me, but the tone was defiantly grumpy. Even though I know the girl behind the counter is waiting for the lady in front to pay, I turn around and make sure she's not waiting to serve me. Wish I hadn't, because I knew she wasn't, and it would have been better to tell him he was wrong without even looking round. Anyway, I turn back towards him and tell him look, she's not ready to serve me, and what does he do? He just maintains his stony disposition and looks away from me. Am I being pedantic or overly sensitive or something, or am I right in thinking a little apology or just some form of speech would have been an appropriate response from him?

I honestly do not understand why people walk around with such a bad attitude all the time. I don't know about other cities, but London is absolutely full of these unpleasant individuals seemingly intent on turning everybody else's day sour. The example I just gave is fairly minor, admittedly, although it did irk me nonetheless. But much worse awaits the visitor to this city who has the bad luck of running into one of these miserable gits.

Oops, look at the time. I'd love to carry on moaning about the moaners, but I've got to get to work.

Ramble.

2006-07-31T12:49:00.000+01:00

Been out the country recently. Went to Spain and found much of it's drab, arrid wasteland has been swallowed up by rapid urbanisation. Apartment blocks for miles and robbers everywhere too. Then I came back and found that temperatures here in London had also been in the thirties.

Talk about a busman's holiday.

Opened up my email and saw reams of messages. Realised that only two or three were from friends and the rest was junk from places like Amazon.

Had a couple of friends say hello on Myspace as well though, so altogether I reckon that makes me about as popular as Nick Griffin in Brixton.

Shouldn't use Myspace anyway, now that c*** Murdoch owns it. The shame.

If anybody fancies writing me out a nice new shiny CV, I'll slip 'em a tenner. Working every afternoon and night in the pub so I can forget seeing my better half for the next week or so.

Anyway, I'm running out of time in this shabby little 'net cafe. Donations to the Phu home computer fund can be forwarded to the normal email address.

Ta.

Anniversary.

2006-07-08T11:55:00.000+01:00

Well, yesterday was a sombre day for us all. Just outside my house is situated the main South London Mosque. Being a Friday the streets were packed with Muslims, who hang around and converse after the midday prayers. A friend bemoaned the police presence outside the mosque, claiming any burglars and muggers would have an easy day of it due to lack of available constabulary.

Meeting my better half in North London, I caught the tube up to Finsbury Park, former home of the infamous Abu Hamza, and again noticed some police presence.

My lovely lady has been staying with her family in North London for a few days, and is coming back home today. I wish there was no reason to worry for her safety, travelling on the Tube. But that's a luxury we have all lost now.

Blair and the committee.

2006-07-04T11:22:00.000+01:00

Interesting watching the committee Blair is facing this morning.

Asked whether he thought it acceptable to send people back to countries where they faced the risk of torture, Blair answered no, but our obligations do not extend to ensuring the safety of foreign criminals over ensuring the safety of our own citizens. True, maybe. But what constitutes a dangerous criminal in Blairite Britain? We only have to look at the absurd cases of arrest under the anti-terrorism laws to realise just how blurry the distinctions are. Are we to understand Blair would deem it justified to send Milan Rai or Barbara Tucker off to be tortured?

Explaining why he thinks it right that British citizens should have their liberties stripped away one by one Blair said that modern society poses new challenges, and we must adapt to face them. A simple matter of evolution, then. Apparently blaming immigration (seriously) for much of these new 'challenges' the PM argued for a "balance between liberty and security", saying we need to "tilt the system". Part of this new formula, he went on, was the loss of right to trial by jury and that old 'innocent until proven guilty' nonsense.

Incredibly, he then immediately followed this up by pleading that his government be judged on evidence, not what is printed in the media.

Stating that the Muslim community needs to be purged of "a completely false sense of a grievance against the West", he pointed out much had been done with the Muslim community since 7/7, although he didn't say what any of this work actually was.

And try telling all the innocent Muslims in the ME who have suffered at the hands of Western foreign policy that their sense of grievance is "false".

Failure.

2006-07-02T15:08:00.000+01:00

Like I said, it takes the opposite of playing bad. England have played poorly throughout the campaign, and the World Cup in general has been pretty shit.

We all got excited when Spain won their first match 4-0.

It was against UKRAINE. One good player doesn't make a good squad.

Everybody except me thought Argentina would win it, when Mexico took them to their very limits before a miracle goal saved them.

The reason I didn't think Argentina would win? I was too busy thinking Brazil would do it. They too have been rubbish.

Germany have probably got it now. But what a shame it's been so disappointing, and not just because of England's inevitable quarter final misery.

Sweet Justice.

2006-07-02T14:45:00.000+01:00

Two obvious wronguns come bowling into the pub late last night. The one with speech capacity puts his arm round my shoulder and orders two pints of Nelson Mandela. I put the pints down in front of him.

"Yeah that's on my slate bruv."

"No, you haven't got a slate bruv."

"Ask Frank* (the guvnor) it's on my slate."

"Frank aint here (he's upstairs) and I'm not doing any slates mate."

"Alright whatever. Ask my mate over there for the money."

I go and speak to his mate, who grunts some neanderthal response. I'm later to learn this lurch is a murderer who did 18 years bird. The bastard at the bar had sent me over to him anticipating me getting my head split open.

Anyway, it's clear these two are trouble so I ring my boss, who comes down to have a word with them, then calls the police. The two arseholes meanwhile Take it upon themselves to wander round with a menacing swagger and then threaten to kill my mate Mick, who in turn threatens to kill the both of them.

Eventually they end up falling out the pub to have a row with my boss, who's outside waiting for the old bill to arrive. While hurling insults at the landlord (a man big enough to handle himself in any situation) they get distracted by a group of kids hanging around the street corner.Being a couple of bullies they move towards the kids and start having a go at them, too.

Bad move.

In seconds, a huge group of COTA* are punching, kicking, and jumping on top of them. My boss watches them get kicked absolutely shitless, calls the police, and tells them there's no longer a problem.

"Sweet justice", he called it.

Personally I was torn between two emotions. On the one hand I felt uneasy that two blokes had just been savagely attacked by the increasingly violent youth on London's streets. On the other hand, I couldn't help smiling at the fact two pieces of violent scum like these, one of them a murderer, had been given a taste of their own medicine by a pack of kids they were trying to bully.

* All names changed.

* Children of the Apocalypse - see earlier posts.

Henry Porter

2006-06-30T12:58:00.000+01:00

Henry Porter is a man whose views I respect. His Vanity Fair article, reprinted in yesterday's Indy, made many salient points.

'In the guise of fighting terrorism', he argues, Blair's government has 'taken power from Parliament and the British people'.

The Serious Organised Crime and Police Act is perhaps the most obvious example of Blair's authoritarian style. We continue to see people arrested as if they pose some deadly threat by peacefully protesting in Westminster.

Certain aspects of ASBOs (the so-called presumption of guilt) are also a worrying development, although I think the basic idea of looking at an individual's persistent misbehaviour, rather than pinpointing single, minor offences, makes a lot of sense. The fact 'hearsay' is admissable as evidence in ASBO cases is of course unnerving; neighbours are able to police each other. Pat next door can get the state on you for any number of trivial reasons, if she takes a dislike to you.

Coupled with ASBO TV we can perhaps understand why the government is so sensitive about people quoting George Orwell in public.

Porter includes some pertinent quotes in his article, which I shall reproduce here (stay with me):

If you will not fight for the right, when you can easily win without bloodshed, if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not so costly, you may come to the moment when you have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no chance of victory, becasue it is better to perish than live as slaves.

- Winston Churchill.

If you throw live frogs into a pan of boiling water, they will sensibly jump out and save themselves. If you put them in a pan of cold water and gently apply the heat until the water boils they will lie in the pan and boil to death.

-Shami Chakrabarti.

Homosexual practices are not acceptable.

-Iqbal Sacranie.

The first quote would serve to warn us against the dangers to established civillian liberties posed by Blair and the Labour Party.

Make no mistake about it: Blair's threat is as tangible as Chakrabarti describes.

The third quote is representative of an increasingly significant section of British society. A basic goal for many Muslims is to make England an Islamic state. I'm not being sensationalist here. I know Muslim men who are the nicest people you could meet, my next door neighbour for one, who would never ally themselves with those who kill in the name of Islam. But for a Muslim to want to establish an Islamic state in Britain is as natural as a Born Again Christian knocking on your front door with a bible in hand. That's what religions do.

While Porter seeks to defend civil liberties he needs to remember the rights of everybody, including those who would suffer if responsible attitudes to free speech were not maintained. In fact, the best example of the value of this responsible attitude was the refusal of the British press to publish the infamous cartoon depicting Mohammad.

Sacranie would do well to observe this code of responsibility himself (and free himself from the chains of hypocrisy).

And well meaning libertarians would do well to observe the faults of our "external" enemies as well as those of our "internal" ones. I cannot fall in line with those people who honestly believe Bush and Blair are simply protecting the people of the world from evil. But neither can I defend the actions of one type of tyrant simply to attack another.

Sven Goran Eriksson

2006-06-30T12:55:00.000+01:00

SGE really is talking shit. What's he on about, we'll "win it playing badly"?

"To win the World Cup I'm prepared to do whatever it takes."

Well, here's a clue, you wanker: it takes the opposite of playing bad.

Inheritance tax.

2006-06-27T11:09:00.000+01:00

Heard about the law stating that if a property is left uninhabited for six months, the local council can rent it out to whoever they please?

As legal owner of the property, you get to keep the rent from the house your dear old parents brought you up in.

Such generosity.

Still, it has to be said, you might not like the idea of having no say over what sort of person is moved into the gaff.

Wait, that sounds silly.

You're far more likely to be extremely pissed off at the fact that somebody is being moved in in the first place.

I tried to imagine myself in this same situation. If my parents had passed away and left me a house they'd bought with a life time's worth of hard work, how would I feel if the government moved a bunch of homeless crackheads in six months and two days later?

It's not hard to argue against keeping a property standing unused while many in the community wait in queue for a roof. But six months is surely not long enough to have decided on what is to be done with a house and sold it, moved into it, rented it, or whatever after the death of a loved one. I would have thought a period of two years more suitable to be honest.

Particularly when there are so many examples of local councils leaving properties empty for years with no effort towards renovating them and filling them with the needy.

The thing is, from a personal point of view, I would like to be able to provide those who need it with a roof over their heads. But is a lifetime of your benefactor's hard work yours to give?

Instead of this law, I would propose a situation similar to the organ donor system, where we could decide before our deaths whether our properties could be appropriated by the local council after a fixed period, so long as our relatives retained ownership. The stipulation: this system be introduced in exchange for the abolition of the inheritance tax.

Brazil.

2006-06-23T15:33:00.000+01:00

Is Graham Poll going senile?

How could you forget you'd already booked a player and should have sent him off the second time?

To be honest, you've got to congratulate the Ozzies, even if they are something of an old enemy. They might be a bunch of arrogant tossers in most sport, but when it comes to football they're the underdogs. Everyone loves an underdog, right?

Well, no, not if they're playing Brazil. Why so many Brazil fans in England, I wonder. When Japan scored the first goal I thought, good for them, nice one. But everybody else couldn't wait for the Brazillians to crush them. When Ronaldo scored, people were cheering as if Rooney had just netted the winner in the final against Argentina. One poor confused soul even told me he'd be in a dilemma if England come up against them, because he wouldn't want either side to lose.

And no, he hasn't got any ancestral Brazillian lineage or any other bond to the country.

I know Brazil are a delight to watch but it doesn't mean I want them to do well. Personally I'd love to see them beaten 3-0 by Ghana. Fat chance.

Or that's what I think Ronaldo said.

By the way, didn't they look dodgy with the white shorts?

Beware of UK, Nigeria tells citizens.

2006-06-22T14:37:00.000+01:00

Oddest story from Reuters today:

LAGOS (Reuters) - Crime-infested Nigeria, famed for its email scams, has warned citizens travelling to Britain to watch out for conmen who use tricks to rob or rip off visitors.
Fraudsters in Britain might pour tomato juice or other substances on your dress and then offer to help remove it, robbing you in the process, the information ministry warned in its first-ever travel advisory obtained by Reuters on Thursday.

The conmen, who are mainly white, but also include east Europeans and north Africans, might also pretend to pick up an object from under a potential victim's seat to distract his attention while he robs him, it added.

"Nigerian travellers are hereby warned not to carry large amount of money on their body and ensure that their air tickets, passports, expensive wrist-watches as well as trinkets are securely hidden," the advisory said.

Nigeria itself has seen a sharp rise in violent crime since President Olusegun Obasanjo was elected in 1999, ending 15 years of military rule.

Africa's top oil producer, ranked by Berlin-based sleaze watchdog Transparency International as the world's seventh most corrupt country, is also famous for junk mail scams.
The advisory said favourite British blackspots include airports, high streets, markets, hotels and restaurants, shopping centres, tube stations, bus stops and buses.
It said the Nigerian High Commission in the United Kingdom had reported an upsurge in crime and assault against Nigerians visiting London in the recent past.

There is no evidence that Nigerians are being specially targeted, "but ostentatious dressing, spending and ancillary actions may identify a target," the advisory said.
Nigeria's so-called 419 email scam, named after an article in Nigeria's criminal code, was so successful that campaigners said it became the country's main foreign exchange earner after oil.

The fraud swindled hundreds of millions of dollars every year from people across the globe, who respond to emails promising them a share of non-existent fortunes in return for an advance fee.

Hats, books, paints, and balls.

2006-06-22T11:16:00.000+01:00

-BBC Breakfast - Royal Ascot 'ladies day' - excuse me while I puke all over your preposterous hats and dresses.

-Also on BBC Breakfast - Will Self's new book, The Book of Dave, sounds great. I wanted to hate it because I've been reading loads of his stuff recently but I've got to admit the plot sounded interesting. Basically a London cabbie is cuckolded and goes on a bit of a rampage. Oddly enough he fashions some sort of makeshift version of the Ten Commandments on some sheets of metal and buries them in his wife's garden (presumably our disbelief is suspended, it does sound a bit dodgy there...)

Anyway, in London's flooded future only the tops of the hilliest areas are still above water, and on them live a group of people who discover Dave's templates, and subscribe to them devotedly. These people view Dave as a god, and their greeting for each other is "where to guv?"

-I really can't get my head round those who want to cover up Banksy's artwork as if it is an ugly blemish on the bland walls of our cities. His murals are stunning, highly original, and should be revered, not slated.
(Although the statue he vandalised - in the 'outdoors' section of his site - does nothing to help his cause)

-One more football bit, people keep asking when Sven will play Walcott. He'll only feel safe bringing him on if England have a comfortable lead and look to have bagged the match. He might have talked a big game, saying he's ready to take a gamble, but will he really want to bring Walcott on against the goliaths we have in front of us?

If we beat Ecuador, the quarters will bring either Holland or Portugal, the semis either Brazil or Spain, and the final either Germany or Argentina. Something like that anyway.

Can't help thinking Defoe should have been there.

Blair Force 1

2006-06-21T11:46:00.000+01:00

Sod it. Might as well make a prediction for tomorrow night. 1-0 to England.

I know, I know. I really should stop.

Frank Lampard is exposing himself as a bit of a luxury player in this World Cup. Bolstered by players like Essien he has put many into the back of the net for Cheslki. But at the moment, he seems pretty incapable of similar performances for England. Even his usually excellent shots on goal have been rubbish.

Now, I know that if I'm going to comment on Blair Force One I should start by saying something about what a scandalous expenditure on behalf of the taxpayer it is. Possibly next I should jump in with the Green argument and lambast this prime minister who supposedly cares so much for the environment.

In truth, I'm not sure what difference to the environment these two planes are actually going to make.

Anyway, stuff all that. What strikes me most is just how pathetic Blair's presidential style appears when contrasted with the real thing. So he wants to play at being like his mate George, that's nice. But how silly does he look, emulating the state of the art, missile repelling flying palace Bush uses with a couple of second hand commercial airliners?

Kidnap.

2006-06-20T17:06:00.000+01:00

London can be a strange place. Last night I witnessed a kidnapping. I don't hesitate to use the word, because that's certainly what it was.

After a brief argument, a girl was bundled into the back of a car, clearly against her will. A few of the men gathered around seemed to know what was going on and who was involved. My friend and I questioned some of them, and I began to argue with a guy who tried to pacify me and pretend nothing out of the ordinary had happened. At the bus stop nearby loomed an imposing figure, who dwarfed my 6'2 frame. He intruded on the conversation, telling me it was none of my business, I should keep out of it. His tall, shadowy presence only compounded the sinister aura of the scene.

Warned off by the giant, my friend and I crossed the road, sat in the green, and called the police. The police ignored the first call. When I rang again after it became apparent no attention had been paid, they asked me why I had left it so long before calling. Anyway, finally they turned up and we detailed what we had seen.

Not long after the police had gone an American bloke came along preaching the word of God. My Irish death metal head friend tested the American's patience, proclaiming himself a Satanist. Fair play to the zealot though, he strived to maintain relations and spread the love. A couple of other guys came along and decided to 'protect' the preacher man from us, simply because we were white and he was black. The newcomers were Somalian. More argument ensued, with the preacher trying to quash it all. The bizzare debate died down but the Oregon toned DV went on.

Meanwhile, across the road, elements of the sinister kidnap crowd still lingered around. I was pretty lucky they didn't come over after they'd seen the old bill leave. I don't know, am I a 'normal' guy, observing the oddities of my south London environment, or am I just another clown in the circus?

DNA tests.

2006-06-19T13:25:00.000+01:00

As I was brought up within the mental confines of Catholic inertia, I have always struggled to fashion a solid opinion on the issue of abortion. Although religious overtones may have been purged from my logic long ago (or perhaps they haven't), I can never forget reading a midwife's account of the true nature of abortion. Explaining her conversion from pro-choice to pro-life, she recalled a baby that continued to gasp for breath minutes after being "aborted". In reality I didn't need to hear this horror story to believe that not long after conception a baby with a right to live exists whether we like it or not. Add to it all the fact I myself was adopted and am eternally indebted to the lady I will never meet, who went through the physical and emotional hurricane of child birth in order to gift me life, and my liberal instincts find themselves out-boxed by heavyweight morality.

However, this brand of moral righteousness must sometimes be met by another type of moral thinking. To argue against abortion where a young couple have been careless and would rather deny their child life then let them have it with another family is one thing, to knowingly bring a child into a short, painful, restrictive, and emotionally traumatic life due to serious illness is something quite different altogether. Still, even in this situation, abortion remains quite correctly a hotly contested issue.

That scientists claim to have found a way to detect any potentially serious diseases in embryos, and then work towards preventing these diseases, not simply aborting the child, should surely be seen as a miraculous breakthrough to be applauded and celebrated. Critics deplore the idea of helping these unborn babies, disgusted at the concept of "designer" births.

Obviously, it would be ethically repugnant if we were able to craft our babies according to our whims and fancies. Generations of British girls would grow up to look like clones of Christina Aguilera or Beyonce (now I come to think about it...)

But seriously, the argument is fundamentally flawed. In fact, it seems no more rational than arguing against the existence of a police force to protect society, lest they abuse their powers. Millions of children could live happy and fulfilling lives, looking forward and planning for the future, just like their friends. To deprive them of that in case we are not able to resist turning humanity into one giant Vogue photoshoot is what is truely morally repulsive.

Australia dumped in the WC.

2006-06-19T13:11:00.000+01:00

Ahem... well, I knew I shouldn't put my head on the block like that. Still, I was only one goal out. Trinidad did to us what Australia have done to Brazil, Poland to Germany, and Paraguay to Sweden. They made us wait, and even deserved a goal. Tough.

After the match with Ghana everyone was saying Italy looked good, but what was that all about with the USA? My Italian housemate (and football coach) was seriously pissed off, he had a face like a wasp chewing a bulldog the next day. He even said if they are going to play like that he wants them to go home now. Bit harsh, they'll beat the Czechs, I reckon (out on a limb again). Was fun when Ghana beat the Czechs on Saturday, the carhorns and cheers in the street lasted all night.

When South Korea equalised last night, the cheers could be heard again, everyone was an SK supporter for the evening. Can't think why. They're real support was phenomenal, the Korean fans know how to represent.

Sod it. Might as well make a prediction for tomorrow night. 1-0 to England.

Out on a limb.

2006-06-15T13:28:00.000+01:00

Even though I had imagined finishing my studies would have freed up my time for blogging as usual, I didn't foresee the difficulties a lack of free internet access would bring. Getting to a net cafe is a pain in the arse and not frequently possible when you're trying to have a life. Going to save up for a computer of my own as soon as I get the chance.

Everyone's saying it's a good thing we probably won't meet Germany in the next round of the WC, but I hardly think beating Costa Rica and struggling for 91 minutes to score against Poland is a sign of any threat. Yeah, England had a shit second half against Paraguay, granted, but I don't think that would happen against Germany. England generally play less good football against rubbish teams, they'll still come good in the next round though, mind you, even then it'll be Ecuador or Costa Rica. Tonight should be a laugh, watching them smash Jamaica was just boring, it was meaningless, but if they do something similar in the WC I'll be glued to the screen, even if it is against Trinidad and Tobago. Probably best not to go out on a limb like this, but I reckon England will win with three goals, in the conservative estimate, four if someone like Lampard sticks one in for good measure. Got to keep serving beer to a bunch of pissheads while I'm trying to watch the match though unfortunately.

PMQ's was great yesterday, Blair was in danger of losing out to Cameron just because he got so visibly agitated, while Dave kept it cool and tried to laugh off any blame Blair attributed to the Tories for the state of the criminal justice system. Blair was the real winner though, he out-argued Cameron and generally made a little bit more sense/packed a bit of a harder punch.

Almost easy to forget you were watching politics really, the issues debated seemed less important than the entertainment factor.

Anyway, back to the job hunt...

He's a ladeez man.

2006-06-07T10:34:00.000+01:00

Was meant to post this yesterday, but other engagements interfered with my plans. On the Daily Politics show, they were discussing David Cameron's 50/50 gender quota and 10% ethnic minority stipulations. Several Tory members were far from happy with the idea. James Wharton, Team Tory representative in Stockport, is displeased with it all. He argues that such quota filling will mean worthy contenders will be overlooked in favour of employing the right amount of women, blacks, iguanas, etc.

Not an unheard of line of thinking, this.

But the trap Wharton and the rest of the quota sceptics are in danger of falling into is the basic assumption that women or ethnic minority members will essentially represent a drop in quality. The automatic response in situations like this implies that yes, we're all equal, but let's face it, some are more equal than others, aren't they?

In terms of ability, in any case.

Accusations of political correctness abound (which, stripped of it's Daily Mail tarnish, is a grimly ironic insult) but this is surely an issue of fair representation for all.

Not that we should wholly buy into it, of course. While recognising the noble cause, it's worth remembering it comes as part of the glossy new package Dave is wrapping the party in. Fairness for all doesn't sit so easily alongside pledges to abandon the Human Rights Act A.S.A.P.

Bloody Mondays.

2006-06-05T11:16:00.000+01:00

Official confirmation dropped through the letterbox this morning:

Dear Mr Phu,

we regret we will not be able to determine the overall results of your studies. We shall, however, provide you with a letter to any prospective employer, explaining that you do not have a degree.

Well, as helpful as that might prove, I can't help but feel a little pissed off at the fact I've spent the last four years pouring thousands of pounds into your institution, money not gifted me by super-rich parents but earned bit by bit, five nights a week, behind bars, in pub kitchens, and on building sites. That you are so gracefully prepared to write me a pretty letter for any prospective employer is all very well, but not exactly what I had envisioned as the fruit of my endeavours four years ago. Don't worry though, it's not like I can sue you or anything. Let's face it, you made sure I couldn't afford that when you siphoned the five grand tuition fees you've charged me from my bank account.

Stroll in the pub for a couple of late night drinks with the better half. Tired, not feeling very well really. Shake hands with the guv'nor, acknowledge the pair he's talking to. Stand at the bar, say hello to the girls working and order the beers. Shake hands with the fellas, there's only two about, one visibly drunk. This one enthusiatically engineers a conversation regarding the potential for me to work in politics. I'm not in the mood to be honest, but your man perserveres with me. A close friend of some influential politicians, he introduced me to the idea of becoming a political assistant a week or so ago. But now he wants convincing of my passion. The thing is, he hasn't actually explained much of what the role consists of. He asks me what my favourite television programme is, but warns me not to tell him just what I think he wants to hear. I haven't really got one, but I do watch Have I Got News For You, which he advises me to watch excitedly. I don't think he even believes I watch it. Can't see why, it's not likely to turn up on the application form is it?

I can see the interviewer now:

"So, as I can see from this pretty letter, you don't actually have a degree, nor any experience which could have been gained in the last four years if you weren't wasting your time with university. But you watch Have I Got News For You? Splendid. When can you start?"

RIP is resurrected.

2006-06-01T13:43:00.000+01:00

Resistance is Phutile is back, like a phoenix from the ashes, or a re-lit dog end from the ash tray.

Back to further pollute cyberspace with the daily garbage spilling out of the current affairs landfill that is my brain. The reason for the hiatus: finally finishing university, tonnes of work consuming my time and passion for writing. Well, not strictly true, I continued to scribble scraps of scrutiny in my little black notebook, all far too absurd or pointless to sully the public sphere with (rich, maybe).

Just because I feel like it, here's a quick list of the books I've managed to read in between endless reams of socio-cultural theory. Without the respite afforded me by these treasures, I'd have sunk into an impenetrable coma long ago.

Grey Area - Will Self
Cock and Bull - Will Self
Papillon - Henri Charriere
The Time Traveller's Wife - Audrey Niffenegger
How the Dead Live - Will Self

A bit too much of the same author maybe, but an enjoyable selection nonetheless.

Now I'm faced with the task of securing a job I actually want, and an escape from working in the boozer. Mind you, the pub's just a thirty second walk from my front door; maybe I'll miss the proximity when I'm crammed into the 159, ploughing it's way through the Brixton traffic on it's way to the West End every morning.

Anyway, good to be back.

Dot

2006-05-23T11:54:00.000+01:00

Phillipe Scolari

2006-04-27T15:47:00.000+01:00

Thank God the FA haven't offered the job to Mclaren or Curbishley. It might be seen as a vote of no confidence in our own managers but the alternative would have spelled dismal performances and no trophies. True, Scolari's success with Brazil at the last World Cup can be countered with Gary Lineker's argument - "even my nan could probably have steered Brazil to World Cup success" - but at least he will inject something new into England. Mclaren would certainly have engineered yet more of the same. The quarter finals will not be enough to satiate the appetites of England fans.

Should the FA have pursued Wenger? It's highly unlikely he would have acquiesced. He's been in the country long enough to have this mythical "connection" with the English game that people like Lineker and Harry Redknapp bleat on about. But the flipside of that is he has seen firsthand the intense spotlight England manger's lives are subjected to. Who knows? Perhaps the reputation of the British media might yet deter Scolari from accepting a role he would otherwise almost certainly relish.

To my mind, there is one man above all else who possesses the necessary skill, knowledge of the English game, and armour plated ego thick enough to withstand any tabloid assault on his character. But we Brits don't really like winners. We secretly hanker for noble men-of-the-people, capturing hearts but never the elusive trophy. Much more important he display that humble attitude, so graceful in defeat, than he display the indigenous killer instinct so sorely missed by the current England squad.

No, we'd never accept a man like Jose Mourinho, we'd rather carry on as we are thanks.

A humble piece of the criminal pie.

2006-04-12T10:11:00.000+01:00

Kingston upon Thames is apparently the borough which saw the highest level of bicycle theft last year. While applauding the boroughs residents on their achievement of this dubious honour, I feel I should stake my claim for a share of the accolade.

Late one night after visiting my mate who lived in the borough, I had decided I didn't much fancy staying in his flat until the morning. My drunken wisdom told me it would be much better to steal a bike from the row of them chained up in the shed round the back of the building and cycle home. Problem was, most of the locks didn't look like breaking when pulled (surprisingly) and in fact the only one that did belonged to a complete piece of junk with no tyres. Worse, it was the sort of old fashioned bike you might see a granny riding. Memory is a bit hazy, but if it didn't have one of those little baskets on the front of the handlebars, it should have had one.

Unperturbed, I yanked the bike from its harness and saddled up, realising it was quite small, a fact not helped by the absence of inflated rubber around the wheel frames. In all honesty, the ridiculously long journey home might have been shorter if a sober person had walked it, as I spent as much time zig zagging off course as I did moving forward in a straight line. It was a painful journey, and the lack of tyres made it very hard to actually make the thing move, which would have been more obvious to me in any other situation.

For a while, the police followed me. Trailing along on the road beside me they might have looked like curb crawlers with a bizarre interest in drunken bike thiefs if their car wasn't covered in neon. Bet they had a right laugh though, I would have done. So anyway, if you're the granny or young person with suspiciously pensioneresque taste in wheeled transport affected by my dreadful crime - cheers for the bike.

Dangerously subversive dad.

2006-04-04T13:27:00.000+01:00

Occasionally perusing the world of blogging can throw up some real gems, such as this one from the Philippines. Then other times I come across bloggers so vile I wish I could reach through the screen and out of theirs, and smash their stupid faces in. So without any further ado let me introduce Dangerously Subversive Dad - the link is to just one of his venemous diatribes, entitled Invasion of the grey criminals, in which his initially reasoned argument against the BBC's depiction of non-white criminals degenerates into thinly veiled racist rage.

Suggesting black on white racist crimes have become so prominent they are now "run of the mill", DSD bemoans how, if a white on black racist crime were ever to take place (don't think it actually does in his world - he asks his reader to "imagine" it happening, having no examples of such cases himself, despite a ready supply of examples of black on white crimes to hand) it would be all over the papers. What a national ignominy this is, when the hordes of black rapists and thugs are allowed to carry on savaging the poor English every day in their own land.

Reading the comments readers have left in reply to this piece of sage political observation, it becomes clear what type of animal DSD caters for. Hoping for at least one response from a non-racist lunatic, I read on in vain. Dave said that black on white crime "doesn't bother (him) as much", because, the dim-witted brutes, they "attack each other as much." Ah yes, the old black on black crime. They're all a bunch of violent thugs. Thick. If only they could learn from the example of the excessively peaceful white man, who is never to be seen committing acts of violence against his own.

DSD sympathises with Dave's worries about English political correctness, though. The English, he enthuses, "aren't ALLOWED to protect our own".

"If whitey so much as looks funny at anyone who isnt whitey in this country -
especially a Muslim - whitey finds himself inside a prison cell on hate crime
charges."

Obviously any non-whites are not considered English by DSD.

Last but by no means least, a scumbag going by the name No Mercy rants about the Muslim pollution in Berlin, and finishes thus:

"Muslims are like locusts and they have to be treaten (sic) like locusts!The answer is
not 42 but Gas."

I did type a little response of my own, but DSD employs comment moderation, and judging by that last comment, it's clear he maintains meticulous scruples when deciding which comments be published and which not. So perhaps my reply will not scrape through the net.

Update: Well in response, it has to be said DSD comes across different second time around. It's only fair to reproduce his words here, as I have seen fit to attack him.

"All the post was about is arguing for equality of reporting and prosecution -
no special treatment for ethnic and/or religious minorities. None at all. That's
ACTUAL equality old boy, as opposed to the 'only whitey is racist' nonsense you
think is anti-racism. I'm sorry if its not to your liking.And for the record, as
far as I presnally am concerned ANYONE born in England who wants to regard
themselves as English, is English. Anyone who legally enters this country and is
willing to abide by its laws and respect its culture, is English to me. But
anyone who wants to reserve the right to live in my country but still only obey
their own 'cultural laws' like subjugation of women, murderous homophobia, rabid racism and anti-semitism can fuck off because they are NOT English."

As with everyone coming from your angle, DSD, you simply assume that anybody who expresses absolute disgust at the suggestion of gassing Muslims is some sort of "phoney anti-racist" who doesn't think that a black man murdering a white man should be punished. Couldn't be further from the truth. It is not the shrouding over of inconvenient realities I seek in order to push some political motive (an inconvenient reality for you though seems to be that white people do attack blacks too). I can't deny there are some so eager to stamp out the racism they see they become blind to racism on the part of those they have designated as victims. But to use those people as some sort of easy get out clause enabling the instant dismissal of any anti-racist thought (which doesn't include poor whitey playing the victim) is unacceptable.

You also cite your experience of growing up in a very Asian area of NW London, how you have seen all the "stick it to the white boy" stuff for yourself. I also reside in London, a very multiracial area south of the river, and have also in my time seen racism on the part of non-whites, as well as on the part of whites. Your calls for equality are in fact reasonable, as far as you bother to take them. But for all the racism you or I have seen in the schools, streets, pubs, etc, I can think of an area where I have seen more racism than any of these put together.

The workplace frequently provides the perfect breeding ground for racism. In the workplace I have often witnessed overt exploitation of non-whites, such as constantly giving them the most menial jobs to do. Worse still is the refusal to employ non-whites, I have seen many turn up on the same bus as me to do the same job, but not come back the next day, when the supervisor shares a joke with us about how he didn't want any coons working in his factory.

Perhaps when these very real social conditions change, and the equality that you hunger for really does take hold, then ethnic minorities will begin to reap the benefits of an equal standing in British society. And if that ever happened, then maybe there would be less of those examples of anti-white feeling that you are rightly angered by.

Monday musings. Of empire and commerce.

2006-04-03T10:55:00.000+01:00

It has been argued that globalisation is a force for good. The consumer allegedly gets better products at cheaper prices, and can always find a McDonalds when faced with eating some fowl concoction cooked up by the locals when on holiday (insert symbol denoting irony here). But the real achievement of globalisation that its chief advocates celebrate is its conquering of the nation state. Corporate dynasties now command much more revenue than many countries, and demand the loyalty of their subjects, who may come from anywhere across the world. The national sovereignties on which human society has based itself for so long are becoming defunct.

It could hardly be argued that transnational commerce is a new development, obviously. The crossing of borders in search of profit has been going on since recorded history began. But until the 1970s any company that had factories and markets overseas viewed them as adjuncts to their home operations. It was during that decade the big businesses, overwhelmingly American of course, began to visualise the entire world as a single economic unit. Charles. P. Kindenberger, one of the leading US authorities on global economics of that time, suggested the international corporation had "no country to which it owed more loyalty than the other, nor any country where it feels completely at home."

So theoretically, all would be equal in this new world of the Great Market. Regardless of race, ethnicity, nationality and so on, all would enjoy equal standing in the eyes of the corporate gods. A twisted yet somehow noble veneer almost emerges, before the reality check hits you between the eyes and you wise up to the facts.

The nation state is said to be outdated, made obselete chiefly by technological progress and economic developments which have seen companies like Exxon and Microsoft gain much more muscle in the global market place than many countries. But if "down with borders" was once the call of ideological students, Lennoned-up and seeking peace and love, did they really envision swapping national identity for a homogenous, centralised existence devoid of character, dictated by those with enough money to buy control of their lives?

And in these days of ferocious US imperialism, when the PNAC manifesto sears itself across the Earth, who really believes that the mass Americanisation of the global market place has been intended to aid the progress of all men as equals, rather than the progress of American interests above all else? Man has always sought to control his surroundings. From Alexander the Great and Attila the Hun to the British Empire and Hitler, the use of military force has been seen as the most effective means of achieving this dominance. Invariably though military strength alone has always eventually failed. The introduction of the One Great Market, under the false guise as liberator of man from his "outdated" nation state may well have been the breakthrough in the eternal pursuit of hegemony. Although breaking down those national borders may have been the dream of the naive ideologists of the past, they have long since woken up from their LSD induced dream world, and are faced with the reality of an entire world of unique cultures and traditions being swallowed up by the most virulent and effective empire the world has yet seen.

But what can be done? The world cannot be expected to step back into its pre-Ipod, Pre-Walmart existence. The path of the human race will not retrace upon itself any more than the teenager will give up his/her eighth of skunk and go back to spending pocket money on penny sweets. As usual there are no simple solutions, but identity-preserving measures need to be taken. Faced with the option of hanging out with the bad crowd, skipping school and smoking weed all day instead, we need to take control of our destiny, focus on the things that matter and work towards achieving them. And keep the weed smoking down to a minimum.

The Fantasy Blog Stock Market.

2006-03-31T11:37:00.000+01:00

Ever heard of it? Me neither, until a few minutes ago. Quite a strange concept really, estimating the fantasy value of weblogs. My humble little blog came in valued at just over one and a half million dollars, which is surprising. Apparently the value of an outgoing link from my site to yours is about $73. Which means a bunch of you owe me some money.

The lady is a stinky tramp.

2006-03-28T14:10:00.000+01:00

As I'm writing this I'm sat on the top deck of the number 57 bus, otherwise known as the travelling circus. About 5 minutes ago, as the 57 approached the bus stop where I was waiting, I braced myself for the usual scuffle in which everyone aims to be the first person on the bus. As is my custom, I maintained a slow - compared to the frontrunners - but determined pace and reflected on how insect-like human behaviour must appear to any celestial obvservers (well, if they actually exist, obviously).

But today something was different. There was a tangible urgency in the drive to board the big red sardine can. Some people actually started running. Blindly bandying the word "parasitic" around in my head (bit harsh, I know) it was then I noticed the driver was actually telling people to hurry up "before they get on".

Who is this they, you might wonder.

Lepers?

Masked men with assault rifles?

No, he meant the two homeless women, one thirty-something, one impossibly small and frail pensioner, who were at the back of the que - crowd. As everybody crammed through the doors the thirty-something sped up and managed to squeeze through before the driver could shut them. "Get off!" he shouted, but the woman refused, choosing a seat for herself and sitting in defiance. As the other passengers all crammed back out the doors to escape the terrible aura of this woman, now joined by her gremlin-like companion, I sat thinking how sad this whole scene was from the safety of the top deck.

The problem, you see, was the stench. Rarely do I find opportunity to use the word "abominable". But as I walked back down the stairs to exit the stationery bus the dense wave of odour nearly made me sick. Abominable was the only word that would do.

Everybody had something to say of course, although only one man was saying the driver should just drive the bus whether people smell or not. A lone noble voice amidst a chorus of disgust aimed at the lepers. But was he right? This I can't be sure of, for all my sadness at watching the pack exclude these two poor souls, sneering, mocking them, I know I couldn't have sat anywhere on the bottom deck if they were on it. As always, having waited ages for the bus, two had come at once, and I blended myself into the pack once more. Having briefly gazed skywards, contemplating the Grand Scheme, I now looked down again, continuing on my path, insect-like.

I hate British Gas.

2006-03-24T14:47:00.000Z

British Gas are beyond doubt the most infuriating, badly managed company I have ever had the misfortune to deal with. After a long, cold winter, where due to a shitty old boiler we were without the use of gas for two or three freezing months, they sent me a bill for £258. During a number of 30 minute phone calls, which as an 0845 number really tax your pocket quite heavily, I was told by some monotone voices the bill was obviously wrong, and by some other monotone voices the bill was certainly right. It carried on like a game of ping pong because around about the third or fourth time I would be put on hold by these delightful human beings I inevitably ran out of money in the phone box. Talk about a scam.

After finally receiving an amended bill of £143, we switched to a gas card meter system and arranged to pay the 143 quid at a weekly rate of £7.50 via the gas card. After the debt outstanding had fallen to around £120, I looked at the meter one morning and lo and behold, we now owed, according to the machine, £412. More phone calls and more wasted money, we were assured a new, correct, bill would find its way to our letterbox shortly.

Fed up with the bullshit we have had to put up with, including:

about seven seperate bills for the same period
a number of lazy useless "engineers" who turn up and do nothing
a number of lazy useless engineers who don't turn up at all and then tell the company they weren't given access to the property
the continued billing of our gas usage even after transferring to a pay as you go system
the most incompetent idiots ever to pick up a phone
the rudest idiot to do the same thing, a dickhead of a lady who accused me of lying when I said we had not used the gas for over a month
blah blah blah

- we contacted London Energy seeking a move. Unfortunately, we were told, a move would not be possible because British Gas say we have neglected to pay a bill which is over two months old.

Which fucking bill exactly, British Gas?

Obviously not the correct one I have been assured will be coming through my letterbox by the 20th March.

The real cost of oily fish.

2006-03-24T14:19:00.000Z

That doctors have raised doubts over the benefits of eating oily fish comes as no surprise. I was actually thinking about the issue just the other day, but it is something myself and surely many others have been waiting for for ages. It's not that I suspect eating oily fish will be detrimental to our health, or even that I doubt the beneficial aspects of Omega 3 consumption particularly. But whenever "the experts" bestow their blessings on one food type or another, it always seems their claims are liable to be disputed at some point, and eventually rubbished.

Science is nothing more than the continual advance towards an as yet (and as always will be) unknown goal. Where will space exploration really lead to? What will the discovery of the absolutely healthy, body clock defying diet really achieve? Eternal life seems unlikely but many are seeking it anyway.

All that is definite is that on this path towards enlightenment wrong turns are inevitably taken, and backtracks need to made. So if you're going to take notice of every new miracle food that gets heralded in on a wave of corporate/scientific/governmental promo-ganda then you're probably going to end up in a real mess.

One day you'll have stuffed yourself full with genetically modified, pesticide-reared tomatoes, next thing you know a new scientific study will discover the importance in flower essences, transported via bug wings, in the development of the tomato's coronary-reducing capabilities.

Or something.

Personally, I love eating fish, it tastes good. Forget any scientific studies claiming it might not be so healthy after all, the only reason I eat less than I would like is because it's so bloody expensive.

Who needs a passport?

2006-03-16T15:37:00.000Z

Charles Clarke really is a class act. Faced with growing opposition to the identity card (even some supporters are said to oppose the compulsory nature of the card being introduced by stealth) he threw a little tantrum in the House. As MPs argued with Clarke, pointing out that making it mandatory to apply for an ID card if applying for a new passport goes directly against Labour claims the scheme will be voluntary, Clarke came over all flabbergasted, insisting nobody would be forced into applying for a new passport.

Well gee, thanks.

So, we either all eventually succumb to the inevitable and get the biometric barcode, or we will not be permitted to go on holiday, open a bank account, or do any of the various other activities which require a passport as means of identification.

To call it introduction by stealth is taking the piss, actually. There's nothing covert about it.

In a few years, anyone lacking a passport and ID card will probably come under the attention of the authorities. A person of Middle Eastern appearance in this situation will probably end up having their front door kicked in by immigration officers at six in the morning, and subsequently getting shipped off to Guantanamo for "questioning". Anybody else will still get their doors kicked in, only this time by the Serious and Organised Crime squad.

Or am I just getting paranoid again?

USA DNA.

2006-03-16T15:30:00.000Z

I don't know, this is just weird.

Sir Ian's comedy of errors.

2006-03-14T12:15:00.000Z

Can we really expect anybody to trust Sir Ian Blair? His career has devolved into a catalogue of errors which, in the worst light, indicate a man capable of dishonest and unlawful endeavours to serve his own ends. Even with the benefit of the doubt, Blair seems worringly susceptible to error of judgement. Indeed, the many characters who want Blair out on his ear must be positively laughing at the amount of favours he's done them. That is a shame, given Blair's achievements regarding the recruitment of members of ethnic minority communities. The majority of recruits to the infamously institutionally racist force in London are black or Asian for the first time. It's hard to overlook the importance of that fact. The prospect of equality for all in the eyes of the law is an encouraging one and largely attributable to Sir Ian.

To be honest, I think his comments concerning the Soham murders were, despite the uproar, perfectly reasonable. The media feeding frenzy was the result of people not liking what they saw in the mirror Blair held up to them. Nevertheless, the comments were part of an unsettling trend for the commissioner.

Livingstone has rushed to defend Blair's phone conversation taping activities, pointing out that since 7/7, those in positions of authority can and should be given carte blanche to do anything they want. Given the "confusion" caused by the bombings, he said on yesterday's BBC Radio 4 lunchtime show, it is perfectly understandable that Blair neglected to inform either the IPCC or the Attorney General that he was recording the conversations they were having. Poor old Sir Ian, he simply forgot, what with all the pressures and everything, to tell the Attorney General he was recording him as he discussed the legitimacy of phone tapping!

Executed at dawn.

2006-03-07T11:29:00.000Z

Late last night I came home from work with a sense of anticipation. The guvnor had been complaining about the ongoing rodent problem in the beer garden, which requires constant preventive measure, when I mentioned that I had a similar problem at home. After a brief chat, where I explained that the use of humane traps had proved fruitless, he gave me something that turned out to be a 'GlueeLouee' rodent catcher. Armed with the gluepad and a pack of pork scratchings for bait I thanked him and headed off. When home, I showed it to my better half and she pointed out that if successful, the enemy would still be alive when found. Feeling full of bravado and sensing a breakthrough in the war, I didn't much care that I would have to kill any prisoners the next day. With the trap laid in the kitchen, where the enemy has been sighted most frequently, I went to bed promising myself not to get my hopes up. This has been a common mistake on my part these last couple of months.

Entering the kitchen this morning I moved slowly, anxious of both failure and success, and saw the mouse, trapped. I took it out to the yard to carry out my grim duty. Despite finally piercing a hole through the enemy trenches I have to admit I didn't enjoy the victory much.

All I can do now is hope there is just the one other mouse (only two have ever been seen), I can't say with any certainty whether that's the case though.

Update: Well, within two nights I captured the second little bastard and slayed it with the use of a very large plant pot, which proved much quicker and more humane than the rock I used first time round. Again, didn't enjoy it much, I don't like killing things. Unfortunately, a third mouse has been spotted, and we live in fear of full scale invasion. The arms industry that is my boss assures me that help is forthcoming.

Fashion.

2006-03-06T15:41:00.000Z

It surprised me that I gave a shit enough to write about this, but I'm going to go ahead anyway. Susannah Frankel, fashion editor of The Independent, saw fit to savage Victoria Beckham this morning, mocking her capacity to "murder any look". Now, while not exactly overcome with the urge to defend Mrs Beckham, I couldn't help feeling irked at the snobbery of Frankel. I know, that's how the fashion world is. But it always pissed me off when some la di dah moron sat there in a grotesque outfit, advising everyone about next year's must-have look, or criticising somebody else for their bad taste. Especially when, as in this case, the photo of the person being attacked showed someone looking glamorous and stylish, while the photo of the attacker showed a dishevelled looking Wurzel Gummage understudy. Then again, I suppose being fashion editor doesn't often present one with the opportunity of getting your name to appear in the front half of the paper, where people are still reading, and haven't left it on a seat on the tube train for the next traveller to pick up.

Now I've got that off my chest, I can go back to not giving a shit about celebrities and their bloody fashion sense. How many others were frustrated at this morning's 'news' programmes, which were saturated with images and opinions of the dresses worn by Kiera Knightley et al at last night's awards shows?

Government surveillence.

2006-03-06T12:37:00.000Z

Is democracy in danger of destroying our liberty?

That was the question Peter Hitchins was asking in his Dispatches programme on Saturday. Warning of the dangers to our civil liberties posed by an increasingly political style of policing, Hitchins set out to put the fear of Big Brother into us quicker than any early morning footage of Pete Burns ever did. Unfortunately, however, the programme fell considerably short of its aims.

The case of Maya Evans was admittedly a good opener. A protester arrested in October last year for reading out the names of those in the British military who have been killed in Iraq, Evans was taken in under the Serious and Organised Crimes Act of the same month. Hitchins noted the irony of the situation with something approaching gleeful opportunism. Here, next to the Cenotaph, where those who died to protect our freedoms are celebrated, an innocent exerciser of those freedoms is carted off by the thought police. I found myself imagining the heroes of the past catching a glimpse of a grim future where the liberties they were fighting to uphold were thrown away by the leaders of their very own country. Opportunistic or otherwise, the point was well made.

Even the story of Matthew Dodd, a trainspotter subjected to a public strip search by the British Transport Police, was still on the right track (sorry for the pun).

But here the programme began to degenerate. As a natural sceptic of the I.D card and somebody who feels genuine anxiety about the stripping away of civil liberties I really wanted to agree with everything Hitchins said. But questioning whether people in police custody under arrest should have samples of their DNA taken was not going to win any converts to Hitchins' line of thinking. Having been arrested and subjected to DNA sampling in the past, I can testify that no unjust consequences have ever come back to haunt me. While I would argue strongly against the cultivation of the national DNA database that is being engineered by the government, it can only be logical that once a person has been caught committing a crime, they have their DNA sampled and held on record for a length of time appropriate according to the offence. Of course, if the police were to arrest somebody for voicing a particular opinion, however disagreeable it may be, there could be no justification for DNA swabbing.

Hitchins shifted his attention to CCTV. Again an area worthy of debate, ASBO TV is very much a worrying development in the population monitoring activities of the state. Yet while the prospect of a suspicous, paranoid populous abandoning the streets in favour of watching them through a screen, in order to observe the hooded Children Of The Apocalypse* happy slap each other to oblivion, is enough to spark contention, can anyone really doubt CCTV's value as a whole? What about all the violent criminals whose capture is made possible by surveillence networks?

While maintaining a healthy suspicion of government activity in general and biometric recorded surveillence of the poulation in particular, I think what this programme really achieved was to serve as a reminder not to get carried away by one's own agenda, blindly dismissing anything and everything those in positions of power do as some sort of conspiratorial manoeuver aimed at achieving world enslavement.

* (COTA registered trademark)

Mouse War.

2006-03-01T12:19:00.000Z

Had intended to write an update concerning the Mouse War while I was on the bus this morning, but ended up having to stand, crammed between people with a rich variety of odours emanating from them, for the entire hour and a bit. Incidentally, if you're ever in that situation, remember never to inhale through your mouth at any point, as you can practically taste the stenches.

Anyway, to the task at hand.

It has been a harsh winter, compounded by the lack of central heating in my abode, which has made getting out of bed in the morning similar to entering one of those big walk in freezers wearing shorts and a tee shirt. The enemy will certainly not have found the conditions agreeable. With its main base of operations in the kitchen, with its freezing cold tile floors, it must have been like the long hard Russian winter the Nazi invaders had to endure. The Rodent Queen of the 'humane' trap misery had advised us to place a piece of newspaper underneath the trap, so the cold night time floor wouldn't kill the mouse. So, with it being such a long time since the last enemy sighting, I entertained myself with the idea it had fallen victim to the unforgiving circumstances.

Then, disaster. My better half reported an enemy sighting and worse yet, there were two of them. The bastard didn't just survive, he brought a recruit! How long can there be before this unholy alliance spawns a new generation of invaders?

The dynamics of the war have changed too. Saturday night we saw a mouse in our bedroom (well, all I saw was a dark blur moving very quickly).

The bedroom!

It's like that picture of Hitler, Speer, and his other cronies parading in front of the Eiffel Tower. I can't believe I ever entertained thoughts of not inflicting capital punishment upon the bastard.

It's time for the big guns.

US and them.

2006-02-21T12:16:00.000Z

Not been having much opportunity to blog recently, having neglected to pay the tuition fees for my university course, the bloody swines have cut off my access to the computer systems. All those hours spent arguing with other bloggers with silly screen names, like Scott Burgess (only joking) done away with.

I've still managed to read through a blog or two here and there though, and one thing is bugging me. Despite all the supposed dynamism of the blogging community, citizen journalists, or whatever you want to call us, a lot of us seem depressingly satisfied with swallowing whole whatever the government and right wing press throw at us. When it comes to Polly Toynbee slating the latest garbage to be churned out of Hollywood because of its religious overtones, bloggers are in uproar. When (insert name of Guardian journalist here) writes an opinion piece on (insert relevant issue here), all across the internet, angry writers bustle their way through the pack with talons at the ready to take a swipe. Not content with our own savagery, we scour the web looking for other examples of the same opportunism, hit the 'comment' icon and indulge in some good old back slapping.

Well, thanks, Toynbee, at least your opinion piece gave me something to write about, even if it was shit. An opinion piece on an opinion piece.

But what worries me more at the moment is the increasingly fortified "us and them" mentality fostered by the mainstream press, and bought into by the bloggers.

Yep, you guessed it, I'm talking about the Muslims again. Or the Middle East in general, really. You know, that group of about a billion human individuals whose only representation in the Western media seems to consist of angry young men burning flags or waving guns. Whenever I go on about the demonisation of Muslims I get the same response: it's the extremists who give them a bad name, not the Western media. That just doesn't wash. I don't understand how anybody could see it in such a clear-cut, one dimensional way. Of course the extremists and their jingo-hungry recruits are providing negative images of Islam. But if the press didn't do such a good job of sexing the whole thing up into a "clash of civilisations" the negative impact of the extremist minority would be reduced rather than blown out of all proportion.

Maybe some of us have forgotten the most basic fact, that we are all essentially the same. Like it or not, regardless of religion or race, people have the same needs and desires the world over.

Does nobody but me find it strangely convenient the way Muslims have become such a threatening, dangerous bunch since Bush realised he needed to erase all non-US backed governing bodies in the Middle East?

Funny how, when popular support for the Iraq war (and consequentially the forthcoming invasion of Iran) was dwindling, Bush revealed how Al Qaida were actually planning to steer a plane into the tallest building in LA simultaneously with the attacks in New York. Can't think why he chose to suddenly reveal all this though...

Again, I'm not saying there are no dangerous Muslims out there. But when the American led West is in such agressive pursuit of absolute financial and military dominance of the Muslim world, it's not really surprising. Countries like Egypt are little more than financial colonies of the US. What is really worrying is it is this aggressive policy which is feeding young disillusioned Muslims into the extremist organisations which do pose a tangible danger to society.

Disclaimer: In no way does this post signal an end to the shameless opportunism of "Fisking" which has, on occasion, been witnessed in this blog.

Smarter than your average tramp.

2006-02-14T10:43:00.000Z

It always strikes me as odd when I see homeless people sitting beside cash machines. I mean, you can see the logic, sure, but do they not notice their upside-down hats always seem depressingly empty? If the whole idea is to attack the unsuspecting passerby's conscience, and beat the guilt out of them until they capitulate (which it is), then why provide such an easy escape route, I wonder. Any idiot can think quick enough to blurt out "sorry - no change" whilst snatching a wad of notes from the machine and rushing off.

It's not that it should be this hard for a person in need to acquire 20p from a person with a wallet full of £20 notes. But the world is full of people who need help, choc-a-bloc with them. Why should I give you any money, the busy bank manager wonders, when you'll only go and spend it on drugs and besides, there are people starving in Africa with much less than you.

(Must get round to donating a few quid to Comic Relief one of these years.)

Anyhow, rightly or wrongly, the contemporary tramp has to work hard in order to get a few quid in today's world congested with worthy causes. So with that in mind, I'd like to suggest an alternative approach to the 'hole-in-the-wall-hawk' method. Rather than heading for the nearest Natwest, why not hunt down the closest water fountain? It would take a thick-skinned soul indeed to stand there chucking loose change into the displays in Trafalgar Square while a shivering beggar looks up at him with pleading eyes.

Incidentally, I have often heard cries for help on behalf of the homeless come from somewhat surprising quarters. See if you can guess what angle they're coming from:

"What I wanna know is why we've gotta help all these foreigners when we've got our own to look out for. There's people in England who need the money and the food, not all these bloody Africans."

Are the sentiments of concern for the homeless genuine? Of course.

Liverpool and Tottenham.

2006-02-09T13:43:00.000Z

Sticking with all things football, after Liverpool lost to Charlton last night and now have just one game in hand over us, they should be looking over their shoulders at Spurs. Just one point behind and with the Reds struggling to score goals, Spurs could be looking to capitalize and further consolidate their Champions League position.

All donations welcome.

2006-02-09T13:34:00.000Z

The future looks bleak for Rotherham football club.

Their imminent demise is apparently just weeks away.

In desperation, the club have appealed to the local community to come to their rescue. With a population of around 250,000, Rotherham's residents might be able to save the club from going under if they are prepared to dig into their pockets.

Still, the club only manages to attract 4,000 fans on matchdays, so the success of this appeal may be limited somewhat.

Out of sympathy for the club and as a show of solidarity, I thought I'd chip in and do my bit to help. If you're interested in making a donation to this noble cause, send me an email and I'll be happy to reply with the details of a bank account from which I will ensure all donated funds find their way to the club.

A suggested amount of £20 is provided as a guideline only, to serve as an indication of what might be appropriate. Please feel free to to give more where possible.

Globalization with a twist.

2006-02-09T13:24:00.000Z

When we think of globalization, we tend to think of it more as the spread of American influence throughout the world than as a genuine interspersing of the nations via commerce and culture.
From the dominance of Hollywood in cinema to the big industry slogans penetrating every aspect of our lives, "globalization" often seems little more than the expansion of the American Empire.

So, as fundamentally opposed to globalizing forces and in particular the World Economic Forum though I am, Tesco's announcement they are opening stores on America's west coast is almost like the sugar with the cyanide pill.

If the world is to degenerate into a huge network of identical, characterless high streets and shopping centres, it is nice to know the Americans will be subjected to some foreign influence as well. Even if it does look exactly the same as all the other shops in the area.

Hamza and the media.

2006-02-08T11:25:00.000Z

The media have come under fire from many quarters over the representation of Abu Hamza and his message of hate, and I agree such extensive coverage of Hamza has led to further problems. A nation of Sun readers believing a one-eyed, psychotic Captain Hook can be seen as representative of all Muslims is a worrying concept.

However, Hamza was inevitably going to attract attention to himself. An Imam in one of the country's most prominent mosques, it is hard to understand why his presence was tolerated.

Not by the British government, but by the Muslim community.

You would think the clerical community would have rapidly identified him as a dangerous extremist and subsequently sought to silence him. Even if it was felt by moderates he had a right to voice his message, however disagreeable, (which is disturbing) it was naive to the point of stupidity to grant the man a pedestal and therefore push him into the public eye.

To attack the media for its sensationalist hunger is like getting mad at a dog for eating a steak you left in its bowl.

I'm not saying the media are blameless, only that you incur some of the blame yourself if you did not prepare for the obvious consequences and do your best to avert them.

When a minority of sexually starved, tortured priests turned to minors in search of relief, the Catholic church was suddenly imagined to be teeming with perverts preying on choirboys. This is untrue, of course, but subsequent investigations into the church have revealed the paedophile element to be real, and identified the causes making a minority of otherwise normal men so desperate and tormented they are prepared to do the unthinkable.

Similar investigations need to be carried out into the radical elements of Muslim society today, in order that the preachers of hate, on the fringes or otherwise, be exposed and shut down. But this will never be achieved while the Muslim majority either turn a blind eye to, or even tacitly condone aspects of the teachings of someone like Hamza.

The sad fact is, there seems to be a shortage of senior Muslim figures willing to condemn Abu Hamza.

Islamic Intolerance.

2006-02-03T15:01:00.000Z

A guest writer over on Samizdata questions the intolerance of the Islamic world today and expresses surprise that some are not prepared to agree to disagree over the Danish cartoon incident.

All common sense (or what we in the west consider common sense) aside, it isn't really that surprising the Islamic world has expressed such rage.

I would love to know what the majority of ordinary Muslims think about it all in countries across the world, to see if there are differences between Muslims in different nations.

Looking after the pennies.

2006-02-01T11:58:00.000Z

On the issue of money, or the lack of it, I found myself in the embarrasing situation of being a penny short in a shop today. Well, I wouldn't usually find it embarrasing, but the girl behind the counter wouldn't let me off. I asked her, in disbelief, if she was serious. "It's me that'll have to settle it later" she responded.

I should have told her what a mean spirited little bitch she was, and that I'd never come across a shop keeper that would have given a shit for a penny before (not that I make a habit of being a penny short, you understand).

But instead I just mumbled that she was being harsh, and made a rapid exit.

I need to conquer the emotion of shame.

Morlock Spurgan.

2006-02-01T11:28:00.000Z

Watched Morgan Spurlock's "Thirty Days" programme last night, the one in which he sets out to survive on minimum wage for a month.It's a good documentary, and for the most part I appreciate what Spurlock (who, after a few drinks, I was calling Morlock Spurgan) is doing. Highlighting the issue of domestic poverty in the richest nation on Earth, and making a tidy little sum along the way? Nice one.

But there's where my contentious inner demon started growling. This guy could not believe the everyday complications a lack of money conjurs, because of course he's actually very well off, just pretending to be poor.

I know, that's the point. A real poor person doesn't notice it any more, it takes somebody exposing the faults of an aspect of society from the outside in to make people sit up and take notice.

Nonetheless, it was irritating to watch his disbelief that a day that was meant to be about having fun and celebrating disintegrated into argument and misery over the little matter of thirty dollars. To me, that's just standard living, a day like that can disintegrate over thirty pence!

Emperor Benedict.

2006-01-31T15:57:00.000Z

I just couldn't resist this.

If this is you in a good mood...

2006-01-31T15:32:00.000Z

"In speaking to the people, my message is this: 'You know, we're not going to tell you how to live your life, but we would like you to be free'"

Does Bush honestly believe that ordinary Iranians are going to swallow that? You can be free, so long as you do what we tell you (even though we don't want to tell you what to do).

"But to the government, our message is that if you want to be a part of the family of nations, give up your nuclear weapons ambitions."

Straightforward enough, and I'm not here to argue whether we should sit back and watch Iran develop nuclear weapons, but If I was a member of the Iranian government my reply would be "I don't want to join a family if it means playing the role of the infant, obeying you the father.

Regardless, the path to hostility is unfolding at an ever increasing rate. In response to the decision to refer Iran to the Security Council, chief Iranian nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani has warned of an "end to diplomacy". Well, if the recent mood between Iran and the West has been one of diplomacy, I dread to think what's in store.

Police justice.

2006-01-30T13:23:00.000Z

The leaked IPCC report finds that the Special Branch covered its tracks, doctoring a logbook in which one of the SB surveillance officers is recorded to have wrongly identified de Menezes as Hussein Osman, suspected would-be suicide bomber.

The fact the IPCC report was leaked is not to be scoffed at. I had intended to hop on the bus to Stockwell last Sunday and show support for the family of de Menezes in their calls for the report to be made public; my plans being foiled by a cowboy gas man. The Special Branch's underhand tactics have thankfully been exposed.

But what now, one wonders. What sort of punishment awaits those who left their Firearms wielding police brethren to take the flack in order to save their own skins?
(No honour among thief-takers either, then.)

Apparently all the Special Branch officers on duty that day deny all involvement or knowledge of the incident. In that case, arrest them all for withholding knowledge and perverting the course of justice.

And what of the efforts to confront de Menezes before he "ran" (walked) into the station? There are so many unanswered questions, the IPCC report just doesn't seem to have gone far enough.

Compare this indifference with the absolute disgust the murder of pc Beshenivsky was met with by the force. It reeks of self-serving, unjust contempt for the people the service is meant to protect.

If only...

2006-01-30T12:20:00.000Z

Apparently, I'm a pretty exciting kinda guy.

I'm a Honda S2000!

You live on the edge, and you live for the adrenaline rush. You don't need luxuries, snob appeal, or superfluous gadgets. You put your top down, get your motor revving, and take all the curves that life throws at you at full speed. So what if you spin out occasionally?

Take the Which Sports Car Are You? quiz.

Shame it seems less action-packed in reality.

Cheers Scribbles, who came across the wonder that is the sports car personality test via Normblog.

Google: The fallen hero.

2006-01-25T14:29:00.000Z

So was anyone really all that surprised by Google's decision to play by the rules in China and set up shop there? The official spiel of course was hollow, presumably mumbled out by some snivelling little creep while he looked down at his own feet. Something about not delivering a service to the people at all being an even bigger sin than offering a censored service. Let's face it, the big businesses that drive capitalism are not soldiers prepared to die for the cause, they are big businesses prepared to stay rich by any means possible. Attributing values of free democracy to the capitalism it spawns is misguided.

A good businessman will sell his gran for the right price.

Symbolically, Google's capitulation to the dark side of the force might serve as an unhappy reminder for some that our society is one of moral under profit.

But I just don't know how long they were expected to stay away from the huge, money breathing dragon that China is becoming.

The last place you'd expect to see it.

2006-01-11T11:26:00.000Z

Really had to look twice at Simon Tisdall's choice of wording in his "World briefing" piece in today's Guardian:

"A Downing Street statement yesterday asserting that the world was 'running out of patience' with Iran apparently sought to reinforce the impression of a united front. But chinks were apparent within hours of Iran's move. Looking to cool diplomatic temperatures, China urged the EU not to abandon talks with Tehran."

Could this really have been innocent?

Still snowed under.

2006-01-05T14:21:00.000Z

Unfortunately, the vast amounts of work I have to complete are stopping me from devoting any time to anything else. This is the first time I've even been on a computer since Christmas, and I had promised myself I wouldn't spend the time blogging when I'm supposed to be picking apart the ins and outs of online media discussions.

Still though, the case of Helene Castel had me feeling compelled to write something. Jon Henley had an easy day of it. To paint a romanticised portrait of the young Parisian idealist, daughter to "intellectual" parents, who went on to raid a bank, and escape the shootout through a back alley, before moving to a new life in Mexico was never going to be that challenging, really.

But what was it this story actually made me want to write?

To question the value of sentencing this woman so long after the crime? No.

To mock the lilly-livered liberals who would do the above, arguing we should all pay for our crimes? Not that either.

It's just a damn good story, I think it made me wanna write a plotline.

Boxing Day, on the box.

2005-12-26T15:01:00.000Z

Predictably, the festive season is proving a busy one, and blogging unfortunately suffers. Not that I watched it, but apparently the queen's speech yesterday was the gloomiest since "annus horribilis", 1992. It's true 05 has been a tragic and catastrophic year in many respects, although I don't really need the most privileged woman in the country to tell me that.

I never do watch the speech, I actually applauded David and Victoria Beckham's speech whatever year that was broadcast as an alternative. I didn't actually watch that, either, but in the interests of fair chance for all, I encourage alternative sources of all-knowing wisdom especially at this time of year.

Is Little Britain finished for good? I think I heard this series was the last one to be filmed. A blinding show, no doubt, but the episode I saw the other day did seem to be on a slight decline in quality from the heady days of series one.

Just one more telly related item, before I start seeming like some sort of Garry Bushell understudy (Ian Hyland would have to be demoted to under-understudy). The Green Green Grass (I think that's what it's called) was slated in a review yesterday, the forgotten critic lambasted its shoddy scriptwriting. When I first saw the show, I thought it was so obvious a spin off from Only Fools and Horses because of the funny gags so reminiscent of Del Boy and Rodney in Peckham. I actually thought it was a pretty funny show. Was the critic an ignoramous, or is it me?

Anyway, time is scarce, I just didn't want to forget how to find the letters on the keyboard that correspond with the ones in my head.

T.T.F.N

Greer gets it wrong again.

2005-12-15T15:20:00.000Z

Sitting on the bus sinking deeper into my hangover I attempted reading the Guardian today and was rapidly getting nowhere with it. Try a bit of Germaine Greer, I thought. She always has something to say which provokes a reaction.

She didn't disappoint.

"If Australia had been colonised by any other nation but the British, it would be less racist."

Really? So, despite the fact that countries like Italy, Spain, and France have huge problems with racism, it is only the British who would leave a racist mindset as a legacy of colonialism?

Rubbish.

I don't see how Australia's white supremacists can be blamed on the British anyway, to be honest. All countries have a responsibily to address their internal problems, but Greer seems to want to push the blame elsewhere. So it is the "unshakeable conviction of British superiority" which she decides is the reason for Australia's racists.

It's not the first time Greer has spoken such gibberish. When the film "Bullet Boy" was released, a look into black Britain and the rising problem of gun crime, Greer argued the film "diluted" black slang, and somehow dumbed down an "impenetrable" culture and form of speech non- blacks would never understand. This was all news to the black commentator (name forgotten) she was arguing with. It must have been a surprise for the black actors and production team who previously thought they were representing themselves pretty accurately, too.

Like Greer, Australian PM John Howard also seems to want to shift the focus on the racism of the supremacists elsewhere. So he puts it all down to alcohol. It's the loss of inhibition which comes with drinking, he says. That's a funny euphemism. "Loss of inhibition", as in, "racist thuggery". The terms are practically inter-changeable.

America's brutal prisons.

2005-12-14T14:24:00.000Z

For those who might have missed it, here's a link to the Channel 4 programme "Torture: America's brutal prisons."

Fuck off Jane Moore.

2005-12-14T13:26:00.000Z

Polly Toynbee recently called the idea of Christ dying on the cross for humanity "repugnant". Rightly, she was swiftly mauled by several bloggers for such frivolous use of the word. So it is with caution that I employ it myself now. But then again, it's not like I have a readership of 300,000 odd is it?

Jane Moore is somebody I have often found repugnant for her hard-fact-concealing drivel she has at times attempted to smear the pages of The Sun with (admittedly, she's bound to fail in such company - it's like the opposite of trying to write "clean me" with your finger on a perfectly clean white van). Her annoying appearances on tacky Channel 5 shows that purport to "dig the dirt" by telling you Robbie Williams wore the same shirt twice only add fuel to my dislike of her.

And now the opportunist would-be celebrity journalist has seen fit to concentrate her efforts towards that fame on the humble Christmas dinner.

"WHAT'S REALLY IN YOUR CHRISTMAS DINNER?" asks some faceless voice usually employed to warn of impending danger. As if we hadn't been subjected to enough televisual diet analysis already. It's as if Channel 4 have looked at the magazine shelves in the newsagents, seen the saturation-level presence of "how I lost a stone in two weeks" type features on the covers, and suddenly had an epiphany: That's what they want!

The following is a quote from the Channel 4 advanced programming schedule:

Following her investigation into supermarket foods in Dispatches: Supermarket Secrets , journalist Jane Moore now turns her attention to the once-a-year belt-busting extravaganza that is our Christmas dinner. Although the British public has never been more concerned about the food on our plates, Christmas is the one time we seem prepared to let down our guard and relax our vigilance. Dispatches analyses the nation's favourite seasonal dishes from the way they are reared and processed, to their cost and nutritional values.

Well exactly, I couldn't have said it better myself. "Christmas is the one time we seem prepared to let down our guard and relax our vigilance." So what precisely made you think we need to deny ourselves that one little respite as well? It's not exactly in the spirit of the season.

Livingstone part 6: the anti-Semite.

2005-12-14T12:42:00.000Z

Nice to see somebody else thinks the whole Ken Livingstone 'anti-Semite' issue is a nonsense.

Yep, he's an idiot.

Yep, I'd love to see him out of office.

But not if it means being chased out of the village by a bunch of torch-waving witch hunters high on the fumes of politically correct madness.

This is the man who seeks to appease Islamo-facists, the man who has condemned Londoners to foot an ever increasing bill for the Olympics, the man who continues to patronise the population at every opportunity.

And inspite of all that, the only time any mention of a "disciplinary hearing" is heard is when some ill advised comment just happened to be directed at a Jewish journalist. Does anybody really believe there was any anti-semitic intent?

Hell, if you're finding it that hard to find a reason to kick him out, kick him out for going back on his word and removing the Routemaster from service.

So cheers, Scribbles, for reminding me of how dumb this whole thing is.

Tookie Williams executed.

2005-12-13T13:55:00.000Z

Seem to be stuck in a busy period right now, trying to sandwich this blog in between various other commitments, but I won't be leaving it alone though, it's more interesting than the other stuff.

I remember reading about Stanley "Tookie" Williams years ago, about the early days of the Crip gang, and about Tookie's reluctance to follow suit when gang bangers were picking up guns and shooting to settle feuds in favour of fistfights. He has become known throughout his years on death row for his anti-gang work, speaking out against the culture and even writing children's books, advising them of the perils of becoming involved with gangs.

All this is nice to hear, and certainly seems to indicate some degree of rehabilitation, although a friend's observation this morning that "anybody on death row long enough will be rehabilited, so do you have to let them all off after a certain amount of time?" made me think.

In truth, it doesn't matter now whether Tookie Williams deserved to be let off of not, because he's dead, it didn't happen. What matters now are the reasons for refusal of clemency.

Again, I do not want to get into the death penalty argument too deeply, as I believe each individual case merits an individual analysis and I have neither the time nor the inclination to state a case for or against abolition here. But a couple of things struck me as odd when reading about Williams' appeal.

Schwarzenegger has written that the "continued pervasiveness of gang violence leads one to question the efficacy of Williams' message." So, whether you feel Williams has been "redeemed" or not, he's got no chance. I'd only let him off if he was any use to us, if he could wave the magic wand that expels violence from LA streets.

This idea was reflected by LA district attorney Steve Cooley, who implied that as Williams had been a founder of the Crips, he was responsible for countless murders, not just the ones he was actually accused of. Do these men honestly believe that Williams was solely responsible for the gang violence? What about the countless others involved, I wonder.

On Monday, in response to Williams' lawyer's requests for a stay of execution, three judges argued there was no "clear and convincing evidence of actual innocence." Well, that must be where I'm going wrong, and I thought I'd just about figured how this justice thing works. See, I thought you needed clear and convincing evidence of actual guilt before you sentenced a man to death.

Williams' consistent denial of guilt is one of the reasons Schwarzenegger gave for refusing to grant clemency. However, I don't think we could have expected anything different from a man who declared:

"If you gave these blacks a country to run, they would run it down the tubes."

Got any bog roll?

2005-12-12T13:31:00.000Z

Bush on the US constitution: "it's just a goddamn piece of paper!"

Jackson "not the father".

2005-12-12T10:58:00.000Z

Heard something about the 'news' that Jackson isn't the real father of his kids, that his other half of the time underwent artificial insemination. I've always found it strange that Jackson, a black man with a skin condition that has paled his own skin pigment, would have white children. It just seemed odd that the disease would mean his children were born with no trace of black heritage. Even if the condition is hereditary, surely the kiddies would be born darker and change later in life, like Jackson himself?

The Last Ride.

2005-12-09T14:27:00.000Z

"A part of England is dying."

It was, perhaps, a little melodramatic.

The voice was that of one of the many camera-wielding enthusiasts crammed on the lower deck of the 159 this morning. Living in Streatham, south London, provided the opportunity to grab a ride on the last of the Routemaster buses.

Accompanying the air of nostalgia that was so tangible was the fog. This I entered upon leaving my house, thinking how reminiscent it was of the "pea souper's" that still blanketed London streets in the early days of the beloved Routemaster.

Along the route there were hundreds of photographers, and people waving; for a brief moment it felt like an insight into the world of the chauffeur driven celebrity. Just for a moment though, the cramped conditions of the regular public transport experience kept feet firmly on the ground (or bums firmly on seats, for the lucky ones).

Surrounded by the type of people society has condemned to be known as "anoraks", I found humour in their eager discussions of all things bus related. One of these guys stood out, as instead of taking pictures of any Routemaster that passed us on the other side of the road, he seemed more interested in snapping every person with a camera on the pavement.

Not that they all were on the pavement. Westminster Bridge took forever to cross not just because of the traffic congestion, but because of the vast numbers of fanatics running out in front of the bus taking photo's.

There was another contingent of fanatics too. I first encountered them at Marble Arch, then back at Streatham when I returned home on the last ever bus. Waving placards that read "we demand freedom from transport apartheid" and "good riddance Routemaster", were small but
hardcore groups of disabled people, intent on dancing on the grave of London's favourite bus.

Their presence sparked conflict, as many Routemaster fans and members of the press told the banner-wavers to piss off. "You've already won, why spoil this for the rest of us?" This was one particularly angry looking man at Marble Arch, I had to agree with him.

At Trafalgar Square, among the camera happy crowds, stood Tony Blair. He waved at me. Quite a nice surprise, I thought. But alas no, closer inspection revealed a man with a Blair mask, and a whistle and flute complete with red tie.

At Brixton we passed a huge crowd of schoolkids, waving Union Jacks and smiling happy little smiles. The female London Transport member of staff sitting on the seat next to mine shed a tear, caught up in the moment.

Then I heard it.

"A part of England is dying."

Well, maybe his anorak tendencies could be forgiven on this occassion.

Pinter: bang on, or just banging on?

2005-12-08T15:50:00.000Z

Unsure whether I really wanted to comment on Harold Pinter's vitriolic attack on the US, as I felt to do it properly would require more time than I had available today. I did have a quick look around the 'blogosphere' to amuse myself with the disgust I knew it would have provoked, though was disappointed to find little mention of it. The scraps I did come across seemed to indicate a general feeling of contempt for Pinter's opinions.

Citing Nicaragua, Greece, Chile, and many other examples of US intervention in foreign affairs, Pinter argued the US "supported every rightwing dictatorship in the world since the second world war" in the ruthless pursuit of Empire. While I'm no fool, who believes the world would be just fine if the US role in international affairs was suddenly withdrawn, I do believe that most conflicts the US now seek to resolve were actually either engineered or supported by them in the first place. In fact, I think it beggars belief that an American imperialist control of the world could be denied. The US government has, as Pinter points out, used secretive methods of stirring up trouble in order to tighten its grip on world affairs. He observed:

"Direct invasion has never been America's favoured method. In the main, it has preferred what it has described as 'low-intensity conflict'. Low-intensity conflict means that thousands of people die but slower than if you dropped a bomb on them in one fell swoop. It means that you infect the heart of the country, that you establish a malignant growth and watch the gangrene bloom. When the populace has been subdued - or beaten to death, the same thing - and your own friends, the military and the great corporations, sit comfortably in power, you go before the camera and say democracy has prevailed."

Call me fool, but I think this is a pretty accurate analysis of US foreign policy. You only need look at their blatant disregard/contempt for international law. The US government has such a firm grasp of power they no longer need to pretend to observe the lilly-livered laws of the international community which they preside over.

But anyway, I need to be elsewhere, I'll just leave you with a link to a discussion concerning the speech in the Harold Pinter website forums, which is good for a laugh.

Destruction of Israel

2005-12-08T13:31:00.000Z

When Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad voiced his desire to "wipe Israel off the face of the earth" a few weeks ago there was outrage. It was almost as if people in the west didn't know Arab countries hold any ill feeling towards Israel. But while the Occident expressed shock and horror at Ahmadinejad's comments, many in the Arab world will have payed them little attention, wishing for more than just empty rhetoric.

To think of the troubles in the Middle East as a conflict between just Palestine and Israel is innaccurate, and dangerously misleading. While one after another American state figure visits the region, hoping their mere presence might help facilitate that elusive "peace process", resentment towards Israel continues across the Ummah.

A quick look at some of the history does not inspire much confidence in reconcilliation.

Back in 1948 it was only the Jews who actually accepted the UN's proposed nation states, claiming the independence of the state of Israel the same year. The Jewish people only constituted 1/6 of one per cent of the Arab world. Predictably, Arab states rejected the proposals, and before 1948 had finished, five Arab armies invaded the state of Israel. Jamal Husseini, of the Arab Higher Committee, vowed to soak "the soil of our beloved country with every last drop of our blood."

This graphic statement of intent reveals much of how many still feel, even today. Fact is, between Husseini's '48 outburst and Ahmadinejad's 2005 one, there have been countless examples of similar bloodthirsty rants.

In the Six Day War of 1967, Egyptian president Gamal Nassar explained his "basic objective (was) the destruction of Israel".

More disturbingly, Sheik Ahmad Halabaya, a vehemently anti-semitic character from Gaza, made the following outburst which was broadcast on Palestinian Authority television in October 2000:

"They (Jews) must be butchered and killed, as Allah the almighty said: fight them, Allah will torture them at your hands. Have no mercy on the Jews. Wherever you meet them, kill them."

Now, I'm not suggesting that every Muslim who believes the "occupied state" (PA TV) of Israel must be returned to the Muslims also goes along with the above sentiments. The majority will argue the Jews should simply be 'evicted', moved on. But it is undeniable that there are many who do agree the destruction of Israel is absolutely necessary.

Whether you are disgusted at the idea of the destruction of Israel or not is a matter for your conscience. But next time (and there will be a next time) a senior Arab figure expresses a desire to wipe the Jews off the map, do me a favour:

Don't act surprised.

Journalists aren't citizens.

2005-12-08T12:54:00.000Z

Just doing a bit of research on the whole idea of "citizen journalism" and came across a post on the J-Log site of minor relevance. Apparently the NUJ have proposed bloggers, people with video phones handy at events of interest, and anyone else who enters the public distribution/debate of news, be known by the more humble term "citizen witnesses" or "witness contributors".

Sounds like a case of precious egos to me.

Water torture.

2005-12-06T10:55:00.000Z

A new dimension has been added to the rendition issue. The definition of torture has come under scrutiny, apparently, as it is suddenly unclear what actually constitutes torture. I always assumed it was reasonably straightforward.

The methods of torturing a person may be enormously diverse, granted. Anything from peeling fingernails off to positioning the head under a leaking tap. But despite the broad spectrum, there remains a fairly obvious common theme which would suggest to the curious that no, this is not a very pleasurable experience.

However, in the spirit of the naughty child caught with fingers in the sweet drawer, some US sources have thunk on their feet and changed tact. Oh alright, the gig's up. But this isn't really torture, anyway. This is a legitimate persuasion technique, recognised by honest, hard working Americans all over as a proper and decent way to deal with prisoners.

Having one's head pushed under water and forcibly held there until consciousness is about to be lost, pulled up for a short breath, and then thrust back under to repeat the process, can't really be called legit, can it?

I don't know where it would rank in the broad spectrum of gruesome torture techniques (those interested could find out at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture) but it's got to be there somewhere though.

So damn immature!

2005-12-05T14:33:00.000Z

Do people ever call you immature?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4492814.stm

Women: crap at the game.

2005-12-05T13:37:00.000Z

Money, as they say, is the root of all evil.

The great Bob Monkhouse used to dedicate a little time of his live show to linking words or names of people/places that were suggested at random by the audience. Bob would start off with some obscure actor from the 1940s, and within a minute he arrived at the name of one of the characters from The Simpsons, via a route involving polar bears and cans of coke.

As a schoolkid I played this game myself, although some of the links were decidedly dodgy. If it was getting too muddled, you could always point out that Dean Martin and Ross Kemp both breathed oxygen, and there was your link.

But with evil, you never have to look too far down the chain to find money, so the cop out option is never necessary.

For example, when a woman says you aren't comfortable with your sexuality unless you will wear something pink, the financial foundations are glaringly obvious.

Some time in the last decade some bright advertising spark dreamed up the concept of New Man. Yes, there are some good things to come of New Man, helping out with the nappies, feeding the kids, etc. But forget all that. The real benefit was that young men now found it acceptable, required of them even, to buy make-up products for their skin, and wear pink shirts.

Wearing pink became so cool that it almost became a measure of masculinity. Some geezer in the pub in a pink rugby shirt, for instance, might have once been called a ponce, but now he was a model of machismo. Why didn't you have a pink shirt? Not man enough? Can't say that about him, he's comfortable with his sexuality.

But what does that mean?

Does it mean you might be secretly worried that you're gay?

Seems a bit presumptuous; you're gay, because you're not wearing pink.

And the make-up. I was with my other half up the west end not long ago, in a Boots store, I think it was. My girlfriend wanted to buy some cosmetics. Fair enough. But the lady behind the counter didn't think it was fair enough.

"Aren't you going to buy anything, sir?"

"Uh, no thanks."

Look of disbelief.

"But what about this moisteurizer?"

"No, I'm alright thanks."

To the missus:

"You really need to get him to buy something."

The cream, which I have lived thus far without and never noticed any problem, cost about fifteen quid.

I think I'll stick to a bar of soap, thanks. About £14.50 cheaper.

Why is it that women can't seem to find the link between the evil and the money though? I don't particularly like pink shirts, in the same way I don't like orange trousers. And I really can't see the point in slapping all these expensive 'face washes' on, the world never seemed to need them before FHM.

It's like women are getting lost on the way to the money, and taking the cop out option: you're stuck in the closet. Notice how similar that conclusion is to one any schoolboy might arrive at when discussing pretty much anything with one of his peers.

So although this might be a bit Old Man, I'm gonna have to say it: women just can't play the game.

Those with glass houses... pt II.

2005-12-05T11:46:00.000Z

I'm sure this whole issue has been on the backburner for a few weeks now, but America's practice of rendition is finally getting the attention it deserves.

Much is being made of Condoleeza Rice's visit to Europe and her likely response to Jack Straw's soft request for "clarification" on the matter. US sources have made it clear that Rice will be on the counter-offensive in response to any European criticism, telling EU leaders that we are all "in it together." The idea is that Rice will remind EU leaders of their own positions and openness to criticism.

While this approach might not in any way seek to either deny or justify the practice of rendition, it seems a good one for the US secretary of state's purposes. As much as European leaders make a fuss now, and express outrage at the idea of prisoner's human rights being violated, it is hard to believe there hasn't been some kind of tacit agreement or 'blind eye' philosophy at work here.
No doubt this will be hotly contested by all concerned. In the spirit of fairness, then, let's suspend our disbelief for a moment to consider the situation.

So hundreds of flights containing prisoners en route to the torture chamber via European soil have, since 9/11, all gone thus far unnoticed.

While denying that any secret CIA prison camps exist in Romania, Razvan Ungureanu, the country's foreign minister, suggests the US may have set up such camps without the knowledge/approval of the Romanian government.

It all seems a bit far fetched to me.

Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe as Rice's trip unfolds events may convince me that Europe has had no part to play (wittingly, at least) in the transportation of suspects to countries where they can be legally tortured.

I hope so.

The binary opposites of our nature.

2005-12-02T13:42:00.000Z

So Michael Barton and Paul Taylor have received their sentences for the heinous murder of Anthony Walker. Barton will serve a minimum of 17 years and 8 months, Taylor a minimum 23 years and 8 months.

What pointless atrocities we are capable of.

Conversely, what heights of dignity we can reach.

Gee Verona, Anthony's mother, vowed to forgive her son's killers, in the same way Jesus forgave those who put him to the cross.

We humans are an infinitely complex bunch.

Aunty better watch out.

2005-12-01T13:50:00.000Z

Al-Jazeera seem to have gone through more than most young television stations have to. I remember, when channel 5 "burst" onto our screens, (well, some of them) they faced a barrage of criticism. This criticism was mainly concerned with the channel's coverage problems, poor programming, and generally being rubbish. But all that fades into insignificance when contrasted with the minefield of opposition al-Jazeera have had to pick their way through. Actually, scratch that. They've pretty much just kept on walking their straight, determined path through it.

Greeted with suspicion in the Arab world, the station has been charged with serving an Israeli agenda, attempting to disintegrate Arab unity, and promoting western values and ideas.

In the west, al-Jazeera have fared no better. Being an Arab station run by Muslims, Washington naturally concluded that it was a propagandist tool of Osama and his allies.

With the furore over the leaked memo, al-Jazeera has found itself thrust into the spotlight once more, and have decided to come out fighting. Wadah Khanfar, head honcho at al-Jazeera, appeared in yesterday's Guardian asking Bush and Blair why they want to bomb him, and demanding the truth be revealed.

Don't Bomb Us is a blog run by al-Jazeera staff. Together with Blairwatch they have pledged to publish the memo if it becomes available to them, and have set up a list anyone also willing to risk their freedom can join.

That Blair has promised to jail anyone who publishes the memo is predictable enough, freedom of the press is a very disposable thing. Citing the Official Secrets Act the government can easily justify caging a few pesky journalists or so called "citizen journalists".

But hang on, Official Secrets Act?

What's the implication here?

Last week we were told it was all a joke.

If there is nothing to hide, why conceal the truth, I wonder. An even bigger question is why Bush would want to bomb al-Jazeera. It's not as if al-Jazeera have been spreading anti-American propaganda for the last nine years. Don't believe that? Then why has so much of the Arab world treated the station with suspicion and contempt?

The answer of course is that al-Jazeera make a deliberate effort to show the world "the opinion, and the other opinion." That is a different thing from the gung ho "saviour of the world" image Bush wants of the US. It is also a different thing, however, to acting as some kind of al-Qaida sympathizing, extremist propaganda mouthpiece.

Honestly, I just hope Bush doesn't happen to switch on News 24 and catch any coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian troubles.

Otherwise Bush's bombers could be flying over west London any day now.

The Mitchell Bruvers.

2005-11-30T16:35:00.000Z

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?

2005-11-29T15:47:00.000Z

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/603

http://resistanceisphutile.blogspot.com/2005/11/with-friends-like-these.html

Too smart for it's own good.

2005-11-29T14:29:00.000Z

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.

2005-11-29T12:24:00.000Z

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!

2005-11-29T11:45:00.000Z

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!

2005-11-28T14:46:00.000Z

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.

2005-11-28T12:21:00.000Z

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.

2005-11-25T16:36:00.000Z

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.

2005-11-25T14:47:00.000Z

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.

2005-11-25T13:31:00.000Z

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.

2005-11-24T12:16:00.000Z

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.

2005-11-24T10:12:00.000Z

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.

2005-11-24T09:59:00.000Z

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...

2005-11-23T15:48:00.000Z

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.shtml

One 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?

2005-11-23T12:25:00.000Z

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"

2005-11-22T15:47:00.000Z

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.

2005-11-21T18:03:00.000Z

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.