Hope for the Future . . .

Another year is ending as I write.
Not much happened - earthquakes, famines, wars all happened on schedule.
Inevitably the "democratic" process in Iraq sentenced Saddam to death and in the last few days that sentence was carried out in front of the cameras.
Meanwhile today I heard the news that the 3,000th American serviceman was killed in Iraq. There are bombs in Bangkok. Gales in Britain. Polar bears are dying out in the Arctic.
In spite of all this I look at my two sons, now growing further at University, and think there still could be some hope for mankind. We still have the hope that our sons and daughters will show more sense than we did.
And because of that hope I wish you all a happy and prosperous New Year, whoever and wherever you are.

I Can't be Bothered

I note that it is more than two weeks since I last was moved to write in this blog.
The news is always depressing and nothing to get fired-up about. Not much has happened at home. In general it's a dull time.
Christmas has come and gone - presents were good, the company of my younger son also good. Offspring Senior has stayed in Birmingham in his new flat with his fiancee. It's always nice to have Christmas in your own home - and we're going to see them both tomorrow and travel on to the in-laws in Shropshire for a "second Christmas" gathering. There will be more exchanges of presents, eating, drinking and generally making merry.
There was almost one notably newsworthy item on the BBC today - a BA 747 overshot the runway at Miami International Airport. Apparently the pilot missed the turn off to the taxi-way and ran over the lights at the end of the runway. So what's so exciting about that? No damage done, no-one hurt. The difference between this and other similar incidents is that Tony Blair and family were on board. They were on their way to spend New Year in Robin Gibbs' Miami mansion.
Had there been a serious crash it would have made world news. People would have been asking questions as to why the Prime Minister was on board an ordinary scheduled BA flight instead of in a specially chartered jet - or even a designated RAF luxury plane with the name RAF One.
Unfortunately TB was not injured. He wasn't even ruffled.
Pity - he could do with someone or something giving him the shits!

Needs must . . .

Ipswich is a town in Suffolk, England. It has a typically English setting with a football team, industry, commerce, night life and - of course - "ladies of the night".
Every town has them. They satisfy a need for the blokes who either feel inadequate to satisfy their wives' sexual needs or need to satisfy their own sexual fantasies.
These girls ply their trade for a many and varied reasons - looking after their kids, making a decent living in an environment where having a piece of paper saying you're qualified is more important than ability - the list is endless. But one reason crops up again and again - feeding a drug dependency.
Ipswich is also the centre, at the moment, of blaring news headlines because three prostitutes have been found murdered in the last two weeks. There are fears that others have not been seen for some time and may also be victims. Police are - sensibly and sensitively - urging the girls not to go onto the streets in case they become the victims of what is beginning to look like a series of killings by one person.
The BBC found that tonight many girls were still plying their trade. The girls still need money to live and seemed prepared to take the risk in order to make money. One girl, simply identified as "Lou", was totally honest in front of the camera.
"I need to work to feed my heroin habit."
She knew the risks. She knew that she may possibly be the next victim. But her life was so centred on her need for heroin that she was driven to try to earn enough money for the next fix.
I - along with many of my generation - have played with various substances in my youth. I was lucky. I did not get the habit. For that I am eternally grateful.
The person who is killing these girls - whatever your feelings about their morals - needs to be caught and stopped immediately.
But also the people who lead young people like Lou into an existence of total drug dependency must be stopped. We will never stop prostitution. We will probably never stop drug dealers.
BUT WE MUST TRY!

Music as she should be played . . .

Last Saturday my wife and I took a trip to Worcestershire. We went to Pershore Abbey, which dates centuries before the American nation was even thought of. We had gone to hear a performance by the Worcestershire Symphony Orchestra. This is not a well-established professional outfit, but a band of dedicated amateurs and students who wish to make good music together. Offspring Senior also happened to be a member of the ensemble.
We got to the venue and I took one look at the shape of the venerable old building and thought "the acoustic is going to be awful". How wrong I was!
You could sit anywhere in the building and get a beautiful sound. It was wonderful. All concert venues should be shaped like this - using high vaulted ceilings and great 10ft-diameter pillars to support it. Admittedly the pillars severely restricted the view - but the sound was what we had really come for and that was perfect.
We were treated to Saint-Saens' Danse Macabre, Pavanne by Gabriel Faure, Maurice Ravel's
Mother Goose Suite, and finally the stirring Symphony in D minor by Franck.
An unbelievably beautiful concert by a dedicated group of musicians who were completely uncluttered by fame or fortune. They just did it because they like to make music.
I am glad that my son was associated with this concert. I am also glad that he wants to contribute to the next concert by this orchestra, which is at St George's Church, Barbourne, Worcestershire, England, on Saturday, March 10 at 7.30 pm. The programme will include Haydn, Shostakovich and Dvorak.
See you there!
PS: Why the hell does the spell-checker on Blogger insist on American mis-spellings? Can't they have a version for us Brits who want to spell correctly instead of the stupid American way?

Child Protection . . . ?

So a government organisation, the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, has created a website naming offenders who have in some way breached the conditions of registration on the Sex Offenders Register. So far there are five men listed on the site. Members of the public are asked to notify the police if they see them so that the full weight of the law can be brought to bear.
But who do they think will look at this site? Fine upstanding upholders of the law? Model citizens who have nothing in mind but the good of the community?
If that is the case they are being totally naive.
News of this site has, naturally, been published in all the news media, from the BBC to rags like the Sun and the Star. They all state the official line of asking the public to report sightings of these offenders. But the type of person who reads this will vary widely from publication to publication. The typically hypocritical Sun would be a good example. They happily exhibit pictures of young wannabe models showing tits and bums while decrying "Paedos" (they probably think the standard of intelligence of their readers is such that they could not understand the word "paedophiles" - let alone spell it).
Six years ago in the South of England it was discovered that a certain establishment was housing paedophiles who had recently been released from prison. The reaction from a certain sector of the community (probably many of the Sun readers) was to march on the building shouting slogans like "Paedos out".
Around the same time some morons mistook the word "paediatrician" to mean "paedophile" and attacked the home of an honest, hard-working doctor whose work was centred around the well-being of children. This is the mentality with which we have to deal.
I am not saying that we must not keep tabs on paedophiles. It seems to affect some people so much that they cannot stop offending. But it should not be up to the public to do this. If people can slip the net then the net must be tightened, not by the public but by the authorities.
If we leave it to Joe "Moron" Public we leave the whole of the community open to descent into vigilante rule which is not too far away from total anarchy.
The law must be seen to be working so that idiots do not have the chance to "take the law into their own hands".

Remember, remember . . .

The date is November 11, 2006. You can read that at the top of this blog. But it is worthwhile reminding you.
Outside my house there are fireworks exploding, making pretty sparkling displays in the sky.
In the UK we have a day which we call "Fireworks night" or "Bonfire night" or "Guy Fawkes night" on November 5. This commemorates the Gunpowder Plot in the 17th century when one Guido Fawkes (known as Guy Fawkes) plotted with others to blow up the Houses of Parliament with large amounts of gunpowder. The plot was successfully thwarted by the government and effigies of Guy Fawkes are traditionally burned on a bonfire on the anniversary of this event, along with fireworks. When I was a lad family fireworks displays were held in the back garden, or groups of neighbours would get together to have fireworks parties. Obviously accidents would happen and so we were encouraged to attend more formal organised displays. But to this day many people still have their own displays. On November 5, and indeed the days around that date, fireworks can be seen and heard in the neighbourhood. Relatively harmless fun, a little annoying if it is too late a night, but - what the hell - it's only for a short period during the year.
I remind you now that the date is November 11, 2006.
November 11 has another significance for Brits and many other Europeans. That date is set aside as Remembrance Day. It is the anniversary of the day that the First World War ended - November 11, 1918. Every year we buy imitation poppies sold by the British Legion. They represent the poppy fields where so many servicemen died on the battle fields of Flanders. The money raised goes towards helping those ex-service people who suffered in wartime and need our help. At the exact time of the signing of the Armistice, the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month of the year, we hold two minutes silence in remembrance of all those who suffered and died in all the conflicts in which Britain has participated. The two world wars, the Far East, Kenya, Aden, Palestine, Vietnam, Eastern Europe, the Falklands, Kuwait, Iraq - the list is almost worldwide and endless.
They were all the sons and daughters of loving families and should be valued as members of a society which respects the sacrifice they made to keep world order.
Maybe my point is obscure. Maybe I am being obtuse - even paranoid.
The sound of fireworks - so late after the designated date for Guy Fawkes night - on the date which we might remember the guns and bombs which killed those poor soldiers, sailors and airmen fighting for the freedom of the world, to me is at least in extremely bad taste. I would even go so far as to say that the bangs, crashes and flashes almost make fun of the death and agony of those who fought, willingly or otherwise, for what has been thought was democratic freedom.
George Bush and Tony Blair have also done their bit to denigrate the real fight for true democracy by setting up a puppet government in Iraq - but that's another story.
It seems to me that there could be a case for banning the use of fireworks on November 11. I wonder how many close relatives of fallen servicemen feel the same as me?
Nuff said . . .

Doing our bit for the Environment?

A much-awaited report has been published about the environment. Rightly it states that no one nation's efforts alone can reverse the race towards the greenhouse effect. We could all suffer extremes of climate like hurricanes, tornados, rising temperatures etc. Melting polar ice-caps could cause rising sea levels - drowning great tracts of land and leaving up to 200 million people homeless and hopeless. Whole countries could be literally washed away. Drought could become so extreme in some areas that new deserts are formed and hundreds of millions of people would have to either move away or die. The report goes on to say that the rising economies of countries like China and India go hand in hand with their increased carbon emissions and they must be brought on board in some new "Super-Kyoto"-type agreement on controlling climate change. New-found industries in the former Soviet bloc are also contributing more and more as their industrial clout strengthens.
Government ministers in the UK are talking of further restricting high carbon emissions by taxation. Tax gas-guzzling cars. Apply carbon taxes to every flight of every aircraft. Yes, I agree that this could possibly reduce the number of people who wanted to use these forms of transport or make them restrict their use of them. And, in an ideal world, the additional taxation revenues could be put towards helping Joe Public to become more energy efficient in his or her daily life.
I also heard on BBC Radio 4 a little anecdote which is worth recounting. In the months when fresh home-grown strawberries are not available we import them from various countries around the world. Spain, other Mediterranean countries - even from as far as New Zealand. Some poor geek had sat down and worked out some figures and came up with this one: the amount of carbon emissions generated to get one punnet (around 150 grammes) of strawberries in an assignment from New Zealand to the UK is the equivalent to 11 average school runs in a Chelsea Tractor. I should point out to my non-Brit readers that a school run is classed usually as an unnecessary journey to take a single child to school when the little tyke should have been encouraged to walk and that a Chelsea Tractor is a 4x4 MPV, usually with off-road capability which is never used, which uses much more fuel than an average family car.
Now Brits are congratulating themselves that they are more-or-less on target to meet their Kyoto obligations for cutting carbon emissions by 2010. It is stated that the Yanks create nearly 25% of all emissions while we contribute just 2.4%. Great - aren't we good little boys and girls!
Hang on a minute. The world population is about 6.5 billion. the population of the UK is about 60 million - less than 1 per cent. It does not take an Einstein to work out that each Brit is contributing more than twice the emissions of the world per capita average.
How about consuming more home-grown food? Not importing unnecessary goods which could be made at home (or done without). Turning out the lights. Not leaving the TV on standby. The list can go on . . .
In the DIY shop where I work we are running a save energy promotion, selling wind turbines, solar panel heating, more efficient heating boilers and radiators. In the next part of the store we have started selling this year's crop of Christmas lights. The slogan on the banners reads: "You can't have too many lights".
Nuff said.

America's Berlin Wall?

The US has sanctioned the building of a 1,100km fence along its border with Mexico. It says there are 12 million illegal immigrants in the country, mostly working in the black market (careful with that use of the word "black", we don't want to offend any ethnic minorities!). The idea is to keep all those unwanted Mexican and other South American immigrants away so that they don't sponge on the American Way Of Life. The BBC, reporting on it, called it America's Berlin Wall.
There is the US, one of the biggest powers in the world. A population made almost entirely of immigrants. Affluent to the extreme. Not caring much about the plight of others, spending useless money on even more useless projects. Making war, it seems, for the sake of it. People in poorer countries see the American way of life blasted over the media, in TV series, movies, internet, and it's no wonder that they see it as the land of milk and honey. Many poor, hard-working people must think to themselves that they could work less and have more if they went to such a place.
As such, America's success is its own downfall.
Perhaps they should lower the standard of living in the US. Ban multi-car families. Make air-conditioning illegal. Make it illegal for anyone to make more than 1% profit on any deal. Cut everyone's salary by 50% and raise taxes to at least 50%. Then, perhaps, Mexicans would not view the US as Shangri La. They would go about their daily lives happy that they were no worse off than their neighbours in the North.
Hang on - a thought occurs. If America did all those things, think of all the savings in fossil fuels that would be made. The reduction in CO2 emissions. The resultant improvement in the atmosphere and the lessened threat of global warming.
Perhaps it is a good thing to erect the fence. It may stop immigrants consuming too much.
I see it all now - the fence is the USA's contribution to cutting use of fossil fuels . . . ?
Nuff said.

Discrimination?

The young lady teaching assistant who refused to take off her veil when asked to work with a male colleague has lost her case for discrimination. She was awarded a token amount for the discomfort she has endured.
She claimed she was being discriminated against because of her Muslim beliefs.
Did she ever stop to think that, in her religious fervour, she was discriminating against her male colleague?
Is this reverse sex discrimination?
Nuff said . . .

Madonna and Child . . .

A little boy was flown into Heathrow from Malawi. His - for the time temporary - adoptive mother is a famous singing star. Over the last few years this purveyor of "music" has developed a conscience. So - she goes to Malawi and sees the starvation, poverty and degradation of the orphans there. She donates loadsamunny to an orphanage for children of AIDS victims and tries to adopt one of the children. Malawi law says that children may not be adopted by foreign carers. But several millions of dollars in charity donations speaks very loud. So the rules get "bent" so that she can have temporary custody of the child for 18 months while the application for adoption goes through. This could be long enough, if the government is corrupt enough, to change the law so that she can legally adopt the child.
If the child is adopted there is no doubt that he will live a completely different life to that which he would have had in Malawi. A large mansion to live in. Toys to play with. The best education money can buy. No worries for the future about finance. Everything we all dream of.
When the lad arrived in this country he was carried lovingly off the plane by - a nanny. Not the doting prospective mum - doubtless she was too busy making her next million.
This poses the question: will Madonna give the boy the most important thing a mother can give? Will he really feel loved and wanted? Or is he just to be another publicity stunt who, in time, will drift into obscurity?
Money doesn't necessarily buy happiness. Would it have been better if Madonna had given her money - and her time and energy - towards helping the Malawi people look after their own? Giving a better standard of living so that the locals felt more able to look after their own children and bring them up in the local culture and environment? Instead of singling out one child the efforts she has made could help hundreds, maybe thousands, of children to become more able to help themselves and thus - in the long run - help Malawi extract itself from the third-world poverty to which the Western powers have condemned it.
Madonna has done one good thing. She has highlighted the problems of the African nations in dealing with poverty. But has she gone about her help in a selfish way? Did she really want to help Africa or did she want to have praise for helping one child - a child who will more than likely be brought up by a nanny rather than the woman who wants to be his adoptive "mum".
Her money, I feel, could have been more productively spent in helping the Malawi people to help themselves.
Someone once said words to the effect that if you give someone food they eat for the day but if you give them seed and a plough they, and the generations after them, eat for ever.

Facing up . . .

So now there is a Muslim classroom assistant who has been suspended because she refused to take off her veil in the presence of male members of staff. She stated that she was quite happy to remove her niqab in front of the schoolchildren but insisted that if a male member of staff was in the room she should have the right to wear it.
The school in question is not a Muslim school. It is, in fact, a Church of England primary school which has both female and male teachers. When she was interviewed for the job - by a male governor - she did not wear her niqab. Now she is taking the local education authority to an industrial tribunal to retain her job. She admits that she did not reveal her need to wear the veil during her interview. Perhaps because she was afraid that such a disclosure would preclude her from the job - which entailed working with other members of the teaching staff in the classroom. If the school only used her in classes with women teachers it could mean disruption of the timetable and - worse still - disruption of the children's education.
This is a difficult enough decision for the industrial tribunal to resolve but it has been exacerbated by a junior education minister stating in a Sunday newspaper that she should be sacked. Whether or not you agree with him it is wrong for him to intervene while the case is still being dealt with. If it was in a court of law then the minister would be in contempt of the court and could be fined or even imprisoned for such an intervention. The minister should apply the same common sense and courtesy to the present proceedings. It could even be that because of his intervention the tribunal will feel obliged to rule in the lady's favour even if its instinct is to rule against her.
Then there is the case of British Airways who have disciplined an airport worker for wearing a small crucifix. They are saying that all such items should be worn discreetly under the uniform. At the same time they allow Muslim employees to wear scarves on their heads and Sikh employees can wear turbans and iron bangles - all very plainly to view.
Is there to be one rule for some and one rule for another? The company wants a corporate identity to be carried by the uniforms of its staff but it should either be totally uniform or allowance should be unconditionally made for the individual's beliefs to be discreetly displayed within the uniform.
Or should it?
Should the Muslim ladies wear a headscarf emblazoned with the BA insignia? Should the Sikh air steward have a red, white and blue turban made from a Union flag? Should this Christian lady have a crucifix with the BA logo stamped on it?
I work for B&Q, a large DIY chain. Everyone - from the trolley boy to the chairman of the company - wears an orange apron when they are on duty in the store. Each one has his forename written on the nameplate. So the supreme boss has "Ian" showing as his identity on his apron and should he be in a store and a customer approaches him then he does his best to help the customer even though he knows bugger-all about where things are in that particular establishment.
That is uniform - except that you can always tell when someone is from Head Office. Their aprons are always brand new and still have the creases in them from having been just taken from their wrappings. But the public don't know that. They just see an orange apron and know that guy should serve them.
Perhaps the B&Q way is not a bad example to follow. We have people of all faiths, colours, political and sexual persuasions in our ranks. So does the wider world. In B&Q you just look for an orange apron and know that he is a member of staff. It does not matter what else that person is wearing. It may be a headscarf, a turban or even just too much eye make-up. They are all there to do the job and in the eyes of the public they are all equally able to do it.
Have I made my point?
Nuff said . . .

Needle in a Haystack?

So Messrs Bush and Blair went looking for WMDs in Iraq. They were sure Saddam had them - or were they? Was it just an excuse to show some muscle in an oil-producing state? Or just to show some muscle - full stop! After killing thousands of innocent Iraqis and hundreds of allied soldiers it turned out that there were no weapons threatening us. But one gets the feeling that they knew that all the time and were just looking for excuses to throw their weight around and get rid of a government which was hostile to them. They are now embroiled in a protracted war "against terrorism" - another way of changing their reasons for going into Iraq in the first place. Bin Laden must have been hiding out there. But, hang on, if that's the case why did they invade Afghanistan? It is the stronghold of Bin Laden's merry men. Isn't it?
Meanwhile all the time the despots of North Korea have been developing a nuclear bomb - or have they? They announced that they had just tested a nuclear device. Seismic records show a blip around 3 to 4 on the Richter scale at the time. But many experts are now saying that this would be consistent with a 1,000 ton explosion of conventional explosives. So, was it a small nuclear device or an attempt at deception? Or was it really a nuclear dud? The North Koreans certainly wouldn't tell us if it was not successful.
The technology required to produce a one-kiloton nuclear device is far more advanced than that required to make a much larger bomb so there is some doubt that a true nuclear test took place. Some say that the explosion recorded could have been consistent with the explosion used to trigger a reaction in plutonium. If that's the case then the North Koreans have built themselves a dud but - rest assured - that will only redouble their determination to get it right next time.
There is sufficient concern about the consequences of a North Korean nuclear bomb for even China to ask the UN to take action. China is one of the few countries which have in the past supported and even propped up the North Korean regime.
Japan is worried. South Korea is even more worried - after all as the 53rd state of the US it puts nuclear capability right on Bush's doorstep.
I find it sad that yet another country has, or will, developed the capability to destroy the whole world. Some of those who have the bomb build it themselves - US, Russia, India, Pakistan, France - some of them, like UK and Israel etc, buy them from the US (usually at exorbitant cost).
The US doesn't mind proliferation - providing it is only to states friendly to it. But when will they learn that friendly states can turn. Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan - all at some time have been friendly to the West only to turn when the US lost interest in their cause.
I think I might even join CND . . .

Face to Face?

Ok, I'm going to join the debate started by Jack Straw on the Muslim veil. Yes, it seems that it is important to some Muslim women to wear the veil and not just the head covering. This is their belief and their right, which I would defend in all circumstances. Just like their right to free speech, freedom of worship and freedom to live in this country unimpeded by extremists like the BNP and UKIP.
I listened to an interview with Jack Straw on BBC Radio 4 (God bless it) the other day where he explained his reasoning behind his statements and actions regarding the veil. Mr Straw represents a constituency with a fairly large Muslim population. As such many people who come to see him at constituency surgeries are Muslims. He recounted one such meeting where a husband and wife came to see him. The lady was wearing the full veil. While the husband stayed relatively mute the lady took the lead in the conversation with Mr Straw.
Jack Straw reported that, at the close of a quite constructive meeting, the lady said that it was good to talk to him "face to face". Apparently that was what started Jack Straw thinking. He had not had the benefit during the discussion of viewing the lady's facial expression, only hearing the words she said.
Now, I know from my job in dealing with the public at large that facial expression and body language can radically alter the meaning of the spoken word. I often use phrases and statements with my customers which, without them seeing the twinkle in my eye, would be considered at least in bad taste and at worst highly offensive. My customers, seeing my demeanour and facial expression, without fail join in with my jokes and give as good as they get back to me. They leave the store with a smile on their faces, often remarking that they have received good, cheerful service from me. I often end my conversations with them with the remark: "You get a better class of insult in this store", which usually raises another laugh from the customer. If I made such remarks from behind a veil I am very sure that many of my customers would take offence and it would not be long before I was sacked.
Communication is not just about words. It is about meanings communicated by the eyes, the face, the body. All these things contribute to our understanding of what is said.
I still uphold the right of anybody to wear the veil. It is their belief and to ban it - as the French have done in their schools - is to ride roughshod over the individual. But I totally understand Jack Straw's point. He states that he asks his female constituents if they would remove the veil. Some do so quite readily. Some refuse. Mr Straw accepts their answers and states that he continues the interviews with as much fervour for serving his constituents whatever they do. I hope that that is true because, whatever their beliefs, he represents them and is their conduit to justice and rights in this democracy.
Good that the lady had the right to wear the clothes she believed she must. Good, also that Jack Straw was able to state is reasons openly for finding it more difficult to communicate.

Justice . . . at last

Julie Hogg was killed in 1989. Her former boyfriend Billy Dunlop was accused of her murder soon afterwards but two juries failed to reach a verdict and he was acquitted.
Mr Dunlop was later jailed for other offences and, during his interment, admitted to a prison officer that he had killed Julie, knowing that he could not be tried again for the same crime under the 800-year-old double jeopardy law.
He reckoned without Julie's mum and her husband. They campaigned, along with many others, to have the law changed so that - should new compelling evidence be forthcoming - a person could be charged again on the same crime. The law was changed in 2003 and the Appeal Court ruled that Billy Dunlop should be tried again on the charge of murdering Julie Hogg.
Dunlop was sentenced to a minimum term of 17 years imprisonment - which coincidentally is the time it took from the original murder to his conviction. Julie's mum and her son - three years old when she was killed - have already served 17 years of pain and grief knowing that her killer was free. Now they can rest a little easier knowing that her killer has finally been made to pay a price for her killing.
Prison sentences will not right the wrong. Julie cannot be brought back from the dead. But at least we know that - at last - justice has been done.
There are other crimes - especially murders - where it has been obvious who the killers are but legal technicalities have led to acquittals. Let us hope that justice will prevail in these cases under the new law. I don't want "trial by tabloid" to lead to convictions but I would like to see real criminals brought to justice by legal means.

Kill the Planet to Save the Planet?

The DIY chain for which I work has just gone into selling alternative energy sources with domestic wind turbines and solar panels.
The wind turbines claim to "cut your electricity bills by up to one-third" with a pay-back time of 5-7 years. The solar panels will supply hot water - even in winter - and cut your heating bills by a large margin. Again the pay-back time is 5-7 years.
All very commendable. Save on fossil fuels. Cut emissions of greenhouse gases. Let's all go out and buy this technology and save the planet. The cost is not prohibitive, especially if you consider the "Pay-back" period.
Have you noticed where I'm heading? The emphasis is not so much on saving the environment- more save your pocket. The whole selling emphasis is "how much money can I save". Nobody is thinking "What can I do to help the environment?" because if they really did they would realise that the best way is not to try to continue your energy usage but to decrease it.
I wonder if the calculations made by the manufacturers on cutting emissions include the emissions created in the manufacture of this equipment? If this is factored in - and real savings for the future of the planet are the goal - how much overall gain, if any, is there?
Surely the only sure way to cut emissions in a truly meaningful way is to change our way of life.
The consumer society in which we live must change if we are to make a difference. Surely it is better to consume less energy - however it is produced.
Silly things like leaving the TV, DVD, hi-fi, PC - even the microwave - on standby instead of totally disconnecting make a substantial contribution to our energy consumption. In my own hypocritical fashion I'm wasting energy using my PC to create a blog which I know few - if any - will read. Even better - why not do without some of our power-hungry appliances? My wife has a dishwasher - me! I only emit greenhouse gases when I fart - which is not very often!
When I was a kid we did not have a refrigerator, an all-singing all-dancing washing machine, central heating, running hot water - many of the things which we take totally for granted nowadays. Water was heated only when needed. Clothes washing was done in a boiler and drying clothes started with a mangle and finished by hanging on a line in the garden or an airer in the kitchen. Milk was bought fresh and frequently from the local grocer in small amounts so that it would not go off. Meat was bought from the local butcher in quantities that would be used before it could go mouldy. The coming of hypermarkets has killed off the little corner shop where you could get small amounts as you needed them. They have also encouraged the use of gas-guzzling vehicles to go for the weekly shop.
Perhaps we didn't live such a bad life in the past. Maybe we should be thinking about combining the best bits of life from 50 years ago - including the community spirit that was part and parcel of it - with the energy-consciousness that we all should have today. Then we could do lots more to pass on a viable environment for our children - and their children - and theirs . . .

Calculating? Naive? Or Just Plain Stupid?

Pope Benedict is heard to utter references to 14th-century Muslim teaching about the spreading of the faith by use of the sword. He was speaking at the educational institution where he taught for many years in Germany.
Immediately some Muslims are up in arms. How dare he criticise Islam. Why does he draw references linking Islam to violence? Has he forgotten the Crusades which were intent on killing all Muslims?
What the Pope said was - to say the least - unfortunate in these days of tension between the Western "democratic" ethos and the Islamic ways of life.
For all his years of study and prayer, Pope Benedict has shown a complete lack of understanding of the world around him.
He must be an intelligent man or else he would not have been elevated to his lofty position as "Christ's representative on Earth".
There are three possible reasons for his statements:

1. It was a calculated statement in order to promote more antagonism between Christian and Muslim.
2. He was naive enough to think that all people would take his words in the spirit of historical fact.
3. HE IS JUST PLAIN STUPID!

Let's hope it's the last reason and we can all just write off Pope Benedict the Stupid as a madman who should be ignored. If this is not the case then the Pope will go down in history as the biggest supporter of Mad George W.

Perhaps he has an inbuilt German guilt for what the Nazis did to the Jews and wants to pacify them? I hope it isn't that simple because it would show that he hasn't thought things through to their logical conclusion.

Perhaps we will hear that Benedict advocates nuking Tehran or Islamabad?

Stupid, bloody stupid!

An Inconvenient Website?

So Al Gore, ex-Presidential candidate, has written a book and a film about global warming.
Called "An Inconvenient Truth", I'm sure it has many erudite things to say about the wasteful state of human life. It's about time that someone told the Americans how much they are squandering the earth's resources and as such I applaud any attempt by a respected American politician to bring it to the public's notice.
Having watched an interview on BBC's Breakfast Show with Mr Gore explaining the meaning of his film, shortly to be released in the UK, I decided to find out more. I surfed the net and found a site which would, hopefully, expound Mr Gore's beliefs in more detail.
The site had a prominent link on it marked "PLEDGE".
I went to it. Perhaps if it was a site where one could pledge to use less energy I would sign up. But no, it was a site where you could pledge to go and see the film. Still good, you may think, since it may make you think about the future of the planet and what we can do about it. But on the same page I see a link to "PARAMOUNT CLASSICS" which presumably advertises the other movies that studio produces. Suddenly I lost interest in the site. Here was a man who was purportedly trying to help save mankind from self-destruction helping to advertise an entertainment company.
Paramount would undoubtedly want to make money from Al Gore's film.
But when it is making money out of something as important as this - and probably wasting precious resources in the making and marketing of the movie - one wonders what the true motives are.
Is Mr Gore really a believer in saving the planet? Or is he just another cynic?
Altruism, it seems, is dying. And, until we realise this and try to revive true love of our planet and our fellow man, so is the planet.

Sorry is just a Word . . .

Reading some of the news today I see that "Prince" Naseem Hamed has been released from prison. He served less than four months of a fifteen-month sentence for driving dangerously. Hamed drove his McLaren Mercedes at more than 90mph while overtaking on the brow of a hill. His car was involved in a head-on smash with a VW occupied by a Mr Burgin and his wife. Mr Burgin broke nearly every bone in his body and is very lucky still to be alive. Months of reconstructive surgery were required to get him back in one piece but his health and body have both been permanently damaged. His wife suffered relatively minor injuries but is now unable to get in a car from pure fear. The whole episode has caused extreme strain to their relationship. Neither person will ever be the same as before the incident. The judge at the trial expressed concern that he had not been given all of Hamed's criminal driving history - the DVLC had withheld some of it on the grounds that it might infringe Hamed's human rights. What the hell did condemning Mr Burgin to a life of disability do if not infringe his human rights? Reading between the lines one suspects that the judge would have given a much stiffer sentence had he known the full history of Hamed's stupidity behind the wheel. The only other penalty Hamed received was to be banned from driving for just four years. After that he can go out and try to kill more road users. Next time he might even be successful.
On leaving prison Hamed expressed regret for Mr Burgin's injuries with his words but not with his actions.
He was whisked away in a top-of-the-range Rolls Royce accompanied by a stretched Range Rover for his entourage. How heartless!
Hamed was only too quick to say what he had suffered. He had missed the birth of his baby, he had been taken out of society for nearly four months.
We are told by the media that he has not even contacted the Burgins directly to offer apologies and has not offered monetary compensation, even though he is a multi-millionaire and could easily afford to offer enough for them to live as comfortably as possible under their now restricted circumstances. They are not entitled to compensation under the Criminal Injuries legislation so are reduced to taking legal action. It is thought that such action would realise compensation of around £1 million. Small beer when you consider exactly what has been taken away from Mr Burgin for the rest of his life - not just four months.
Sorry is just a word . . .
Hamed made his money by knocking seven kinds of brick-dust out of his opponents. Having nearly knocked the whole life out of Mr Burgin just to show off a new car, he should be made to pay in what seems the only way that will hurt him - through his pocket.
I suppose to be a champion boxer you have to be self-centred. But to nearly murder someone because you want to show off your material possessions is plain criminal.
On the evidence we have seen in the press Naseem Hamed should have been sentenced to - and served - a much longer prison sentence.
He should never be allowed to drive again.
He should be made to pay the vast majority of his wealth in compensation.
He is a selfish, horrible person whose self-centred ego is still too large for real life.
Naseem Hamed comes out of prison showing all the attributes of a nasty, selfish little person.

The Enemy Within?

Prominently featured in the newspapers in UK over the last few days has been the story of the "Muslim Miss England".
Pictures of a very beautiful nineteen-year-old student adorned the pages. But Hammasa Kohistani has shown she is not just a pretty face with a shapely body. She is shown not as the beauty queen but as an intelligent student studying for her A levels complete with textbook under her arm. And she proves she has a thinking brain. She states that Tony Blair and the Government are fuelling hysteria over terrorism and Islam. She says the connection had created a "negative image" of Muslims.
"Tony Blair addressed Muslims in particular, telling them that they need to sort out the problem within," she said. "That was a huge stereotype of the Islamic community." She further stated that even moderate Muslims have been caught in the stereotyped negativity, thus making them feel they have to take actions to prove themselves.
Ms Kohistani's family left Afghanistan because of the Taliban regime and she was born in Uzbekistan. The family eventually arrived in England where she has had the benefit of a British education and thus had many opportunities that her peers in Afghanistan cannot even dream of.
It is good that she can put her point of view and I admit that I can see the truth in much that she says.
We are not so much a multi-cultural society as a fragmented society paying lip service to a "one nation" principle. Yes, it is good that cultures other than the accepted "British" one are encouraged. Freedom of thought is paramount in this world. But Ms Kohistani has been one of the lucky few who keep the faith but are able to live in this culture. She is able to combine both. Would that all people - whatever their beliefs - could do the same. But to some - be they fanatical about their religion, their politics or whatever - that would be anathema.
We have been here before. The way we deserted the Palestinians in the 1940s, the troubles with the Mau Mau in Kenya in the 1950s, the Irish question based on religious bigotry on all sides - all show that we have never quite come to terms with true multi-culturalism.
Would that we could all "live and let live".

Decisions . . .

Let me first state my own position.
I sincerely believe that - whether God-given or not - the human body is of no use to a person once they have died. So, with that premise, I hope that some other person will be able to benefit from parts of my body once it is useless to me. Whether there is a life after death or not, I don't believe the flesh and blood is of any use to me after death so one of the ways I can help my fellow man (or woman) would be to enable them to live.
There is a well-known scheme in Britain. People who feel like me carry a "donor" card stating that they consent to organs being used for transplanting if they should die. Until now that could be reversed by close relatives withdrawing such consent. But as from midnight tonight a new law comes into force stopping the right to veto of next-of-kin.
I can understand the turmoil that some bereaved people must go through. They know it was their loved one's wish to help others but some cannot bring themselves to think that they will be cut up and parts given to others.
Obviously the doctors will have to be sensitive and take into account the wishes of the bereaved. But I believe that the wish of the deceased to help prolong the lives of others should be paramount.
I hope that my family would not oppose the use of parts of my body to save others' lives. In one way - as an agnostic - it would be one of my few ways of still existing. The two other ways would be as memories of my family and of course my two sons who carry my genes on to the next generation.
It is up to all of us who believe that after-death donation is right to talk to our families and convince them that it would be best for both them and the possible recipients.
Very profound Mac . . . nuff said.

War crimes?

According to the BBC, just before the "cease fire" in Lebanon the Israelis sent a barrage of artillery into southern Lebanon. To be expected, you might think. They had to wipe out as much of the Hezbollah enclaves as they could before they stopped firing artillery and bombing. So they used "legal" weapons. The artillery contained cluster bombs. Cluster bombs are legal under international conventions provided they are used against military targets. A good idea. Spread the destruction into the enemy lines to destroy as many personnel as possible. But the conventions clearly state that such weapons should not be used against civilian targets. Orla Guerin of the BBC clearly showed us pictures of unexploded cluster bombs in obviously civilian villages. We were shown pictures of injured children - some of whom would never fully recover from their wounds.
I know Hezbollah have sent rockets into Israel and killed many Israeli civilians.
That is wrong and should be decried by all decent people.
But what the Israelis have done is tantamount to war crimes. There is no doubt that in the type of war Israel is fighting they cannot be sure of hitting only military targets. Hezbollah's tactic of basing themselves in ordinary villages makes sure of that. But to disregard the "collateral" injuries and deaths caused by the use of such cluster bombs is surely a war crime.
Will Israel ever have to answer charges on this matter?
NO, of course not. They have the might of the fascist US military machine on their side.
Bush would not allow it. And what George W says is next to what God says.
Bollocks!
Nuff said . . .

Back to the Grind

I've just spent a week in Cornwall with my darling wife. Offspring Junior was due to come with us but cried off having just spent some days camping in the area with friends. So - luxury of luxuries - a holiday on our own. Yes, just the two of us. The first for more than 20 years! Bliss!
Not that I would not have enjoyed the company of either of my two sons. In fact, it felt quite strange being able to say to my wife "What shall we do today?" knowing that whatever we decided only affected the two of us.
We rented a cottage near Looe, in south East Cornwall. Cottage comfortable with all the necessary amenities. Local village shop - in a village called, believe it or not, No Mans Land -catered for most of our immediate needs (including Cornish clotted cream to go on the blackberries we picked on the roadside near our cottage). About a mile from the cottage is a monkey sanctuary where they look after capuchin and woolly monkeys who have been rescued from private pet owners and from zoos. They have extremely large enclosures with trees and other interesting things to climb on and they can go from one area to another by a series of elevated walkways and bridges. Outside of their natural habitat (to which they could never return) they have the most idyllic surroundings man can give them. The keepers are so knowledgeable and caring. They obviously believe what they are doing is helping the quality of life of these primates. I was really moved by the visits I made there and came away feeling I had really learned something of the way of life of the monkeys and also something of the inhumanity of man.
Visits included the Lost Gardens of Heligan, Polperro, Polruan and Fowey (pronounced Foy). Only once did any rain affect us. That was on our last day when we were on a boat trip on the river at Fowey. The boat had no shelter. It suddenly pissed down and we got drenched. The boat skipper gave us a big umbrella but we still got soaked. We just couldn't stop laughing. And half an hour later the sun was out and the weather was dry and warm. Typical British weather!
Another memorable day was when we took the train from Looe to Liskeard. It was not so much a train as a railcar. As we got near Liskeard after a very slow and scenic route up the river side, the train came to a stop and the conductor got out to manually change the points so that we could reverse onto the branch line that led to Liskeard. After an enjoyable couple of hours in Liskeard we got back on the train and alighted at St Keyne. Just next to the station is a privately run museum of mechanical music. A gentleman by the name of Paul Corin owns and runs the place which is housed in old mill buildings which have been in his family for a long time. Paul is a real enthusiast. He drools over Pianolas, barrel organs and other mechanical means of music making, demonstrating each one in turn. He asks each visitor where they are from and is usually able to tell them where old cinema and theatre organs were in the particular locality. Finally he shows off his "Mighty Wurlitzer" which he has built into the structure. He is not a great virtuoso but his pure enthusiasm takes you past the music. By the time we had seen all the exhibits more than two hours had passed and we had to rush to flag down the next train to get back to Looe. A fantastic visit which I fully recommend every music lover to experience for themselves.
A really enjoyable holiday. Go to Cornwall if you want a good relaxing holiday. But take a good Ordnance Survey map so that you can find all the small coves and beaches to keep away from the holiday moron crowds in their "Kiss me quick" hats.
Ah well - back to work . . .

Private Conversations

It seems that the Royal household is being hacked. The privacy of their mobile phones has been compromised
After a seven-month investigation by the police the Royal Editor of the News of the World and one of his associates have been arrested and interrogated. They were released after 40 hours of questioning. Apparently minor information printed in the tabloid caught the eye of police and they put two and two together and realised that inside information must have been used to get the stories. They were relatively innocuous stories but nevertheless they compromised Prince Charles's sons.
So what? You may think it's nothing. But think of the possibilities. If they can get access to private phone calls it doesn't have to stop at the Royals.
High-powered business deals could be jeopardised. Military secrets could be public knowledge. Political dealings could be put at risk. Our safety and security could be as naught.
Rupert Murdoch has always been known as a tough man who gets what he wants - whether it be freedom from restrictive practices of unions or friendship with, and influence over, the great and the good.
He has more than a little power to influence the nation with his moron-appeal tabloids. If he chose to use such private information to influence his readers he could make a radical difference to the way this country was run.
I, for one, don't want to be ruled - albeit under cover - by a money-grabbing Australian bigot. With all its imperfections I prefer to be part of a democratic state.

It's a Long Time . . .

Well, today it's 30 years since Ros and I got hitched.
To me it feels like a lifetime - but not in a bad way. I'm the luckiest bloke alive to have such a loving and understanding (and patient!) wife. How she has put up with me - through the good times and the not-so-good - I'll never know. I just hope that she and I will be together always and I still love her dearly.
Thank you Ros for being with me and loving me.
I love you above all others.

It's a Long Time Too!

Finally last night Ros and I caught up with my old bass-player Pete. It is well over thirty years since we played together and I caught him at a gig in a pub in the beautiful Forest of Dean, Gloucestershire, England. The band he was with specialises in 60s rock and pop and they were not at all bad.
It was great to be able to chat with Pete during his break and after the gig and we've made a firm promise to meet again and maybe even drag a few instruments out and have a jam session.
That'll bring back some memories . . .

Disproportionate response?

Over the past few weeks more than one British Government official has stated that the Israeli attacks on Hezbollah in Lebanon were "disproportionate" compared with the attacks of Hezbollah on Israel.
Now even a respected American newspaper - no less than the New York Times - has published pictures of the devastation wreaked upon Beirut by Israeli bombs. I don't know what the NYT was trying to prove with the pictures they displayed. Perhaps that the victorious Israelis would win. Perhaps that the Israelis were hitting only selected targets. Perhaps that Israel was over-reacting.
Reading through the article by John Kiener it seems that the latest targets were infrastructure points which were mainly in northern Beirut in the predominantly Christian area of the city. A Christian Lebanese is quoted as saying "where are the Katyushas (rockets) of the Hezbollah here?" It is refreshing to see the an American newspaper is showing the bad side of the Jewish invasion of Lebanon. I hope George Bush is taking note and thinking very hard about what bombs Americans supply to Israel.
Likewise I hope that Hezbollah is looking at all the people who are dying in Lebanon - most of whom have little or no allegiance to their cause. Can they really live with themselves and be sure of a place in heaven with the deaths of all these people on their shoulders?
Why can't they just talk and learn the basics of any religion - namely that the people around you, whatever their beliefs, are just like you. They have aspirations, they have needs and hopes. They also have human frames which can be destroyed by bombs and rockets.
It doesn't matter what each individual believes - killing any one of them for a religious belief is nothing other than murder.
And helping the murderers - either Syria supplying rockets or America supplying tanks and bombs - is just as mortal a sin as if the presidents of Syria or the USA pushed the button to release the carnage themselves.
See the New York Times aerial pictures of the destruction of Beirut for yourself at:
http://graphics.nytimes.com/packages/html/world/
and make your own judgement . . .

Music to my Ears

It's getting very near my birthday. So I coerced my wife into buying me a 2.1 sound system to go on my PC. Today it arrived (thankyou Amazon for a very speedy delivery). I was very good - I did all the chores around the house that I had planned before I opened the package then spent a few minutes plugging in this and connecting that and finally the big moment - switch on!
Yes!
Yes!!
Yes!!!
Goodbye to flat tinny sounds from inadequate PC speakers. My media players will never sound the same. Rich sounds, bass you can really hear (and control) !
Playing through some representative tracks I have stored on my PC I listened to Swearingen, Saint-Saens, Ladysmith Black Mambazo, Phil Collins - all took on the characteristics of being played on a decent hi-fi.
To a music lover like me the difference is like being deaf and suddenly being cured.
Thank you Ros for a truly appreciated birthday present.

Suffer the Little Children . . .

. . . and the old people, the infirm, the helpless, the poor, all those who do not have the ability, the money, the understanding to get out of the way of the destruction.
Southern Lebanon and Northern Israel are two places where no child is safe, no old person can live out their life in peace and comfort. Where the sick and disabled stand little chance of help, where those who have little income cannot afford to leave.
In Israel Hezbollah rockets rain down. In Lebanon American bombs are used by Israelis to destroy "strategic" targets.
Both believe they are Right.
God is on their side.
So - it's acceptable that innocents are killed and wounded - physically and mentally - in the cause of Righteousness.
If this is the case then either God is a two-faced traitor or - more likely - the name of God is being used for indoctrinated men's greed and hate.
The Rabbis and the Mullahs can change things or make them worse. They can preach hate and destruction . . .
Or they could - if they really believed in God's mercy - teach about the love of a God who made them and who must surely despair at the sight of man using his name in the cause of murder and destruction.
We are all indoctrinated - it's part of learning about the world in which each individual life is lived and the culture and traditions of that environment.
But when the beliefs instilled lead to hate and murder then God - however you want to believe in him/her - has no part to play.

Fastest Digger in the World!

There is the old joke about Paddy, the Irish road worker whose dream was to become rich enough to own a JCB GT.
Well, this is now a reality. The British digger and excavator company JCB has just built a car powered by several turbocharged diesel engines of the sort that usually power their heavy plant. They've named it Dieselmax. Their aim is to beat the world record for a diesel-powered car, currently 235mph.
In tests on the runway at an RAF base the car has broken the 200 mph barrier before running out of room on the 1.6-mile stretch.
So now it's off to Bonneville in the Utah Salt Flats for an attempt on that world record.
The shape of the car is reminiscent of Donald Campbell's jet-powered Bluebird. But the sound of the engines is somewhat different. The machine screams power and speed to look at it. Let's hope the driver can take it past that magic 235 on the measured mile at Bonneville.
Perhaps Paddy's dream can become reality . . .

Massacre

This must stand along with the other horrific massacres in the world. A town in Lebanon called Qana was this morning bombed by the Israelis. Reports from various news agencies put the civilian death toll at more than 50 and at least 60 per cent of those were children.
Even the pro-Israeli White House has described it as a "tragedy" - strong words from a Jew-supporting state led by a religious fanatic like George W.
Condi Rice has cancelled her visit to Beirut. Is she scared she might be next to feel the weight of American-supplied bombs from American-supplied Israeli aircraft?
The Jews do not want peace talks - until they have severely weakened Hezbollah. Then they will be able to enter talks which will be meaningless because they will have already wreaked all the destruction they want.
Hezbollah probably started this present round of conflict. I don't know why. They are now suffering the backlash. But so are innocent civilians. That is Israel's plan. Make the innocents blame Hezbollah for their suffering.
But I think this has already backfired on the Jews. Newscasts again and again show previously "innocent" civilians taking up the cause of Hezbollah and shouting "Death to the Jews" and other anti-Semitic slogans.
Violence breeds hate. Witness the average Iraqi's reaction to Western states (in particular USA and UK). At the end of the day - which seems a long way off - we will all have to talk to each other and learn to live with one another.
Hopefully that day is not too far away - but don't hold your breath.

This MAY be Against International Law . . .

An Israeli fighter-bomber drops bombs on a Lebanese target. Israel claims it is bombing selected targets in Lebanon in order to hit Hezbollah strongholds. All very credible, you may think, since Hezbollah is firing rockets on Israeli cities. They should be stopped. Civilians are being hurt. Life in Northern Israel is being disrupted. Hezbollah has captured two Israeli soldiers so the Jewish state must go in with guns blazing to repatriate them.
The trouble is that this particular aircraft bombed a convoy of clearly-marked Red Cross ambulances carrying wounded civilians away from the devastation.
Some were killed.
More were injured.
A cowardly act which would be more believable if it had been done by Hitler's Nazis or Stalin's regime.
And what is the UN's reaction to this act? They stated that this MAY contravene international law.
Of course it does. Only despots would sink as low as bombing a humanitarian convoy of ambulances. Will the pilot of the aircraft be disciplined? More than likely he will get a medal from the xenophobic hate-mongers who claim to be the representatives of the Jewish people.
I do not condone what Hezbollah is doing. They fire rockets which cannot be pinpoint accurate so there must be many innocent deaths meted out by them.
Secretary of State Rice has gone to the Middle East for talks with the Israelis. She stopped off on the way in Beirut to talk to the Lebanese government. Is she carrying threats to both sides? Or is she there to boost the Israeli side? Why am I not comforted by the fact that the mighty USA has sent a high-profile government representative? Could it be that the US supplied, and probably even paid for, the bombs that were used against the convoy? Now the US, having facilitated the bombing of Lebanon, is now giving £16 million in medical aid to help alleviate the suffering of Lebanese civilians. How many billions is it giving to the Israelis so that they can continue to wreak destruction on Lebanese and Palestinian innocents?
The only people who can put an end to this conflict are the protagonists themselves. Race hate is the real evil in this region. Terrorism was the instigator of the modern state of Israel so they must expect a return in kind from their enemies. As such, the Jews must understand why their own terrorist tactics are now being used against them.
Hebrew and Arabic are two different languages. But each must learn to understand the other without the force of bombs and rockets.

Unrestricted or what?

Beware of Internet Service Providers who claim to give "unlimited" access to the internet at all times. I have a computer connected via "broadband" to the net using a well-known provider. They advertise "unlimited" access. Read the small print. They say in very small type that access is unlimited but if you are a heavy user during the peak hours of 6 pm to 11 pm they reserve the right to shift you to bandwidth shared by other heavy users thus giving you access equivalent to dial-up or less.
Now - I have two sons. When they are back at home from university they want reasonable access to the internet. This includes downloading material which is relevant to their studies - very often large files. To facilitate this I have provided them with a network connection to my ISP. So - I get Fair Usage Policy warnings 1, 2 and 3. Which means the provider downgrades my measly 2mb connection to next to nothing during peak hours. They even had the gall to infer an invitation to me to change my ISP by telling me how to get my MAC number from their relevant department.
They advertise that they give an 8mb service to new customers but long-standing customers like me must wait for the increased speed.
I still pay the full amount for my connection but I am not getting the "unlimited" access I paid for.
The moral of this story is simple: Firstly do read the small print before you sign up for a contract. The word "unlimited" is apparently "limited" so you can get a "limited unlimited" connection.

The Escalator goes up to . . . Nowhere

Hezbollah in Lebanon has captured two Israeli soldiers. Probably they thought that they could exchange them for many prisoners held in Israeli jails. But Israel has retaliated with brutal force, killing hundreds of Lebanese, most of whom are innocent civilians. Hezbollah retaliated with rocket attacks on Northern Israeli cities, killing and injuring tens of innocent Israelis.
And so it goes on . . .
The more rockets Hezbollah fires into Israel the more the Israelis retaliate with artillery and air strikes further and further into Lebanon. It is an unequal fight. Hezbollah has hundreds of Iranian built rockets. Israel has tons and tons of ordnance, both airborne and artillery, with which to smash Lebanese cities.
George Bush has come down on the side of the Israelis. Who could expect anything else when his government is propped up by the strong Jewish lobby (for lobby read money) in his country? And, as such, lackey Tony Blair has to follow the same line (have you noticed that we never see the colour of Blair's tongue - I suspect it is brown and I can't for the life of me think why).
But - Foreign Office Minister Kim Howells has just visited Beirut and declared that the Israeli offensive is indiscriminate and too many innocents are being swept into the conflict. Doubtless Tony will give him a good telling off when he gets back but there are at last signs that Britain is not just an American lackey.
Does nobody remember that the modern State of Israel was brought about by a United Nations cave-in to terrorism? Does that not give credence to the current campaign by Hezbollah?
I don't know. I don't want anyone to die for the sake of who owns what bit of land. But then, I am neither Arab nor Jew so what the hell do I know about it?
Only what I read and what I see of the suffering on both sides of the conflict.
God, Allah - whatever you want to call it - hear the plea of a puzzled person and help all these people to come to their senses, whatever their beliefs.

Terrorist against Terrorist

So Israel is bombing the Lebanon. Hundreds, if no thousands, of innocent civilians are dying.
Hezbollah is sending rockets into Haifa and other Northern Israeli cities. Tens of innocent civilians are dying. One set of terrorists has rockets. The other has aircraft, tanks, artillery and the backing of the mighty USA.
Israel should remember that its modern incarnation came about through terrorism - and therefore must be prepared to suffer a similar fate when it comes to defending their position.
George Bush and his lackey Blair have not condemned Israeli over-reaction.
The United Nations seems powerless against the might of the American diffidence. Perhaps there are too many Jews in influential positions in the States.
Nevertheless innocent people on both sides of the conflict are dying unnecessarily.
Why?
Don't ask me . . .

Life-saver or Damnation?

Listening to BBC Radio 4 today I heard a programme about life science research in China. The programme started with the sounds of a gurgling baby with the happy coo-ing of aunt and grandma. The presenter stated that this was a special baby because she was among the first to be born where the umbilical cord was to be kept in deep freeze so that in future, should she need it, stem cells could be taken from it to help repair damaged organs and tissue.
A Chinese professor was wheeled in to tell of all the research he and his team were doing in this field. He talked of the possible benefits of such science, especially the possibility of helping people with injured spinal cords to regain some kind of normality in their life. Usually such injuries are a sentence to immobility and suffering. The professor in question, along with many other Chinese experts, had studied in Europe and the USA and were practising in those countries when the Chinese government woke up to the fact that their best brains were being lured away by money and good facilities in foreign lands. They set about building the institutions and facilities to entice their nationals back to work in China.
Good for them - after all there are many of their population who can benefit from their expertise. But one can't help but think, as was inferred in the programme, that the Chinese want to be seen to excel in the area. That they want to be looked on as a super-power in the field of science.
The professor talked about the morality of using human foetuses in the research and in treatments. His outlook was quite logical. Is it sensible to throw away valuable material which could save lives? The International Agreements which prevail state that no material should be used from foetuses older than 24 weeks, and the professor stated that all Chinese research was governed by a rule of a 16-week maximum. Chinese beliefs and philosophy - right back to Confucius - doesn't think of personality until the baby is born. That's what they believe, so to limit their research to the 16-week rule is considerably more than their cultural beliefs allow.
But of course many in the world think that a being is created at the instant of conception. President Bush seems to be among them because he has just overruled a Bill passed by Congress allowing stem cell research. I can't help thinking if this is more for political expediency than solidly-held beliefs on the part of our George. He could be thinking that the protest from the considerable Pro-Life lobby in America would be very damaging during his last term of office and he would go down in history as the "baby-murdering President".
Further into the radio programme the presenter interviewed an American MS sufferer who had gone to China for stem-cell treatment. He claimed considerable alleviation of symptoms.
I don't have any pat answers. I can see the pros and cons of both sides to an extent. But I wish someone had put my umbilical cord into deep freeze so that I might benefit if I needed it. I hope Bush can look sufferers and dying people in the eye and say that ethically it would be wrong to treat them.
Likewise I hope the Chinese professor can convince mothers who have lost their babies that good will come from their pain. And I hope that there is strict regulation of such research to prevent abuse.

At last - a Purpose in Life . . .

Recent internet re-unions with old friends have led me to a new purpose in life. Let me explain. Very recently I was able to regain contact with Pete, a bass-player from a band I was in 35 years ago. That's a long time. In the few communications we have had already we have updated our family histories to each other and reminisced about old bands and old friends.
Then out of the blue Pete sent me a humorous list of explanations of various musical genres. This set me thinking and I sent him back a short list of descriptions of musical instruments and explanations of musical terminology.
On further reflection I thought - why should I keep all this knowledge to myself? Why not share it with the world via a blogsite? So today I have set up a new blogsite www.musicforbeginners.blogspot.com.
This does not pretend to be a complete encyclopaedia of music but the "comment" button is always there to be pressed by any reader who feels he or she can constructively contribute. All contributions will be considered by me and if I think they warrant inclusion I will enter them in the appropriate place.
As you will see when you go to the site the list is by no means complete but your contributions will be gratefully received.

Putin 1, Bush 0

It was interesting to see news of Putin and Bush meeting at the G8 summit in St Petersburg. Mr Putin introduced Mr Bush to his very first car - what looked like a 1972 Trabant or similar. The Russian leader was able to field and answer questions in English at their joint appearance before the assembled press. He was also able to share Bush's mild joke about the fact that the car was older than the person who asked the question.
I just wonder what would happen if the summit had taken place in the US? Would they conduct the press conference in Russian? Would Bush be able to understand and answer questions in that language and join in the banter? I suspect the answers to those questions would be a resounding NO.
Insular - almost parochial - America will soldier on in the way that the old British Empire did. "If the natives don't understand you then repeat your question/command/request/order in English VERY LOUDLY until they do understand."
Mr Putin has once again got the edge on Bumbling Bush. His lack of intellect is all to obvious. But then, that sums up the whole American political system. Make sure you have the people with the brains behind you once you have won office by wheeling, dealing and publicity stunts. Only the rich can win office in America. It takes a lot of money to buy people's minds. . .

Is it worth it?

So, on Thursday I get all het up about the situation in Gaza. I tell the world to talk instead of use force. I get profound about the need to communicate with words not bombs.
All very good.
I see that someone has left a comment about my blog. I open the blog, expecting some deep, thought-provoking comment which will either support or refute my views.
What do I get by way of support for my cause? Who comes on my side and says "I'm with you - let's change the world!"
Nobody.
Instead Jose, from somewhere in Mexico, says "Hi, greetings from Mexico". That's all. No profound comment. No world-shattering remedy for the Israeli-Palestinian situation. Just some lonely prat who probably has not even read the blog and is just looking for someone to talk to.
Get out and get a life Jose. Start by looking at the world around you instead of just a the screen in front of you. That way you may even get to understand that you, among all of us, are a real human being under all that cyber-pseudo-world you inhabit.
Prats like Jose make me wonder if it is worthwhile commenting at all on the world around me. And then I feel moved to start a charity to help poor helpless souls who don't know of any world outside their computer screens!

Talks not Tanks

Listening to a BBC report it seems that not all Jews agree with the Israeli government's policy. The Israeli government is at the moment concerned by the abduction of one Corporal. He is being held by a Palestinian group who are demanding the freeing of Palestinian prisoners in exchange for his freedom. Israel has responded by sending tanks and other ordnance into the Gaza Strip in areas where they think he may be held. They have taken out a power station and other strategic points like bridges so that "it will restrict the Palestinians' ability to move the hostage around".
An influential group of British Jews has condemned this action. They say it is illegal and immoral to inflict such damage as it affects non-combatant civilians, not necessarily the hostage takers. They also infer that the damage to the civilian infrastructure is part of the Israeli government's strategy - which would be against all the rules of the Geneva Conventions.
I am still to be convinced that a country that gained its territory by terrorism has any right to claim to be legitimate. Many Israeli "statesmen" were bombers and insurgents during the 1940s. To the Jews they were freedom fighters. To the rest of the world they were terrorists.
Hamas, the legitimate democratic government of the Palestinian people, has denied any involvement in the present hostage situation. But doubtless they hope that the hostage takers will gain some advantage.
Now, if even Jews are stating that force is not the way to solve the Israeli-Palestinian problem, surely the need for negotiation and agreement is the only way for all to live.
Bugger principles. Sod the religious bigotry of both sides. Just bloody-well talk and learn to live with one another. Be an example to other areas where similar feuds are taking place.
Killing, maiming and incarcerating people is not the way to peace. Only talk and understanding and compromise will bring a peaceful co-existence.
And co-existence is the only sensible solution.
Nuff said ...

Money Talks

Thursday should be a remarkable start for the two largest developing economic powers in the world. In the cold wastes of the high Himalayas stands a border gate guarded by soldiers on both sides and fortified with ramparts and barbed wire. The only person to cross this border since 1962 is the weekly visit of a postman who has to be escorted to the barbed wire by a soldier on one side, climb through the barbed wire fence and then be escorted by a soldier from the other side to a hut. There the postbag is almost ceremonially weighed and signed for by a postman on the receiving side.
This is the border between China and India on the old Silk Road. It was closed by the Chinese in 1962 after fierce military action between the two sides. Since then nothing much has happened except the semi-ritual crossing of the post. The Chinese postman told the BBC how he journeys up to the border on horseback in the summer but in the winter the snow is too deep for the horse so he has to climb alone with the precious postbag.
This sounds very quaint.
Then you realise what the re-opening of the border is all about. They are re-building the old Silk Road. Crews on both sides of the border are making good the route in a bid to enable trucks and other vehicles to cross the border. As I stated at the beginning of this post the two countries - China and India - are the fastest-growing economies in the world. Individually they hold an increasing amount of economic clout. Think about what could happen if they start to agree on how they trade, first with each other then jointly with the rest of the world. The present economic status will be turned on its head. The US, the EU and the Japanese could find themselves with the economic status of third world countries while China and India, with many South-East Asian countries hanging on their tails, dominate.
So that's progress. We invented the system of the strong rule and the weak go to the wall. Now we will reap the results of the system, as taken on by the "anti-capitalist" Chinese and the entrepreneurial Indians.
It looks like pay-back time.
Nuff said ...

We're With You, Rooney

Yes, I support Rooney.
No, not the boy wonder Wayne - he of the broken metatarsals who has just played a full 93 minutes of football against Ecuador. However much he was considered to be the saviour of England (the football team that is, not the country) I have little regard for this overpaid hulk who looks like he should be a bouncer in a seedy nightclub.
I write of no less a personage than Josephine Rooney, aged 69, of Derby. She has made a stand. She wants her rights. In her street the litter is appalling. Used hypodermics are found. Prostitutes and drug addicts abound in the area. The council seems unable, or unwilling, to clean the streets properly. The local police seem ineffective against the junkies and prostitutes. Josephine decided that if the council wasn't doing its job then she would not pay for it and withheld her £800 Council Tax. It isn't because she can't afford to pay. She has the money to pay sitting in her bank account but she does not feel she has had the service for which she is paying. There is a law in this country that means you must pay your Council Tax. So the local authority took her to court and she was sentenced to three months in prison. Josephine is a retired person and looks like any ordinary senior citizen. She is likely to serve at least six weeks of the sentence unless she pays up. It is a sad reflection on society that a body that does not provide the services it is paid to provide can be "in the right" to the extent that it makes a criminal of a person who decides not to pay for a service not provided. Imagine going into a shop, asking for a product and being told: "You can't have it but we'll charge you for it anyway".
We pay taxes so that we can have a certain standard of living. Where is the Office of Fair Trading when it comes to councils not providing the services paid for?
Nuff said again!

We are Making a Mess of It!

The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds is getting vociferous. Two stories featured on the BBC website news emanating from the RSPB. Apparently wind farms in Norway are causing great problems for sea eagles in Norway. Although they have amazing eyesight which can spot a fish underwater and home in on a rabbit from high altitude these birds are falling foul (sorry for the pun) of the blades of a wind farm in their territory. Many have been killed and it is seriously affecting the local sea eagle population. Since sea eagles live quite long lives they do not reproduce at a great rate and so the birth rate in this area is now much lower than the death rate and the local population is in danger of not surviving.
The second story coming from RSPB is closer to home. Water companies, especially in South-East England, are extracting water from bore-holes and rivers to such an extent that they are endangering the habitat of local waterfowl. Populations will decrease and may even become locally extinct. Ofwat, the agency which licenses the extraction of water, has the power to stop or limit this usage but would be obliged to pay compensation to the water companies in question. Compensation which would come from us, the taxpayers. This makes them very reluctant to make any curtailment orders. But if they don't take action many species will be seriously affected and may become extinct in some areas.
It's surely up to us - the water and energy consumers. Do we just keep consuming without regard to the effects on the environment or do we try to use our natural resources more responsibly? Renewable energy like wind power is ecologically preferable and making sure that local wildlife is not adversely affected just takes a little research at the planning stage. Educating the public to use less water is more difficult. In this consumer society we are encouraged to consume much more than we really need. When I was a kid a bath once a week was considered quite adequate. My own kids nowadays don't feel clean unless they bath at least once a day. I have talked to them but they consider me to be dirty because I shower once or twice a week and the rest of the time a sinkful of water each day can keep me clean. My kids think nothing of leaving lights on and leaving all their computer peripherals switched on while they are not using them except for downloads - however much I nag them about my electricity bills. It's nothing to them. It's the norm.
I am sure that this is the state in most households. We must wake up and do something to stop it! Otherwise my kids - and their kids - will inherit a wasteland in which no one can live, no one can consume and anarchy and war will be end of civilisation and possibly humankind.
Very deep, Mac.
Nuff said.

End of an Era

Home Truths is no more.
The radio programme, broadcast on BBC Radio 4 each Saturday at 9 am made its final appearance today. It was a programme which followed exactly its title - little personal stories of ordinary insignificant folk. The programme was started and ran for years hosted by the late John Peel who gave it a personality of its own. His easy going style made you think of him as an old friend, a sympathetic ear who listened with compassion. And we were privileged to be able to share human stories of everyday people - some personal, some funny, some downright nonsensical. But all was very listenable and the programme had an almost addictive charm.
Come the unfortunate death of Mr Peel the programme was continued by David Stafford. Like many old fans, I thought at the time that no one could ever replace John Peel. I was right. But David brought his own personality to the show while keeping the themes and aims intact. He was a worthy successor.
The BBC, in its infinite wisdom, has finally decided to axe the programme, much to my dismay.
I will miss the signature tune.
I will miss the chatty style.
I will miss the stories from ordinary folk like myself who turn out to be extraordinary in their own way.
Other programmes come and go on the radio or TV but there are very few which would move me to write a blog mourning their passing.
Goodbye Home Truths . . . I will miss you.

Chicken Chocolate?

Cadbury's - a large company manufacturing chocolate, among other confections - has recalled a million chocolate bars from the shops because of a salmonella scare. Now I always thought that salmonella was a bug you caught from under-cooked chicken or eggs. But it seems that a leaking pipe in the factory caused an amount of the bacterium - the rare Montevideo strain - to contaminate some chocolate bars during manufacture. The company dutifully informed the Food Standards Agency and withdrew all bars from the shops which might be a risk.
So a mistake was detected and dealt with - good for Cadbury's.
Except for one thing.
The original problem happened in January. The company reported the problem on June 21, nearly six months later. Cadbury's spokesman said that the risk had been deemed as infinitesimal and as such it was not worth scaring the public because there was no risk of catching salmonella. It was, however, noticed that cases of the relatively rare Montevideo strain of the disease had gone up four-fold of late. Investigation led to Cadbury's coming clean and finally doing the right thing. Their share price on the Stock Exchange immediately went down by a notable amount.
Some of the confections involved were the sort that children would buy with their pocket money. How can Cadbury's let profit and share prices come before the health and well-being of their consumers?
Money talks louder than common sense or public duty.
The FSA should take steps to prosecute the company for supplying foods unfit for human consumption. That would certainly affect profits, share prices and the company's reputation. It would also send a strong signal to others that risking the health of the population for the sake of profit does not pay.

I.C. (Initialising Castigation)

The lady of the house rules!
She has even just dictated the title of this bloody blog entry.
She tells me she is pissed off with me using initials instead of saying the words - especially when it takes just as much time and effort to say the initials as the words.
Little does she know that I do this for a purpose.
If she didn't have to work out what the initials stood for her brain would go into a permanent state of comatose suspension through under-usage.
I only do it for her mental well-being ...

Government by Tabloid?

So the "Sarah's Law" debate rumbles on. This is the British version of the American "Megan's Law" whereby paedophiles are named and their whereabouts are made known to local parents. The idea is that they are too well identified to risk re-offending. But the truth - even in the "land of the free" - is that it leaves the offenders open to vigilante groups who hound them out at best and at worst maim these people.
I am not defending paedophilia - the very thought disgusts me. But self-righteous people, or even people who are just plain scared, can react very inhumanely at times. Fear is a great motivator. It can rouse normally mundane urbanites into a rioting mob. Examples of this fear have been shown in the past with crowds surrounding the homes of known convicted offenders.
Police Chief Terry Grange has castigated such actions, saying that - far from doing any good - it could lead to such offenders going underground where they could not be traced. Mr Grange stated that a particular newspaper's vendetta against paedophiles was counter-productive for the reason that while the police are able to keep a close watch on such people they are less likely to re-offend. He likened the campaign to "blackmail" of government policy. He also said that this year alone in the states in the US where Megan's Law is enacted six people have been traced through the offenders register and murdered. Vigilante rule - in the "land of the free".
The "newspaper" in question is the News of the World, a Sunday rag that normally fills its pages with plenty of tits, bums and celebrity scandals to attract readers. It is owned by a company called News International, headed by that well-known Australian tycoon Rupert Murdoch.
Australians are just like us, normal law-abiding people. They are a young nation with origins which can be seen in my blog of June 6. So does Mr Murdoch have a dubious ancestry? Nuff said? This rag, and its sister daily The Sun, usually rely on the aforesaid tits and bums to sell copies. But, when the owner smells blood, they can change their political allegiance and castigate a government which they previously congratulated themselves on helping to win power. It's called always being on the winning side - otherwise known as being two-faced for the sake of sales.
Self-righteousness from media sources is not going to clean up the world.
Neither will this self-righteous blog.
As a child I, and some of my friends, were the minor victims of several paedophiles. But in those days we just shut up and accepted it. I am glad that that is not the case today. Adults now listen to children who tell of such assaults and so the true extent of these acts is nearer to being understood and tackled.
Paedophilia is wrong. It is sick. But to hound the perpetrators - even murder them - is not the way to solve the problem. I don't know all the answers - I always end up with a phrase like that - but scaring the public for the sake of newspaper sales is definitely not the way to do it.
Nuff said.

Home is where the jobs are . . .

Powergen, a large energy-producing and distributing company in the UK, has announced that it is closing its call centres in India.
Thank God for that!
I am not being racist when I express my delight. I just want to understand what the guy (or girl) on the other end of the line is saying when I call a company with a query. So often I call my bank, my insurance company - even my local retailer - and I get a person with such a strong accent that I cannot understand what is being said. I almost feel guilty in these days of political correctness when I ask them to repeat what they said or to explain what they mean. And I often wonder if they really understand what I am saying.
The scenario comes to mind of a call-centre operator in Mumbai talking to a customer with a thick Glaswegian accent. Would either of them understand what the other was saying?
My own company stopped employing call centres altogether when they realised that their computers did not necessarily give totally accurate information about stock levels in individual stores. Thus, when a person in our Belfast call centre told a customer that a certain item was in stock and on the shelf in Exeter, the expectant customer trolls along only to find that the computer was wrong and Exeter is still waiting for stock.
Nothing is better than talking to the person who has actual sight of the stock on the shelves. He (or she) can then tell the customer it is physically there and can take steps to keep it there until the customer comes to get it.
It brings back the personal touch to shopping. It also brings back the confidence of the customer. If the person talking is 6,000 miles away how can he be sure he is not misleading the customer?
This is not xenophobia - it's just common sense.

Suicidal Act of War?

Three men have successfully committed suicide in Guantanamo. They all hanged themselves in separate cells using bedsheets. They were found by prison guards who were unable to revive them. Now this is obviously a pre-planned joint suicide. Three people don't just independently decide to commit suicide on the same night. Especially using the same method of death. Too much of a coincidence there. It is obvious that the three, as yet un-named, prisoners were in collusion and plotted to commit this final act. The ultimate sacrifice - as they probably thought.
The initial American reaction came from the camp commandant, who stated that this was an "act of asymmetrical war" - whatever he meant by that. Later today a US government official stated in a BBC World Service interview that it was a "good PR exercise". Perhaps it was both - or neither of these. The suicides all left notes in Arabic. I wonder if the Americans will have the guts to publish them in full - I doubt it. If we hear anything at all it will be severely edited.
George W recently stated that he wanted to see an end to Guantanamo and wanted to have the inmates brought under the auspices of the US courts. That would have been a good idea four years ago before the inception of Guantanamo. But now? Where in the United States would you be able to find "twelve good men and true" to act as jury. People who had not been influenced by the anti-Muslim propaganda that serves as American foreign policy?
Fair trial - I think not.
Nuff said ...

A man dies - let's celebrate!

So Abu Musab al-Zarqawi has been killed in an American attack. They sent jet bombers to a house where he was known to be and blasted it with 500lb laser-guided bombs. He died - although according to some recent reports not immediately. He died on a stretcher after some American soldiers saw him move.
Hmmmmm!???
Photographs - some bloody, some almost serene - adorned the newspapers that I was able to see. They were also very present on TV and other media news that I was able to gain access to.
Comments from leaders around the world all said it was an immense victory. Who am I to argue? Doubtless the man was big in Al-Qaeda. There is video footage of him beheading a Western hostage. He stood for evil.
That is according to the media I am able to see and interpret.
When the likes of Bush and Blair state that this is a moment of triumph then I get worried.
Yes, I worry that the people of Iraq should be free. Yes I agree that all people should have freedom of thought, belief and the ability to express these.
But I get uncomfortable when I see Bush and Blair dictating what those beliefs should be. Why is the Western way of democracy the only true way? Why is might always right?
Al-Zaqarwi is dead. I hope his god will forgive him for the sins he has committed on this earth - for it is documented that they are many.
Bush, Blair and their ilk are still alive. They are crowing about the death of one person as if it was the salvation of all the troubles in Iraq.
Do they really think we are all as shallow-thinking as that?
We've killed al-Zaqarwi so let's pull out all the troops from Iraq!
Bollocks it's not that easy. We went in to create democracy but we have created a further monster that is probably as bad as the one that preceded it.
I still get the feeling that had Saddam Hussein been ruling a country which did not have lots of oil no one would have raised and eyebrow at his regime, let alone invaded his country in the name of "freedom and democracy".
But America and the "free" world need energy.
At any price, it seems.
Nuff said.

Wayne Who?

The British newspapers en-masse were full of it today. Each one carried the identical photo on its front page.
Some earth-shattering news?
The end of the world?
The discovery of life on another planet?
Peace, agreement and harmony on earth?
An end to poverty and starvation in the world?
No.
Wayne Rooney kicked a ball. Yes, the kid kicked a ball.
One rag's front page headline read, with no respect to real religious feelings: "There is a God".
Mr Rooney, in case you didn't know, plays Association Football. He is hoping to be in the team representing England in the World Cup. I should here explain to you Yanks that in this case the word "world" really means that. Any country can take part. Elimination rounds take place and the top 32 countries get to the finals in the host country. The host country is, of course, the winner of the previous final of the four-yearly event. This is unlike the American World Series - which only includes teams from the USA. But then most Yanks seem to think that there is no world outside of their own insular boundaries.
Politics aside, Mr Rooney is a young footballer of note. He recently broke a metatarsal - that's a bone in the foot to you and me.
Pictures were shown in newspapers of the scan of the offending broken bone. It was the end of the world for English football fans because if the foot was damaged its owner could not play, and therefore score, for the English team in the competition. Notably the previous winners, and thus host nation this time round, were Germany - the team which England beat in the final of 1966. This was the one and only time England have won the World Cup.
But today - miracle of miracles - Mr Rooney is pictured doing a flying scissors kick. This is good news for Mr Rooney. But it will take more than one kick to prove that he is able to take part in a full match with all the stresses and strains that can be put on such a famous metatarsal.
I wish Wayne well. I know his desire to play in such a prestigious competition must be absolute. But he is young enough to try again in four years time. One of the troubles is that pressure from the press for the "saviour" to win the tournament for the team might lead him to play before he is ready and then possibly even wreck the rest of his career by permanently damaging his foot.
I'm Irish - but I wish the England team well and hope they can realise their ambitions.
I just hope the fans will be able to take it if Wayne cannot play.
I hope they will be able to take it if Wayne does play and proves not to be the miracle man they have set him up to be.

Honouring the Birth of a Nation

Browsing through ABC News (Australia) I found a delightful story. Apparently in Fremantle, Western Australia, they recently held a ceremony to honour the founders of the Australian Nation by presenting awards to their direct descendents. The ceremony was held in the historic building of Fremantle Prison. Yes, Prison. The reason? Most of the founders of the great and adventurous nation that turned into Australians were convicts transported from Britain. Some for quite serious crimes such as murder or manslaughter, others for sheep- stealing or even lesser crimes. Once there, even when their sentences were served, they were often forced by circumstances - or even chose - to stay. They settled, saw a possible life ahead of them (or accepted the inevitable and got on with it) and created a nation. Before the convicts were sent there was a population of a measly 5,000 - not counting the Aborigines, who just didn't count in their eyes. Now they are a proud nation with loyalties to their own country. They are even sometimes trying to make amends to what remains of the Aboriginal race which got there first - probably by at least 1,000 years.
But they are first and foremost Australians.
Good luck to them all. They have their great people - sportsmen, statesmen, artists. They also have their share of crap - sugary-sweet TV series, nicer-than-nice pop stars and all the rest of the flotsam and jetsam. All nations have the same problems.
They also export lager as if it was they who invented it.
If any of the Brits don't like it then they should take time to reflect on the past.
After all we were the ones who started the whole thing off!
Oh well ...