"The US says longer queues are a small price to pay for greater safety "
27 more nations have been added to the list of people who have to have their digital photos taken, and inkless fingerprints made as they enter america. (story here) thats 13 million people a year.
now i am not saying that america shouldn't do it. it is more a question of whether or not what they are doing is going to have an effect. true they stopped cat stevens from getting into america (but lets be honest there are a lot more artists ahead of him you just shouldn't be letting into america - are you listening donovan ?).
interestingly the story about the fingerprint crackdown came a few days after the story about the fbi having something in the region of 123,000 hours of untranslated tapes of conversations that may or may not be concerned with potential terrorist attacks on the usa.
"Since Sept. 11, 2001, more than 123,000 hours of audio in languages associated with terrorists still had not been reviewed as of April 2004, the audit found. In addition, more than 370,000 hours of audio associated with counterintelligence had not been reviewed. " (the guardian)
so all this additional information from fingerprints etc will more than likely just go into that big data black hole and never be much use to man or beast.
and is it only me - but as far as i can tell all identity cards and biometric passports will do is allow the authorities to confirm that the dead guy was indeed mr x (unless of course it was a particularly stupid terrorist whole decided to put "bomber" in the occupation part of his application forms.
i don't profess to be an expert but i think that if you are going to strap a bomb to yourself or get on a plane with the idea of crashing it into a big building then you are not thinking like me and you and more than likely you are not going to be deterred by the fact that you have a biometric passport that says you are joe shmoe (remember the identity on the passport can be whatever you want as long as the biometrics match yours..... not to mention that these things will be forged, or even worse given that they will be issued, created and controlled by private business the technology will be available for sale at some point.... or it won't work!) when really you are peter schmuck because when they bomb goes boom or the Plane goes crash you ain't going to be around to worry.
the need for sensible and effective counter terrorist mechanisms is recognised by all but trying to find that needle in a very very large haystack while riding roughshod over civil liberties is perhaps too much a price to pay for an ineffective defense against terror.
Thursday, September 30, 2004
almost
well tony almost said he was sorry for misleading the country, for taking us into a war in iraq that seems to have no chance of a satisfactory ending.
the silly part is that if he had said at the get go he was for regime change and really didn't care that much about the presence of WMDs then he probably would have had much more support for the action then he did.
oh well we have made our beds on that one and we are stuck there for a long time.
it is interesting that while the british government is making all the right noises about not negotiating with the kidnappers of paul bigley (and yes we all know that they do negotiate with terrorists - but then it is with people who have stated and achievable aims such as the IRA) the italians have just gone and stumped up £500,000 to see two aids workers released.
i am sure that this is going to make it safer for others to be working out in iraq. well no it won't.
and for all the blather about the insurgents causes etc etc - it's nice to see that already the iraqis on the ground have embraced the joys of free market capitalism. at this rate arthur andersen will have to open offices their to balance the books of the insurgents (a tip to all iraqi insurgents reading this though - don't let them sell you shares though - remember enron and worldcom).
currently there are 18 overseas workers being held hostage in iraq.
the silly part is that if he had said at the get go he was for regime change and really didn't care that much about the presence of WMDs then he probably would have had much more support for the action then he did.
oh well we have made our beds on that one and we are stuck there for a long time.
it is interesting that while the british government is making all the right noises about not negotiating with the kidnappers of paul bigley (and yes we all know that they do negotiate with terrorists - but then it is with people who have stated and achievable aims such as the IRA) the italians have just gone and stumped up £500,000 to see two aids workers released.
i am sure that this is going to make it safer for others to be working out in iraq. well no it won't.
and for all the blather about the insurgents causes etc etc - it's nice to see that already the iraqis on the ground have embraced the joys of free market capitalism. at this rate arthur andersen will have to open offices their to balance the books of the insurgents (a tip to all iraqi insurgents reading this though - don't let them sell you shares though - remember enron and worldcom).
currently there are 18 overseas workers being held hostage in iraq.
bits
some odds and sods
nice to see that although we have persuaded libya to give up its wmd programme - that tony blair and a few others are rushing to supply him (well sell him at a fat profit) conventional weapons. i would have thought it would have been better not to sell him any weapons at all, but there you go.
one of the reasons that the weapons are being justified (aside from the money it will rake in for a few) is that libya has a problem with refugees (and with luck i am sure the rest of europe is hoping that libya will stop "undesirables" "flooding" into europe!)
you wouldn't mind this but amnesty have just slammed libya for human rights violations...... (here)
oh look here is jack straw.
and look whose hand he is shaking....
yup jack straw shook the hand of robert mugabe (here) i love the fact he says there are serious disagreements between zimbabwe and the uk, but no need to be rude.
jack in case you hadn't noticed the man is a dictator and a pretty nasty one at that.
oddly we are in iraq at the moment after just having gotten rid of one there. couldn't be because there is a lot of oil in iraq and not much at all in zimbabwe ?
we are also about to send a cricket team out to zimbabwe - i think most of the players are keen to go as they are sure to get their win bonuses. but it's time to realise that sometimes you just have to say - no no no you just can't go and do this as it legitmates the regime you are visiting.
and anyone who says sport and politics should be kept apart, is right in theory, but in practice we know the two things are joined together at the hip. but it's ok mugabe will not use the tour in a political way what so ever.
my favourite tory - boris johnson - has started a blog on his website. he really should be in charge of them. at least they would at least be a bit more human.
there are also links to other politicians who have blogs there - i shall have to check them out.
hey they can't be worse than this !
sadly though boris doesn't give us his version of the TTT list (top tory totty).
nice to see that although we have persuaded libya to give up its wmd programme - that tony blair and a few others are rushing to supply him (well sell him at a fat profit) conventional weapons. i would have thought it would have been better not to sell him any weapons at all, but there you go.
one of the reasons that the weapons are being justified (aside from the money it will rake in for a few) is that libya has a problem with refugees (and with luck i am sure the rest of europe is hoping that libya will stop "undesirables" "flooding" into europe!)
you wouldn't mind this but amnesty have just slammed libya for human rights violations...... (here)
oh look here is jack straw.
and look whose hand he is shaking....
yup jack straw shook the hand of robert mugabe (here) i love the fact he says there are serious disagreements between zimbabwe and the uk, but no need to be rude.
jack in case you hadn't noticed the man is a dictator and a pretty nasty one at that.
oddly we are in iraq at the moment after just having gotten rid of one there. couldn't be because there is a lot of oil in iraq and not much at all in zimbabwe ?
we are also about to send a cricket team out to zimbabwe - i think most of the players are keen to go as they are sure to get their win bonuses. but it's time to realise that sometimes you just have to say - no no no you just can't go and do this as it legitmates the regime you are visiting.
and anyone who says sport and politics should be kept apart, is right in theory, but in practice we know the two things are joined together at the hip. but it's ok mugabe will not use the tour in a political way what so ever.
my favourite tory - boris johnson - has started a blog on his website. he really should be in charge of them. at least they would at least be a bit more human.
there are also links to other politicians who have blogs there - i shall have to check them out.
hey they can't be worse than this !
sadly though boris doesn't give us his version of the TTT list (top tory totty).
Monday, September 27, 2004
hunters
well you have to admire them - the pro hunt brigade were out in force at the weekend.
their target was peter hain (labour's leader of the house and secretary of state for wales). the pro hunters gathered outside his house and for a time prevented him from leaving to go to the labour party conference.
now a couple of things here - if unions do that sort of thing they are considered to be a mob, a rabble and are more than likely photographed by the police and then filed as likely future trouble makers. if football fans did that sort of thing there would be an outrage.
but a bunch of toffs and toff lovers do it then it is ok.
they should be banged up inside.
the worst of it is that they are the sort of people who think democracy begins and end with them and that no one else really should have a say.
i don't mind them hunting - i hate them because they think that they are above the law, and above democracy and parliament itself.
the only surprise about the pro hunt thing outside hain's house was that there were no socialist worker party (swp) banner's there - unusual as they normally join any protest and pretty much any angry gathering over 4 people.
their target was peter hain (labour's leader of the house and secretary of state for wales). the pro hunters gathered outside his house and for a time prevented him from leaving to go to the labour party conference.
now a couple of things here - if unions do that sort of thing they are considered to be a mob, a rabble and are more than likely photographed by the police and then filed as likely future trouble makers. if football fans did that sort of thing there would be an outrage.
but a bunch of toffs and toff lovers do it then it is ok.
they should be banged up inside.
the worst of it is that they are the sort of people who think democracy begins and end with them and that no one else really should have a say.
i don't mind them hunting - i hate them because they think that they are above the law, and above democracy and parliament itself.
the only surprise about the pro hunt thing outside hain's house was that there were no socialist worker party (swp) banner's there - unusual as they normally join any protest and pretty much any angry gathering over 4 people.
badassss
over the weekend i watched mario van peebles badassss which is his movie based on the the trials and tribulations of his dad, melvin, as he made his seminal breakthrough movie sweet sweet sweetback's badassss song. a film that is credited with the start of the blaxploitation boom.
now i have to say a couple of things upfront. i have never really been a fan of mario, i was never a fan of blaxploitation movies and i know squat about black history.
but mario has made a great film that manages to entertain and to an extent educate - not only about the struggle a black artist had in creating his own vision, but also the problems that independent film makers face.
if there is a weakness to the film it is the ending (and i have no idea how close to the truth it is) but it's a little like the scene in the producers where mel and gene are in the bar across from the theatre.
all in all it's an engrossing film to watch, with enough social commentary (nicely entwined into the story so it doesn't feel like you are being battered of the head with it) to remind you that we should all be aware of the history of our pasts good and bad.
this film gets a pat's thumbs up.
now i have to say a couple of things upfront. i have never really been a fan of mario, i was never a fan of blaxploitation movies and i know squat about black history.
but mario has made a great film that manages to entertain and to an extent educate - not only about the struggle a black artist had in creating his own vision, but also the problems that independent film makers face.
if there is a weakness to the film it is the ending (and i have no idea how close to the truth it is) but it's a little like the scene in the producers where mel and gene are in the bar across from the theatre.
all in all it's an engrossing film to watch, with enough social commentary (nicely entwined into the story so it doesn't feel like you are being battered of the head with it) to remind you that we should all be aware of the history of our pasts good and bad.
this film gets a pat's thumbs up.
Friday, September 24, 2004
art
the national gallery in london is about to finish it's looooong revamp. i have to say that i am really excited. although the new look is unveiled this sunday i probably won't get a chance to get there until next wednesday. i can't wait.
the gallery is a spectacular repository of art. there is something special about walking around the galleries looking at the art on display. not only the art but the environment fills you with a feeling of peace and wonderment. it is a place to contemplate and view artistic beauty.
it is one of my favourite galleries in london.
the others being the tate modern, the whitechapel and the heyward gallery.
expect to hear more about my travels in the art world in the weeks to come.
but fear not i am part of the "i-don't-know-much-about-art-but-i-know-what-i-like" school of thought.
the gallery is a spectacular repository of art. there is something special about walking around the galleries looking at the art on display. not only the art but the environment fills you with a feeling of peace and wonderment. it is a place to contemplate and view artistic beauty.
it is one of my favourite galleries in london.
the others being the tate modern, the whitechapel and the heyward gallery.
expect to hear more about my travels in the art world in the weeks to come.
but fear not i am part of the "i-don't-know-much-about-art-but-i-know-what-i-like" school of thought.
batman
i confess i like batman, i read comics (oh ok i collect them and think of them as a modern art form) even today i got my corgi cars 1940s batmobile replica.
secretly i am getting very excited about the 2005 christopher nolan batman movie.
there you have it i like batman.
what i can't understand is why the fathers for justice brigade insist on dressing up as batman all the time when they are making their protests (here - you may have to register to get the story, but it is free).
now it's been a long time since i was a step dad, but i can see how hard it must be to have a child and not be able to have access to the child and what little i have seen about this implies that the courts generally find in the mother's favour making it very hard for dad's to get access. this obviously needs to be addressed.
(yes i know the last protester turned out to be a lying weasel, but one can only hope that he is the exception that proves the rule.)
but i am digressing.
if i was a judge and a bloke was trying to impress me with his ability to be a responsible influence on his child then i am not sure i am going to pick someone who dresses up like a fantasy character (and for many people a violent fantasy character) and climbs dangerous heights. no siree to me they have demonstrated good reasons not to let them near children.
and as one of my colleagues at work pointed out, all the the dad's in costumes have baggy saggy pants on. it's an image i have not been able to shake and have nightmares from it.
if you get a chance to read the article there is a nice caveat later in it which proves just how dumb some television viewers can be.
smile - i nearly did.
secretly i am getting very excited about the 2005 christopher nolan batman movie.
there you have it i like batman.
what i can't understand is why the fathers for justice brigade insist on dressing up as batman all the time when they are making their protests (here - you may have to register to get the story, but it is free).
now it's been a long time since i was a step dad, but i can see how hard it must be to have a child and not be able to have access to the child and what little i have seen about this implies that the courts generally find in the mother's favour making it very hard for dad's to get access. this obviously needs to be addressed.
(yes i know the last protester turned out to be a lying weasel, but one can only hope that he is the exception that proves the rule.)
but i am digressing.
if i was a judge and a bloke was trying to impress me with his ability to be a responsible influence on his child then i am not sure i am going to pick someone who dresses up like a fantasy character (and for many people a violent fantasy character) and climbs dangerous heights. no siree to me they have demonstrated good reasons not to let them near children.
and as one of my colleagues at work pointed out, all the the dad's in costumes have baggy saggy pants on. it's an image i have not been able to shake and have nightmares from it.
if you get a chance to read the article there is a nice caveat later in it which proves just how dumb some television viewers can be.
smile - i nearly did.
admiration
"Today we [Iraqis] are better off, you are better off, the world is better off without Saddam Hussein. Your decision to go into Iraq was not an easy one, but it was the right one." (quoted here)
you just have to admire allawi either he is living in a dream world, or he really knows something we don't. all the news that comes out of iraq points to it being a pretty unstable place. what with insurgents/terrorists/freedom fighters bombing, kidnapping, shooting and beheading, you can only wonder what it would be like if allawi thought the situation was bad ?
while i understand that allawi has to go to blair and bush (no chance they are going to go there) i do find it a little distasteful that in a week that has seen two hostages beheaded, and another one potentially about to be executed, that allawi is out on the stump electioneering for bush. thats just plain wrong.
meanwhile rumsfeld has been talking about truncated elections in iraq, because in the more violent areas polling may be impossible. this has since be refuted by richard armitage (deputy secretary for state) (here for this story) geez louise you would have thought that they could at least get their stories straight - especially with allawi doing his bit to earn bush some more votes.
talk about ingratitude!
additionally they mention that more coalition troops may be needed to ensure the election works smoothly.
i suggest in terms of the election that they go the route of the 2000 florida election and then they can exclude a big chunk of the voters, and with the new electronic voting machines just give the victories to who they want as there will be no paper trail to follow.
all i can say is that i hope that allawi had his fingers crossed behind his back when he was spouting out on the stump for bush. no wonder he is so trusted back home!
you just have to admire allawi either he is living in a dream world, or he really knows something we don't. all the news that comes out of iraq points to it being a pretty unstable place. what with insurgents/terrorists/freedom fighters bombing, kidnapping, shooting and beheading, you can only wonder what it would be like if allawi thought the situation was bad ?
while i understand that allawi has to go to blair and bush (no chance they are going to go there) i do find it a little distasteful that in a week that has seen two hostages beheaded, and another one potentially about to be executed, that allawi is out on the stump electioneering for bush. thats just plain wrong.
meanwhile rumsfeld has been talking about truncated elections in iraq, because in the more violent areas polling may be impossible. this has since be refuted by richard armitage (deputy secretary for state) (here for this story) geez louise you would have thought that they could at least get their stories straight - especially with allawi doing his bit to earn bush some more votes.
talk about ingratitude!
additionally they mention that more coalition troops may be needed to ensure the election works smoothly.
i suggest in terms of the election that they go the route of the 2000 florida election and then they can exclude a big chunk of the voters, and with the new electronic voting machines just give the victories to who they want as there will be no paper trail to follow.
all i can say is that i hope that allawi had his fingers crossed behind his back when he was spouting out on the stump for bush. no wonder he is so trusted back home!
kettle
sitting at home listening to yes (an english prog band of immense skill, but only listened to by a few) and skimming through the newspapers.
it’s an exciting life i lead.
in the evening standard tim lott has his weekly column. bloggers are very much like newspaper columnists, the difference being more people read the newspapers. anyway there is tim lott having a say about patricia hewitt’s recent proposals about the possibility of improving maternity leave (potentially increasing maternity leave from 6 months up to 12 months, and also improving the situation for fathers as well).
say hewitt "i have no doubt at all that a centrepiece of the manifesto will be a package of support for hard-working families, and we will be campaigning on that as a big part of the election." (quote taken from the guardian .
now the proposal has caused a few hackles to rise, especially with my old pals the cbi, and they make some valid points.
but what is tim so irked about ?
well he has two points to make. there is the economic one – that additional "breeding" (to quote lott) is not necessarily going to improve gdp, and besides because we are in a global economy we can just bring in the workers we need. even better we haven’t paid for their education so we are quids in (i am sure their homelands won’t mind this sacrifice for our wellbeing), a further benefit although tim doesn’t mention this is that we could always send them back once we didn’t need them.
his second point is that of course when hewitt is talking about this she is hoping that the only people who are going to be taking it up are people like her, she doesn’t want ethnic or working class types breeding" but she wants people who are good blairites like her.
now i have searched the internet to see if i can track down anything about this and aside from the story about the maternity leave increase i am not sure how lott gets from that to his outrageous statement about "breeding" (feel free to point me in the right direction). so on the face of what i have read hewitt is saying that new mums should be entitled to even more maternity leave than they are now. a good thing you would think.
mind you when he bills patricia hewitt as the minister for women, when she is in fact the minister for trade and industry you have to wonder about his research and well the reliability of anything else he has to say.
maybe a further clue is given in his reference to politicians as saddos that we the public tolerate as a necessary nuisance. and because we regard them as such we are going to ignore hewitt’s call to "breed" (even though she hasn’t actually asked for that…). but, lott argues, politicians don’t see themselves as saddos but as role models that can speak out and influence people in the way he claims hewitt is trying to do.
if it wasn’t bad enough lott seems to have intentionally misrepresented what was said he then goes on to make the point that not only is hewitt asking for people like her (presumably white, middle class labour supporters to "breed" but she is saying that they should stick them in nurseries and get back to work straight away. except she hasn’t she has said let’s extend maternity leave.
confused?
me too.
perhaps what it comes down to is lott is upset because for all his describing politicians as saddos, there are occasions when they are doing the right thing for the right reasons. but what we should do is pay attention to the unelected hack who can’t get his facts right and misrepresents what was said.
to you tim lott i say what you wanted us to say to patricia hewitt – fuck off.
(tim lott’s piece is in the london evening standard september 23rd, i can’t find a link for it.)
(by the time i had finished this i was listening to rush (a canadian prog band).
it’s an exciting life i lead.
in the evening standard tim lott has his weekly column. bloggers are very much like newspaper columnists, the difference being more people read the newspapers. anyway there is tim lott having a say about patricia hewitt’s recent proposals about the possibility of improving maternity leave (potentially increasing maternity leave from 6 months up to 12 months, and also improving the situation for fathers as well).
say hewitt "i have no doubt at all that a centrepiece of the manifesto will be a package of support for hard-working families, and we will be campaigning on that as a big part of the election." (quote taken from the guardian .
now the proposal has caused a few hackles to rise, especially with my old pals the cbi, and they make some valid points.
but what is tim so irked about ?
well he has two points to make. there is the economic one – that additional "breeding" (to quote lott) is not necessarily going to improve gdp, and besides because we are in a global economy we can just bring in the workers we need. even better we haven’t paid for their education so we are quids in (i am sure their homelands won’t mind this sacrifice for our wellbeing), a further benefit although tim doesn’t mention this is that we could always send them back once we didn’t need them.
his second point is that of course when hewitt is talking about this she is hoping that the only people who are going to be taking it up are people like her, she doesn’t want ethnic or working class types breeding" but she wants people who are good blairites like her.
now i have searched the internet to see if i can track down anything about this and aside from the story about the maternity leave increase i am not sure how lott gets from that to his outrageous statement about "breeding" (feel free to point me in the right direction). so on the face of what i have read hewitt is saying that new mums should be entitled to even more maternity leave than they are now. a good thing you would think.
mind you when he bills patricia hewitt as the minister for women, when she is in fact the minister for trade and industry you have to wonder about his research and well the reliability of anything else he has to say.
maybe a further clue is given in his reference to politicians as saddos that we the public tolerate as a necessary nuisance. and because we regard them as such we are going to ignore hewitt’s call to "breed" (even though she hasn’t actually asked for that…). but, lott argues, politicians don’t see themselves as saddos but as role models that can speak out and influence people in the way he claims hewitt is trying to do.
if it wasn’t bad enough lott seems to have intentionally misrepresented what was said he then goes on to make the point that not only is hewitt asking for people like her (presumably white, middle class labour supporters to "breed" but she is saying that they should stick them in nurseries and get back to work straight away. except she hasn’t she has said let’s extend maternity leave.
confused?
me too.
perhaps what it comes down to is lott is upset because for all his describing politicians as saddos, there are occasions when they are doing the right thing for the right reasons. but what we should do is pay attention to the unelected hack who can’t get his facts right and misrepresents what was said.
to you tim lott i say what you wanted us to say to patricia hewitt – fuck off.
(tim lott’s piece is in the london evening standard september 23rd, i can’t find a link for it.)
(by the time i had finished this i was listening to rush (a canadian prog band).
birthday
mine is fast approaching.
never really liked them - and now they are reminders of dates i would rather forget. so these days i tend to try to ignore them.
well blow me down if i wasn't surfing the net andthere he is my pal digby jones director of the cbi and guess what me and him share the same birthday. he is older than me though.
i can only hope that the profile on him was wrong, as it means i have yet another reason not to like my birthday.
never really liked them - and now they are reminders of dates i would rather forget. so these days i tend to try to ignore them.
well blow me down if i wasn't surfing the net andthere he is my pal digby jones director of the cbi and guess what me and him share the same birthday. he is older than me though.
i can only hope that the profile on him was wrong, as it means i have yet another reason not to like my birthday.
Wednesday, September 22, 2004
tories
it is great to see that the old battles and old prejudices never seem to die. just as we have seen new labour do the one thing that old labour supporters would recognise with the banning of fox hunting with dogs. (while ignoring pretty much everything that "old" labour stood for).
the tory party under michael howard (who seems to have shaken off the something of the night quip of anne widdecombe - though that could be he is made to look like a nice chap by the antics and attitudes of david blunkett) has once again returned to their old favourite of quotas for immigration.
but hold on they are not racist policies says mr howard as he reminds us
"He cited his parents' own experience as refugees from fascism in the 1930s to prove his good intentions when it comes to the issues of asylum and immigration.
"Everything I have I owe to this country," he said. "My family came here with very little and made a life for themselves."
except now after he has benefited from the escape from fascism he and his party want to close that door to all but the skilled, qualified and english speaking (being rich wouldn't hurt either).
but look it's not about being racist... OK!
it's about giving the benefits his family had when they came here and of course making britain a better place because of their diversity (and willingness to work in crap jobs).
so lets get it straight this is not a racist policy. (look just stop sniggering).
read the article here and read his full speech here
now i have no love for the tories.
i cried the night maggie was re-elected. i cheered on a tube train when i heard she had resigned (i was surprised the driver, who announced it over the tube's tannoy, didn't run the full length of the train cheering such was the jubilation in his voice!).
but there is a part of me that feels sorry for them (and because of their weakness i feel we are poorer as a country).
they have seen new labour come along and steal their clothes, seen them take over the centre right ground and leave them desperate for policies that keep them distinct from new labour, allow them to still appeal to their members without having to make a style choice of black shirts or white blankets.
so as they move more and more to the right they leave new labour an easy run into their third term in power, and a potential third term where they have no real opposition.
and (geez this started off as a rant at the tories .....) it's not like they will be radical government freed of not having to worry about opposition......
meanwhile the tories will go on fighting the old battles
no to europe
no to immigration
and they wonder why no one votes for them.
the tory party under michael howard (who seems to have shaken off the something of the night quip of anne widdecombe - though that could be he is made to look like a nice chap by the antics and attitudes of david blunkett) has once again returned to their old favourite of quotas for immigration.
but hold on they are not racist policies says mr howard as he reminds us
"He cited his parents' own experience as refugees from fascism in the 1930s to prove his good intentions when it comes to the issues of asylum and immigration.
"Everything I have I owe to this country," he said. "My family came here with very little and made a life for themselves."
except now after he has benefited from the escape from fascism he and his party want to close that door to all but the skilled, qualified and english speaking (being rich wouldn't hurt either).
but look it's not about being racist... OK!
it's about giving the benefits his family had when they came here and of course making britain a better place because of their diversity (and willingness to work in crap jobs).
so lets get it straight this is not a racist policy. (look just stop sniggering).
read the article here and read his full speech here
now i have no love for the tories.
i cried the night maggie was re-elected. i cheered on a tube train when i heard she had resigned (i was surprised the driver, who announced it over the tube's tannoy, didn't run the full length of the train cheering such was the jubilation in his voice!).
but there is a part of me that feels sorry for them (and because of their weakness i feel we are poorer as a country).
they have seen new labour come along and steal their clothes, seen them take over the centre right ground and leave them desperate for policies that keep them distinct from new labour, allow them to still appeal to their members without having to make a style choice of black shirts or white blankets.
so as they move more and more to the right they leave new labour an easy run into their third term in power, and a potential third term where they have no real opposition.
and (geez this started off as a rant at the tories .....) it's not like they will be radical government freed of not having to worry about opposition......
meanwhile the tories will go on fighting the old battles
no to europe
no to immigration
and they wonder why no one votes for them.
Tuesday, September 21, 2004
UN
so bush appears before the UN and says
"......He said every nation that seeks peace had an obligation to tackle oppression and violence.
"There is no safe isolation from terror networks or failed states that shelter them," Mr Bush said....."
(from the bbc website)
this was part of his in your face speech that basically said the war was justified (which seems to fly in the face of all the recent news. i wonder is kofi was sniggering when he listened to bush speak?) as if this wasn't bad enough bush is asking for members of the un to join in with the reconstruction of iraq. i wonder if as he said he, he was casting his mind back several months when he was effectively turning his back on the un, now when it is getting sticky and it looks like it is going to be a long term situation in iraq bush stands in front of the un to say you should all be helping.
the Cynic in me says that if he wants the help of the other nations then he needs to get halliburton to give up some of it's more lucrative contracts to offer the french, germans and chinese. but that is just me being cynical.
but aside from iraq bush also had this to say:
"But he also spoke of a better world beyond the war on terror, outlining the need to improve healthcare, expand prosperity and extend freedom as an alternative to terrorism and violence. "
again nice words - but look at what happened to the AIDS money that was promised to africa that came with many qualifications - among them was no abortions or birth control teaching, mention either of these and lose your AIDS funding. mmm thats freedom for you - we will only give you the money if you adopt our way of life, our way of thinking.
to be honest i can see some of the justification of it - after all who pays the piper calls the tune, but at least have the bottle to stand up and say thats what you are doing, do not hide it in some sort of rhetoric of freedom and choice.
read the article here
"......He said every nation that seeks peace had an obligation to tackle oppression and violence.
"There is no safe isolation from terror networks or failed states that shelter them," Mr Bush said....."
(from the bbc website)
this was part of his in your face speech that basically said the war was justified (which seems to fly in the face of all the recent news. i wonder is kofi was sniggering when he listened to bush speak?) as if this wasn't bad enough bush is asking for members of the un to join in with the reconstruction of iraq. i wonder if as he said he, he was casting his mind back several months when he was effectively turning his back on the un, now when it is getting sticky and it looks like it is going to be a long term situation in iraq bush stands in front of the un to say you should all be helping.
the Cynic in me says that if he wants the help of the other nations then he needs to get halliburton to give up some of it's more lucrative contracts to offer the french, germans and chinese. but that is just me being cynical.
but aside from iraq bush also had this to say:
"But he also spoke of a better world beyond the war on terror, outlining the need to improve healthcare, expand prosperity and extend freedom as an alternative to terrorism and violence. "
again nice words - but look at what happened to the AIDS money that was promised to africa that came with many qualifications - among them was no abortions or birth control teaching, mention either of these and lose your AIDS funding. mmm thats freedom for you - we will only give you the money if you adopt our way of life, our way of thinking.
to be honest i can see some of the justification of it - after all who pays the piper calls the tune, but at least have the bottle to stand up and say thats what you are doing, do not hide it in some sort of rhetoric of freedom and choice.
read the article here
supermarkets
don't get me started on supermarkets - oh well i have started so i guess i am going to have to finish.
it's a day where tescos is reporting huge profit while marks and spencer have yet again lost market share. yet i find what should be a simple task - go in spend money come out with goods in bags is turned into a nightmare.
so why do i care? well i am a batchelor and i am someone who does not like to shop so i want to go into a supermarket and get the things i want, very quickly and then get straight out. i appreciate that there are all types of techniques to make me go around the place in order to find the things i want (it's why the milk is normally at the back to make you walk through the store), and furthermore i am a don't /can't cook sort of person. that should make going into the supermarket so easy as there is so little i need to buy, some fruit, some bread, some pasta, some quorn slices, some hummus, some bread, some cream cakes..... well you get the picture.
it is such a shame that sainsburys (my local supermarket) more often than not never has what i want in there.
this morning looking for bread most of the shelves were empty - i had gotten in there shortly after they opened. in case anyone who is running sainsburys is reading this bread is a staple and in the morning it might be worth while having this section to be stocked up. oh the same goes for the milk as well.
never fear though in my local they did have someone making sure that the booze shelves were stocked (even though you can't buy alcohol that early in the morning.....)
still i managed to get some bread, some cheese and then i thought mmm some quorn slices - once again i go through the shopping safari trying to find the quorn supplies. oh silly me they have put the quorn in the meat shelves. just the place for a veggie to go to...... and when you stumble onto it you are rewarded with nothing, oh they haven't stocked it up.
i wouldn't mind if this was an occasional occurrence, but it happens more often than not.
my experience at sainsburys explains why tescos is number one in the uk - but it is not because they are wonderful, more down to the fact that the others are really bad.
supermarkets are often held up as being wonderful, cutting edge stock control etc - i wish. but as a pal of mine once said it doesn't matter how sophisticated your epos system is, how efficient you just in time system is - if at the end of the day the people who are control the systems are idiots. crap in crap out.
the current thing that is really annoying me is the difficulty to find razors (i need to keep the goatee trim!!) seems like that of all the things that supermarkets carry it is disposable razors are stolen more than anything.
the solution for the supermarkets? don't carry them. looks like i will be ending up with a bushy beard (again) or i will have to find me a cut throat razor.
wish i could get more from local stores - but they have mostly disappeared because of the megastores of tescos, asda and sainsburys.
ah well - so much for the no logo generation.
it's a day where tescos is reporting huge profit while marks and spencer have yet again lost market share. yet i find what should be a simple task - go in spend money come out with goods in bags is turned into a nightmare.
so why do i care? well i am a batchelor and i am someone who does not like to shop so i want to go into a supermarket and get the things i want, very quickly and then get straight out. i appreciate that there are all types of techniques to make me go around the place in order to find the things i want (it's why the milk is normally at the back to make you walk through the store), and furthermore i am a don't /can't cook sort of person. that should make going into the supermarket so easy as there is so little i need to buy, some fruit, some bread, some pasta, some quorn slices, some hummus, some bread, some cream cakes..... well you get the picture.
it is such a shame that sainsburys (my local supermarket) more often than not never has what i want in there.
this morning looking for bread most of the shelves were empty - i had gotten in there shortly after they opened. in case anyone who is running sainsburys is reading this bread is a staple and in the morning it might be worth while having this section to be stocked up. oh the same goes for the milk as well.
never fear though in my local they did have someone making sure that the booze shelves were stocked (even though you can't buy alcohol that early in the morning.....)
still i managed to get some bread, some cheese and then i thought mmm some quorn slices - once again i go through the shopping safari trying to find the quorn supplies. oh silly me they have put the quorn in the meat shelves. just the place for a veggie to go to...... and when you stumble onto it you are rewarded with nothing, oh they haven't stocked it up.
i wouldn't mind if this was an occasional occurrence, but it happens more often than not.
my experience at sainsburys explains why tescos is number one in the uk - but it is not because they are wonderful, more down to the fact that the others are really bad.
supermarkets are often held up as being wonderful, cutting edge stock control etc - i wish. but as a pal of mine once said it doesn't matter how sophisticated your epos system is, how efficient you just in time system is - if at the end of the day the people who are control the systems are idiots. crap in crap out.
the current thing that is really annoying me is the difficulty to find razors (i need to keep the goatee trim!!) seems like that of all the things that supermarkets carry it is disposable razors are stolen more than anything.
the solution for the supermarkets? don't carry them. looks like i will be ending up with a bushy beard (again) or i will have to find me a cut throat razor.
wish i could get more from local stores - but they have mostly disappeared because of the megastores of tescos, asda and sainsburys.
ah well - so much for the no logo generation.
Monday, September 20, 2004
despair
at work... still!!!
listening to led zep's song remains the same - and a fine fine cd it is too.
and to bring a downer on my mood some thing from the guardian newspaper
"Jacques Chirac, the French president and leader of Europe's anti-war camp, made no bones about his views when he declared that the US-led invasion of Iraq and toppling of Saddam Hussein had opened up a "Pandora's box which none of us can shut"."
and
""Is the world today safer than before the overthrow of the appalling Saddam?" Patten asked in the European parliament last week. "Is global terrorism in retreat? Are we closer to building bridges between Islam and the west? Is the world's only super-power more widely respected? Have the citizens in our democracies been treated in a way that will encourage them to give governments the benefit of the doubt next time they are told that force needs to be used pre-emptively to deal with an imminent threat? I simply pose the questions. The answers are well known.""
(for whole article go here )
the sad part of it all is that the only people to blame are those in power in the UK and the USA.
i'll be the first to admit that i was not against the war per se (oh hell now i am sounding like kerry) but i was never a believer in the reasons that bush, blair et al cited.
me i thought saddam was a bastard and probably the world and it's granny would be better off if he were gone.
(the only problem with that view is - if you take out that dictator where do you stop?)
so instead of being honest bush and blair ran through the litany of wmd's, links to terrorism and to osama etc etc. only belatedly talking about human rights and democracy.
perhaps the real reason was bush and the neocons thought it was time to close out old business and to get themselves some nice oil (cuts down on the reliance on the saudis).
blair i have no idea why he did it, other than he thought it was the right thing to do.
now we have a situation where saddam is gone - but the whole area looks as if it is going to be more and more destabilised and therefore a more clear and present danger to us all than it was before the invasion/liberation - or whatever we want to call it.
and the iraqi's are no closer to democracy than before.
but what does democracy mean.
in the usa bush and kerry indulge in negative polling over contested war records. when the questions should be what are you going to do for the poor and needy in your country and in the rest of the world.
(america is the hyperpower and frankly we need it to be governed properly and not in the interests of a minority of it's people).
while over here blair pushes through the fox hunting ban (like most of us care) and for some bizarre reason this ends up with a threat to the democratic running of the country. now that is a nice lesson for the people in iraq.
perhaps we should teach them fox hunting and then ban it.
listening to led zep's song remains the same - and a fine fine cd it is too.
and to bring a downer on my mood some thing from the guardian newspaper
"Jacques Chirac, the French president and leader of Europe's anti-war camp, made no bones about his views when he declared that the US-led invasion of Iraq and toppling of Saddam Hussein had opened up a "Pandora's box which none of us can shut"."
and
""Is the world today safer than before the overthrow of the appalling Saddam?" Patten asked in the European parliament last week. "Is global terrorism in retreat? Are we closer to building bridges between Islam and the west? Is the world's only super-power more widely respected? Have the citizens in our democracies been treated in a way that will encourage them to give governments the benefit of the doubt next time they are told that force needs to be used pre-emptively to deal with an imminent threat? I simply pose the questions. The answers are well known.""
(for whole article go here )
the sad part of it all is that the only people to blame are those in power in the UK and the USA.
i'll be the first to admit that i was not against the war per se (oh hell now i am sounding like kerry) but i was never a believer in the reasons that bush, blair et al cited.
me i thought saddam was a bastard and probably the world and it's granny would be better off if he were gone.
(the only problem with that view is - if you take out that dictator where do you stop?)
so instead of being honest bush and blair ran through the litany of wmd's, links to terrorism and to osama etc etc. only belatedly talking about human rights and democracy.
perhaps the real reason was bush and the neocons thought it was time to close out old business and to get themselves some nice oil (cuts down on the reliance on the saudis).
blair i have no idea why he did it, other than he thought it was the right thing to do.
now we have a situation where saddam is gone - but the whole area looks as if it is going to be more and more destabilised and therefore a more clear and present danger to us all than it was before the invasion/liberation - or whatever we want to call it.
and the iraqi's are no closer to democracy than before.
but what does democracy mean.
in the usa bush and kerry indulge in negative polling over contested war records. when the questions should be what are you going to do for the poor and needy in your country and in the rest of the world.
(america is the hyperpower and frankly we need it to be governed properly and not in the interests of a minority of it's people).
while over here blair pushes through the fox hunting ban (like most of us care) and for some bizarre reason this ends up with a threat to the democratic running of the country. now that is a nice lesson for the people in iraq.
perhaps we should teach them fox hunting and then ban it.
stuff
unlike iraq i have started a new regime today, like iraq the future of it is uncertain.
yup i am back at the gym - and judging by my reflection in the mirror i need to be there as well!!
one of the things about going to the gym is that i have to get up early as i like to do the session in the morning as it sets me up for the rest of the day. this also means i get to listen to early morning radio. the 5.30 am slot on radio 5 is devoted to the business news, and occasionally has digby jones, the director of the CBI, he gets me good and mad - he is the sort of bloke you want to punch on the nose (to be fair though i wanted to do the same to his predecessor and she was a woman - perhaps it's just the position of being director of the CBI that makes them toads...)
luckily he wasn't on today.
they did have a bloke on from credit suisse (i think that is how it is spelt) he was grumbling about the fact that employment law now means that british employers may have to go through 13 steps to sack a person. this is bad says the credit suisse guy, it means we are too much like europe. just look at germany it has 10% unemployment.
now i am not the smartest business person in the draw (ask kenny he'll tell you) but i just can't see the connection.
see i always thought that there was unemployment because there were no jobs, not because you couldn't sack people. (and besides sack one person and employ another person in their place .... mmmm thats still one person out of a job). unless of course you can sack (for no real reason) person a and then employ person b & c for less money to do the job a did?
perhaps it falls under the heading of voodoo economics.
then later in the show they were talking about russian businesses and how 15 of the biggest companies were attending a conference in the uk about corporate governance (hopefully none of the speakers were from the old arthur andersen) and the chap who was organising it and explaining to the listeners what is was about went on about how this would teach russians how to set up the right and proper practices in their businesses. as he was saying that they would have to establish their own models he said "they don't want a second rate british version" i am sure he meant second hand - or at least i hope he did.
oddly on both occasions no one challenged the speakers to clarify what they were saying.
the session in the gym was not as much fun.
yup i am back at the gym - and judging by my reflection in the mirror i need to be there as well!!
one of the things about going to the gym is that i have to get up early as i like to do the session in the morning as it sets me up for the rest of the day. this also means i get to listen to early morning radio. the 5.30 am slot on radio 5 is devoted to the business news, and occasionally has digby jones, the director of the CBI, he gets me good and mad - he is the sort of bloke you want to punch on the nose (to be fair though i wanted to do the same to his predecessor and she was a woman - perhaps it's just the position of being director of the CBI that makes them toads...)
luckily he wasn't on today.
they did have a bloke on from credit suisse (i think that is how it is spelt) he was grumbling about the fact that employment law now means that british employers may have to go through 13 steps to sack a person. this is bad says the credit suisse guy, it means we are too much like europe. just look at germany it has 10% unemployment.
now i am not the smartest business person in the draw (ask kenny he'll tell you) but i just can't see the connection.
see i always thought that there was unemployment because there were no jobs, not because you couldn't sack people. (and besides sack one person and employ another person in their place .... mmmm thats still one person out of a job). unless of course you can sack (for no real reason) person a and then employ person b & c for less money to do the job a did?
perhaps it falls under the heading of voodoo economics.
then later in the show they were talking about russian businesses and how 15 of the biggest companies were attending a conference in the uk about corporate governance (hopefully none of the speakers were from the old arthur andersen) and the chap who was organising it and explaining to the listeners what is was about went on about how this would teach russians how to set up the right and proper practices in their businesses. as he was saying that they would have to establish their own models he said "they don't want a second rate british version" i am sure he meant second hand - or at least i hope he did.
oddly on both occasions no one challenged the speakers to clarify what they were saying.
the session in the gym was not as much fun.
Sunday, September 19, 2004
crucible
from the bbc website
"Iraq has become the "crucible of global terrorism", but insurgents will be defeated, Tony Blair has pledged. "
now don't get me wrong it's not that i am cynical.
but wasn't that one (of the many) reasons we went to war with iraq was that it was a hot bed of terrorist activity and that saddam was just spending his time causing mischief all over the world with his support of terrorism.
so lets do the checklist.
weapons of mass destruction - nope not there, probably never were, oh except as a long term plan.
link to osama bin laden - nope none found.
was the war legally - ooops nope, united nations are saying it was illegal.
oh at least the regime changed - except that if the daily telegraph is to be believed several members of tony blair's cabinet said that the chances of a smooth transition to a new government there was slight. some suggested it was because iraq did not have a history of democracy, others suggested that there would be military coup after military coup.
more and more it is looking like there were only a handful of people on the planet who thought it was a good idea. bush, rumsfeld, rice, cheney, perle (but no doubt he was going to make money on it....) and blair.
why oh why tony.
it's not like the rest of the coalition of the willing haven't gone about it because they were going to get something from it. the uk looks like we got and are getting squat.
"Iraq has become the "crucible of global terrorism", but insurgents will be defeated, Tony Blair has pledged. "
now don't get me wrong it's not that i am cynical.
but wasn't that one (of the many) reasons we went to war with iraq was that it was a hot bed of terrorist activity and that saddam was just spending his time causing mischief all over the world with his support of terrorism.
so lets do the checklist.
weapons of mass destruction - nope not there, probably never were, oh except as a long term plan.
link to osama bin laden - nope none found.
was the war legally - ooops nope, united nations are saying it was illegal.
oh at least the regime changed - except that if the daily telegraph is to be believed several members of tony blair's cabinet said that the chances of a smooth transition to a new government there was slight. some suggested it was because iraq did not have a history of democracy, others suggested that there would be military coup after military coup.
more and more it is looking like there were only a handful of people on the planet who thought it was a good idea. bush, rumsfeld, rice, cheney, perle (but no doubt he was going to make money on it....) and blair.
why oh why tony.
it's not like the rest of the coalition of the willing haven't gone about it because they were going to get something from it. the uk looks like we got and are getting squat.
books
been a weekend of overspending.
not only have i bought too many expensive magazines - all of them fashion magazines and those who know me realise that i am a slob of the highest order. so what you cry is the reason i buy them - i love the photography in them. i know i will never be that good a photographer, but i can only hope. for some strange reason condi rice appears in one of them and i confess that i do find her oddly attractive - she goes onto the top tory totty list).
as well as them there were the 6 paperbacks, 4 of which have an educational bent, but only if i read them. two are novels - i have started one and already regretting buying it, as it's a pedestrian action novel in the style of lee childs and tom clancy. so already i have been introduced to the can do hero (apparently no one in his squad comes close to him), and there has been a list of all the weapons etc they carry. i am not sure i am going to make it to the end of this one.
(and i must say it's not like i want high art in my books but i do want writers who can at least string interesting sentences together and make it feel like they have not written the novel as an assignment at school).
oh and then there was the seether cd.
let me tell you i was happy that i did not buy the emerson lake and palmer boxset that cried out to me as soon as i walked into reckless records. maybe next time - it's not like it is going to be going anywhere.
so i am broke broke broke. and i still have a bunch of things i want to spend money on.
i so want to win the lottery.
not only have i bought too many expensive magazines - all of them fashion magazines and those who know me realise that i am a slob of the highest order. so what you cry is the reason i buy them - i love the photography in them. i know i will never be that good a photographer, but i can only hope. for some strange reason condi rice appears in one of them and i confess that i do find her oddly attractive - she goes onto the top tory totty list).
as well as them there were the 6 paperbacks, 4 of which have an educational bent, but only if i read them. two are novels - i have started one and already regretting buying it, as it's a pedestrian action novel in the style of lee childs and tom clancy. so already i have been introduced to the can do hero (apparently no one in his squad comes close to him), and there has been a list of all the weapons etc they carry. i am not sure i am going to make it to the end of this one.
(and i must say it's not like i want high art in my books but i do want writers who can at least string interesting sentences together and make it feel like they have not written the novel as an assignment at school).
oh and then there was the seether cd.
let me tell you i was happy that i did not buy the emerson lake and palmer boxset that cried out to me as soon as i walked into reckless records. maybe next time - it's not like it is going to be going anywhere.
so i am broke broke broke. and i still have a bunch of things i want to spend money on.
i so want to win the lottery.
Thursday, September 16, 2004
littlejohn
this blog serves a number of purposes for me – sometimes it is a way for me to rant, sometimes it is just an online diary where i can just doodle the things that have been happening in my life, other times it is a place for me to be funny (ok so far i haven’t done that…), and then there are times like this when i read the things best left untouched by moral people.
yes i read the sun and i read the richard littlejohn column, and boy does it suck. – but dear reader i did it for you.
i would give you the link to the article but the sun’s website does not allow for you to read the articles without subscribing, bah humbug.
so lets set the picture – it was tuesday evening i had just been to an art show, stopped off at my local coffee shop and just picked up a couple of papers that were lying around. the sun isn’t a paper i would normally read but there it was. i flicked through the pages and came across the littlejohn column. richard littlejohn is one of those right wing journalists who thinks bigoted rants pass for reasoned opinion – he is the uk’s version of rush limbaugh. littlejohn plays the role of the "lad" who has done good and isn’t afraid to speak out against the system – he sees himself as the voice of the everyman. in reality working for the murdoch press he is part of the system.
so what is it that has irked littlejohn in this column? well he has decided that cherie blair has demonstrated a lack of political tact because she had her 50th birthday party on saturday 11th of september. this is bad because that happens to be the third anniversary of a great american tragedy. i suppose it is because cherie is married to tony blair, the uk’s prime minister, that this party she held was a great affront to littlejohn. by having this party cherie has told littlejohn that she is pretending that nothing has happened and nothing has changed in the world and that if we ignore the occurrence of 9/11 we can pretend it never happened.
(a slight digression here – i am not keen on cherie blair for several reasons 1] you get the feeling that she sees herself as part of a new political aristocracy, 2] that her position confers on her a range of privileges but there are none of the responsibilities that go with them, 3] she is symptomatic of what is bad about the new labour project, 4] that smile of hers scares me. whatever else i say about her she is woman of incredible intellect and in the images you see of her and tony together you get the feeling that they are genuinely happy to be together after all these years. so i suspect that cherie knows that we have been at war with afghanistan and iraq, and we are currently having less than successful occupations of both countries, i suspect she knows why we went to war in both countries- no not for oil and not because dubya told us to (stop being cynical) and that part of the reason was 9/11, and i also suspect that being a very clever woman who is the partner to tony blair i reckon that tony comes home from a hard day as pm and in between slagging off gordon brown and laughing at the whole of the tory party there is a good chance he discusses iraq with cherie… i could be wrong, but i think cherie is well aware of 9/11 and has been involved in some of the ways that the world has changed since then).
so far her crime is that cherie has gotten on with her life and has had a party for her birthday rather than doing something that acknowledges the anniversary of an american tragedy.
littlejohn doesn’t tell us what he was doing saturday – he doesn’t mention if he was at one of the many professional football games played on saturday, or maybe he had gone to see the professional rugby games that were played ? perhaps he was at international one-day cricket event that is taking place in the uk ? maybe he was watching the qualifying session for that weeks grand prix racing, or he was getting ready to watch the tennis from flushing meadows? or perhaps he was catching a play in the west end, or a movie, or…. as he doesn’t say i can only assume that he was in sackcloth and ashes flagellating himself so as to mark the anniversary of 9/11.
but if that was not enough of a crime cherie also has to suffer the slings and arrows of littlejohn’s prose because as a barrister she has pointed out that some of the inmates of camp gitmo (littlejohn refers to them as the tipton taliban) are being denied their basic human rights.
human rights for the islamo-fascists ? cries littlejohn, human rights for the mad mullahs he shouts, obviously she must be madder than a march hare.
now this particular attack on cherie comes after littlejohn says that the mad mullahs are trying to destroy our way of life. so you would have thought he would have been cherie as she defends an individuals human rights, the right to a fair trail, the right to a lawyer, hell even the right to know why you are being held captive…….. but no she is obviously a race traitor for what she is doing. i have to say that if we are defending the idea of "our way of life" but in doing so we are throwing away all the things that make "our way of life" worth defending then i think you have said that the terrorists have won, but to admit that (or even to realise that) would mean littlejohn couldn’t have his pop at cherie.
in her defence of the human rights of the captives of camp gitmo cherie is fighting for "our way of life" and she is also fighting to make sure that the state can only go so far in removing the freedoms we enjoy and have come to take for granted. anything less would be to admit defeat. however that is a world view that has shades of grey in it and that is not how littlejohn sees the world – in his world it is either black or white and so very simple.
and naturally in a stroke of genius that even karl rove would have to admire this pop at cherie for a party gets turned into a warning. oh yes there is going to be a big terrorist strike between now and november (just before the american elections). so far the cia, fbi, mi6 and any number of spookdoms finest have protected us all. so they have done a fine job of it for the last 3 years but just before the election littlejohn says he has been given information that there will be this attack… how unfortunate for the various agencies to fumble the ball just in time for it to help bush get elected. wow it’s almost like someone was cynically planning these things.
littlejohn talks more bollocks than is humanly possible. he stirs hatred and fear where there should be none, what is worse he is given a prominent platform from which to do. if there is an attack on "our way of life" it is that fat bastards like littlejohn are allowed to spout off.
yes i read the sun and i read the richard littlejohn column, and boy does it suck. – but dear reader i did it for you.
i would give you the link to the article but the sun’s website does not allow for you to read the articles without subscribing, bah humbug.
so lets set the picture – it was tuesday evening i had just been to an art show, stopped off at my local coffee shop and just picked up a couple of papers that were lying around. the sun isn’t a paper i would normally read but there it was. i flicked through the pages and came across the littlejohn column. richard littlejohn is one of those right wing journalists who thinks bigoted rants pass for reasoned opinion – he is the uk’s version of rush limbaugh. littlejohn plays the role of the "lad" who has done good and isn’t afraid to speak out against the system – he sees himself as the voice of the everyman. in reality working for the murdoch press he is part of the system.
so what is it that has irked littlejohn in this column? well he has decided that cherie blair has demonstrated a lack of political tact because she had her 50th birthday party on saturday 11th of september. this is bad because that happens to be the third anniversary of a great american tragedy. i suppose it is because cherie is married to tony blair, the uk’s prime minister, that this party she held was a great affront to littlejohn. by having this party cherie has told littlejohn that she is pretending that nothing has happened and nothing has changed in the world and that if we ignore the occurrence of 9/11 we can pretend it never happened.
(a slight digression here – i am not keen on cherie blair for several reasons 1] you get the feeling that she sees herself as part of a new political aristocracy, 2] that her position confers on her a range of privileges but there are none of the responsibilities that go with them, 3] she is symptomatic of what is bad about the new labour project, 4] that smile of hers scares me. whatever else i say about her she is woman of incredible intellect and in the images you see of her and tony together you get the feeling that they are genuinely happy to be together after all these years. so i suspect that cherie knows that we have been at war with afghanistan and iraq, and we are currently having less than successful occupations of both countries, i suspect she knows why we went to war in both countries- no not for oil and not because dubya told us to (stop being cynical) and that part of the reason was 9/11, and i also suspect that being a very clever woman who is the partner to tony blair i reckon that tony comes home from a hard day as pm and in between slagging off gordon brown and laughing at the whole of the tory party there is a good chance he discusses iraq with cherie… i could be wrong, but i think cherie is well aware of 9/11 and has been involved in some of the ways that the world has changed since then).
so far her crime is that cherie has gotten on with her life and has had a party for her birthday rather than doing something that acknowledges the anniversary of an american tragedy.
littlejohn doesn’t tell us what he was doing saturday – he doesn’t mention if he was at one of the many professional football games played on saturday, or maybe he had gone to see the professional rugby games that were played ? perhaps he was at international one-day cricket event that is taking place in the uk ? maybe he was watching the qualifying session for that weeks grand prix racing, or he was getting ready to watch the tennis from flushing meadows? or perhaps he was catching a play in the west end, or a movie, or…. as he doesn’t say i can only assume that he was in sackcloth and ashes flagellating himself so as to mark the anniversary of 9/11.
but if that was not enough of a crime cherie also has to suffer the slings and arrows of littlejohn’s prose because as a barrister she has pointed out that some of the inmates of camp gitmo (littlejohn refers to them as the tipton taliban) are being denied their basic human rights.
human rights for the islamo-fascists ? cries littlejohn, human rights for the mad mullahs he shouts, obviously she must be madder than a march hare.
now this particular attack on cherie comes after littlejohn says that the mad mullahs are trying to destroy our way of life. so you would have thought he would have been cherie as she defends an individuals human rights, the right to a fair trail, the right to a lawyer, hell even the right to know why you are being held captive…….. but no she is obviously a race traitor for what she is doing. i have to say that if we are defending the idea of "our way of life" but in doing so we are throwing away all the things that make "our way of life" worth defending then i think you have said that the terrorists have won, but to admit that (or even to realise that) would mean littlejohn couldn’t have his pop at cherie.
in her defence of the human rights of the captives of camp gitmo cherie is fighting for "our way of life" and she is also fighting to make sure that the state can only go so far in removing the freedoms we enjoy and have come to take for granted. anything less would be to admit defeat. however that is a world view that has shades of grey in it and that is not how littlejohn sees the world – in his world it is either black or white and so very simple.
and naturally in a stroke of genius that even karl rove would have to admire this pop at cherie for a party gets turned into a warning. oh yes there is going to be a big terrorist strike between now and november (just before the american elections). so far the cia, fbi, mi6 and any number of spookdoms finest have protected us all. so they have done a fine job of it for the last 3 years but just before the election littlejohn says he has been given information that there will be this attack… how unfortunate for the various agencies to fumble the ball just in time for it to help bush get elected. wow it’s almost like someone was cynically planning these things.
littlejohn talks more bollocks than is humanly possible. he stirs hatred and fear where there should be none, what is worse he is given a prominent platform from which to do. if there is an attack on "our way of life" it is that fat bastards like littlejohn are allowed to spout off.
hunt
i have to own up here i am a veggie - and i am a veggie for a couple of reasons i didn’t like the idea of the chemicals that were being pumped into animals to make them nice big fat and juicy (basically i didn’t really want to start sprouting mantits thanks to hormones in the food i was eating). the second reason was that there were not much in the way of meat i really liked. but as far as the animals are concerned the reason that they are here is so that they can be turned into burgers, kebabs, fish fingers and steaks.
but there is something about the hunt lobby that gets right up my nose.
they go on about how they have to keep the fox population down – well i am pretty sure shooting the fox is going to do that rather than letting the hounds tear it apart (and it would be economically more efficient – a bullet has to be cheaper than a pack of hounds). then they go on about how the hunt is a social event – well if you are that keen on meeting up with your mates in the morning just do it – get on your horse, put your riding jacket it on and go tally hoing i am not sure what the fox has to do with it – unless they like to see things killed at the end of the social hour.
but really what it comes down to, what my hate of them boils down to is a few simple things:
they were the fuckers who voted thatcher and the tories in 3 times.
they were the people who backed thatcher when she was decimating the mining communities, while they pushed unemployment up and created inner city despair (and have we ever recovered from that).
they are the people who wanted to see privatisation come in but are the first to want a postal service and transport service that is subsidised for them.
they are the people who complained about secondary picketing etc – but look at them now, protesting and causing disturbances.
as one of them said today "in a democratic country it’s a right to disobey unjust laws" oh except if you are a rambler.
wankers one and all.
so basically i see the end of the hunts as being a belated victory in the class war. it’s not even an important one – but it really does hurt them.
besides if they want to hunt something they can get that big bloke from the cbi out – let them chase after digby jones each weekend – he could do with losing the weight.
but there is something about the hunt lobby that gets right up my nose.
they go on about how they have to keep the fox population down – well i am pretty sure shooting the fox is going to do that rather than letting the hounds tear it apart (and it would be economically more efficient – a bullet has to be cheaper than a pack of hounds). then they go on about how the hunt is a social event – well if you are that keen on meeting up with your mates in the morning just do it – get on your horse, put your riding jacket it on and go tally hoing i am not sure what the fox has to do with it – unless they like to see things killed at the end of the social hour.
but really what it comes down to, what my hate of them boils down to is a few simple things:
they were the fuckers who voted thatcher and the tories in 3 times.
they were the people who backed thatcher when she was decimating the mining communities, while they pushed unemployment up and created inner city despair (and have we ever recovered from that).
they are the people who wanted to see privatisation come in but are the first to want a postal service and transport service that is subsidised for them.
they are the people who complained about secondary picketing etc – but look at them now, protesting and causing disturbances.
as one of them said today "in a democratic country it’s a right to disobey unjust laws" oh except if you are a rambler.
wankers one and all.
so basically i see the end of the hunts as being a belated victory in the class war. it’s not even an important one – but it really does hurt them.
besides if they want to hunt something they can get that big bloke from the cbi out – let them chase after digby jones each weekend – he could do with losing the weight.
art
went to see a student photography show the other day – "embedded" and it was the students of the university of westminster whose work was on view. pretty much all of it was technically proficient but in these days of digital cameras that’s the least you can expect (ok i admit even with a digital i can’t get a decent image……)
there were few very interesting pieces at the show, which is always a bit upsetting (and no i don’t expect to see the most wonderfully original stuff when i go to shows, but i do hope to see a spark of something). so seeing two sets of portraits that did very little with portraiture that you hadn’t seen over and over, was disappointing.
honourable mentions go to kate clarke and her series called no 72, witty, fun and provocative. i suspect she will make a name for herself.
shih ying lin and her "woman" series inspired by eileen chang’s novel "red rose and white rose" it is basically a series of images of two oriental women who are dressed similarly and appear in similar but different poses. with the images mounted on rice paper with the text of the story written in chinese on it. this looked effective and had some thought go into it.
paul freemans "holborn/work" "british library/study" "tate/art" are clever technical photos that have had the background information taken out so you are left with just the people caught in motion- each one uses a different technique to get the timing and composition sorted. again the theme is interesting and well executed. to be honest i preferred the image he had on his business card than the ones that appeared in the show.
a name from the show to watch out for is cinnamon heathcote-drury an attractive sloaney to judge not only from her name, but accent and dress sense. she had an installation of two looped movies. in one she appears out of focus her arms out stretched she comes into focus and then falls back – this is constantly looped and is called "perpetuum mobile". the other is a doll on a rocking chair in front of a mirror the chair rocks gently and the doll fades out and fades in again, this is looped, and is called eternal recurrence. both these dvd projections are utter tosh sub bill viola and sam taylor wood. so trust me cinnamon is a name to be watching out for in the future – she will go far.
there were few very interesting pieces at the show, which is always a bit upsetting (and no i don’t expect to see the most wonderfully original stuff when i go to shows, but i do hope to see a spark of something). so seeing two sets of portraits that did very little with portraiture that you hadn’t seen over and over, was disappointing.
honourable mentions go to kate clarke and her series called no 72, witty, fun and provocative. i suspect she will make a name for herself.
shih ying lin and her "woman" series inspired by eileen chang’s novel "red rose and white rose" it is basically a series of images of two oriental women who are dressed similarly and appear in similar but different poses. with the images mounted on rice paper with the text of the story written in chinese on it. this looked effective and had some thought go into it.
paul freemans "holborn/work" "british library/study" "tate/art" are clever technical photos that have had the background information taken out so you are left with just the people caught in motion- each one uses a different technique to get the timing and composition sorted. again the theme is interesting and well executed. to be honest i preferred the image he had on his business card than the ones that appeared in the show.
a name from the show to watch out for is cinnamon heathcote-drury an attractive sloaney to judge not only from her name, but accent and dress sense. she had an installation of two looped movies. in one she appears out of focus her arms out stretched she comes into focus and then falls back – this is constantly looped and is called "perpetuum mobile". the other is a doll on a rocking chair in front of a mirror the chair rocks gently and the doll fades out and fades in again, this is looped, and is called eternal recurrence. both these dvd projections are utter tosh sub bill viola and sam taylor wood. so trust me cinnamon is a name to be watching out for in the future – she will go far.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)