InvisibleVoices

So, the Olympics have started with a breath-taking opening ceremony and now we look forward to a deluge of sporting excellence with the dark shadow of human right abuses and pollution in the Chinese background.

Are we though?

Firstly, the sport. I can’t think of any personalities that flick my switch at all. It’s not like the old days of Seb Coe, Steve Ovett and Steve Cram. Remember Daley Thompson in the decathlon? Even Tessa Sanderson and Fatima Whitbread. Steve Backley, Allan Wells. That’s real Olympic stuff. I’m not sure I can name any track or field people from today’s squad with the exception of the insufferable “I’m Scottish only” Andy Murray. I know we have a decent shout in the Judo and there’s a young girl called Twaddle (or somthing) trying to win a medal. We’ve probably got some posh people with a good chance of a horsey medal or some other posh people in the rowing or sailing who might beat some other nameless people to a medal. The faceless people from Eastern Europe will all be drug-induced hairy women with the power of ten men - better known as cheats. It’s a bit like the British-free football European Championships that I couldn’t force myself to care about. I hope that changes. I doubt it.

Next to human rights abuses. Of course, the denial of freedom is clearly abhorent and anyone reading this who enjoys the freedom to (more or less) do as they please should be very grateful for what they have. It’s clear that there are some issues in China, however, on closer inspection, it’s just as clear that there are many countries on the planet with just as much to hide as China - particularly in Africa and the Middle East. That doesn’t make it okay - far from it - but let’s remember this is a global problem (with no solution) and not just a Chinese one.

In 2012, can we expect global intrusion into our knife culture problem? What about the council wheelie bins turning into a major global topic? The US athletes turned up in the China with breathing masks on, presumably making a point about the pollution. They can’t expect us to believe it’s that bad, given there are 1.3bn people in the country with the vast majority not choking to death. In 2012, I’ll expect the US athletes to turn up in stab-proof vests and being pushed in wheelie bins to make a point. I won’t expect them to venture into our congestion charging zones though, which will be about 1,200 miles long by 500 miles wide by then.

Think about Tibet. What do you really know about Tibet? Tibet should be free, right? What was Tibet like before China? Well, they had slavery and other human rights abuses aimed at keeping the rich in the style that they were accustomed to. Sound familiar? That’s not to say that any current violations shouldn’t be addressed - of course they should. They should be addressed everywhere. However, the image of these smiling freedom-fighting monks appears to suggest that the country was previously a heaven on earth. It wasn’t. Look it up on Google.

Pollution does seem bad. Ten times the levels of London. However, that’s not an easy problem to solve, how is that related to the Olympics? Did it just happen?

My overall point is there seems to be a little bit of China bashing going on. Why? Are we worried about their emergence as a world power? My wife said how awful it was about Tibet. I asked her why. She didn’t really know. I think people swallow the lines from the media without question. Where’s the balanced argument? Are we saying there is nothing good about China? I’m sure there are bad things going on there but there’s bad things going on everywhere. Think about people in this country with no money, spiralling costs, stuck on housing estates, intimidated and abused by local youths with no chance of escape, helped by a police force with their politically correct hands tied behind their backs. What about those people’s human rights? Who’s going to campaign about that?

Ben and Catherine Mullany were tragically murdered during their honeymoon on the island of Antigua. It makes your blood run cold to think about what happened, especially during the 20 minutes from the first scream to the last. (Why didn’t the person who heard the first scream do something?)

It makes me consider some of these idyllic holiday spots in some of the poorer countries in the world. I was thinking about going to the Carribbean but decided against it. I’d been warned by a friend not to go to Jamaica, and if I did, not to venture outside the compound. Erm … if you think about this, it’s like holidaying in Afghanistan or something, isn’t it? You are required to pay about £1k each to go to an island where you have to stay inside your compound that has no proper policing - shown by the appeal for help to Scotland Yard and possibly the FBI. They need help with gangs, allegedly - what, just suddenly? The parents also took the dangerous decision to transfer the stricken Ben back to the UK possibly because the hospital was not well provisioned (unless they knew he was going to die and wanted him to die at home). Hardly feels you with confidence, does it?

Following the shambolic performance of the Portuguese Keystone cops in the Madeleine McCann investigation, it makes you wonder why people go abroad because at the first sign of trouble, you’re IN trouble. When I was in Portugal, the holiday firm that I rented the villa from advises that if you are caught speeding, not to hand over your driving license or passport if the police ask for it. It infers a corrupt police force - definitely demonstrated by the way information leaked into the press concerning the Madeleine investigation. That simple instruction disturbed my Mrs no end the moment we got there.

It’s my opinion that countries should be rated according to their lawlessness, so people can make an informed decision about where they go, or at the very least made aware of things to avoid before they leave. Holiday brochures should carry a security rating for each accomodation as well. My Portuguese villa was on an unnamed road and the villa next door was ransacked whilst we were there. How could I have called the police to help? The Mullanys were staying in a “don’t leave your compound” accomodation, right over the back of the property, separated by a 6 foot wall with no security cameras - in monetary terms, this was likely very expensive, but was similar to staying in the Baghdad Hilton. You should know this before you buy - it’s a fantastic incentive for people selling holidays to get it right.

Barry George has been cleared of the murder of Jill Dando. He was convicted on evidence that was not strong enough to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he did the crime. Other evidence of being spotted in the area and of stalking other women is circumstantial and irrelevant. He spent eight years in prison for a crime he did not commit. Those eight years from 40 to 48 years old are not only some of the prime years of life but they were uttely miserable with the whole world against him. They are talking about substantial monetary payments to try and compensate Mr George for this heinous miscarriage. The real murderer is still out there. These are the facts as we know them today.

How could this happen? How could such a big and well-publicised case allow such a huge error? Who will be accountable for this? Did a single person decide to push through and convict the man for a crime where the evidence did not support the conviction or did a chain of events happen that meant the blame was shared across a number of people or is the system fundamentally flawed enough that there is no blame for any individual or group of individuals? I mentioned before that this was well publicised: how many other people are sitting in prison for a crime that they did not commit with no chance of release because their case was not newsworthy and/or they did not have a supportive sister who crusaded tirelessly on behalf of their brother? How many people from poor backgrounds particularly or with mental health issues such as George are being denied their right to live free lives? If we found them all, how much compensation would be due? How much compensation is enough? Can only money do this? What alternatives are there?

This leads me to consider who did it. This person (or people) committed a crime and had the fortune to have a man come along and virtually fit himself up. The circumstantial evidence is still compelling. How many other criminals are free and free to commit other crimes because the wrong person has been convicted? This person or the organisation they represent will now not ever be caught. How can they with a gap of nine years and no evidence at all? The criminal is either another individual with personal issues like Mr George who was lucky enough to get away with it or (given the style of the killing) is a professional with a military background (or both). I mention the link to a military background because the bullets were modified to maximise damage and minimise noise. We will never know.

Let’s consider for a moment that Barry George DID do it. The circumstantial evidence lead the police to him - quite rightly. He was (or perhaps still is) a self-confessed pest to women (and was spotted many times by police doing this under suveillance); he raped or attempted to rape at least one woman; he kept cuttings of women (Dando included) under the dubious argument that he was a hoarder; he was in the Territorial Army and may have known how to modify the bullets and how to operate a gun effectively; he did have gunpowder residue in his pocket that was matched to that on the victim - although cross contamination was possible, rendering it irrelevant in a legal sense - however, this is in a legal sense and was probably due to police incompetence(?). The toy gun found at his house is an obvious red herring. To say his low IQ would stop him being able to effectively kill is absurd given his military background (albeit limited). I’m pretty certain I could make a bomb by looking it up on the internet - this does not mean I’ve had military training. He would only have needed to have been told (and taken in) that an execution should be quick and quiet (not rocket science and probably is shown in many films). None of this means he did do it, of course - and God help us the day that circumstantial evidence of this type is used to convict people as the prisons would be full of people with ruined lives from it. Can you imagine the fear if you were heard to comment on someone who was later murdered near a place where you were known to be without an alibi? Just being arrested for such a thing would tarnish your reputation and put doubts into people’s minds. Who would ever employ Barry George off the back of this circumstantial evidence? I wouldn’t. Not with the other things I definitely know about him, like his propensity to pester women, let alone the rape.

Barry George has loss of earnings for eight years and can never work again, so his payout will be huge. This will be borne by the tax payer - people like me and you. Unless something changes, no one will be held accountable. He will live out his remaining days, free to pursue whatever interests he chooses. Has his fixation with women been released by careful counselling and will he be monitored? Who would dare to say he should be watched / monitored after what the system has put him through already? I think, given he can’t work again, given his freedom was stolen during the prime years of his life and that people will steer clear of him means that his payout should be substantial so that society can try and compensate him… however, I hope he doesn’t move near to me and I bet you honestly feel the same.

There’s something very disturbing about the rape and murder of Scarlett Keeling aside from the disgusting and unforgiveable act itself. I won’t spend any time on the actual crime as we don’t know for sure what exactly happened but her last moments must’ve been hell on earth.

When I first read the story on the internet, I think I was reading it with a dispassionate eye, as anyone who reads the news does. What really stopped me dead in my tracks was her age: fifteen years old. I had to re-read it. I couldn’t connect the facts that her family had travelled to another area and left the 15 year old behind. Fifteen. I read it again. There was something other than the fundamentally obvious “wrong” of a family leaving a fifteen year old girl behind in a resort that is known for drugs and all sorts of sordid party activity. Fifteen. She was on some very long holiday to India. Fifteen years old. Why was she not at school? Don’t fifteen year olds study for exams this time of year? You can’t substitute home learning for important exams like this if that’s what was going on. You certainly can’t supervise them when you’ve gone to another part of the country. I just couldn’t reconcile the story in my head and I still can’t.

The mother, if that’s what you can call it, is obviously some self-satisfying throwback to a bygone hippy age. She makes my skin crawl with her ice cold speeches on the television and those gypsy style tattoos on her arms. If the McCanns have taken so much stick for leaving their children alone, this woman must do the same. Both women must carry the knowledge in their hearts that they badly let their children down. In fact, although the McCanns cannot be defended in any way for what they did, there was a much smaller statistical risk of harm coming to their children than a 15 year old girl who appeared attracted to the hedonistic lifestyle offered by Goa’s nightlife and if we can believe what we read, was no stranger to it. I think there is a case for this woman to answer to the courts for neglect of that child and for her other unfortunate children to be looked at very carefully by social services. I hope the results of her selfishness haunt her into old age.

What surprises me the most are people’s shock at the apparent corrupt police in Goa. Do me a favour - did you just come out of a spaceship or something? In an area where drugs are rife, in the sub-continent known for corrupton, did you expect something else? Did you expect them to want to draw attention to the dangers of the area and discourage the must needed tourism? The ironic thing is that all of this fuss has probably attracted greater numbers to the area, the morbid rubber neckers that get kicks out of standing in the spot where she died or drinking in the bar she was in.

It’s a sick world out there. Perhaps Ms MacKeown, the mother, will now realise it, should the cannibis smog have cleared from her cold and selfish eyes.

Question: is society worse now than it ever was before? Come on, think about it. There are paedos living in every street, watching kids going to school. There are gangs of yoofs, armed to the teeth, ready to stab you to death. There are grannies getting badly beaten and later dying for the price of a loaf of bread and a newspaper. There is more war, the weather is worse, global warming, food causing cancer, immigration and financial hardship for all, particularly the middle classes. Disease and death is about to consume us all.

Yes, the evidence is compelling, isn’t it? But let’s stop there for a minute and think a little more carefully. There has ALWAYS been the above … always - in every category I mention above. Lots of it. Repeated throughout history. The Moors murderers (and countless others, like the one recently uncovered), the riots of 1982, the Falklands conflict, the drought of 1976, Lebanon torn to shreds, the winter of discontent, the miners strikes and the list could go on. The truth is, we live better and longer than we ever have before and every generation before them could say the same thing (discounting huge numbers lost in World Wars perhaps).

I think there are two things that come into play here.

Firstly, the media. There’s now so much of it. 24 hour news channels competing with one another for the “best” news stories. Let’s get in there and see someone shot, shall we? Let’s see Iraqis beaten by soldiers in the street shall we? Like it’s never happened before, with frustrated soldiers living their life on the edge for us. It’s not an excuse, but it’s not “news”. The “Breaking News” flashing banners have to be justified and given a sense of purpose, even when the breaking news is how much Paul McCartney’s wife got as a divorce settlement. I’m not “old”, I’m now at the grand old age of 37 (recent birthday!). But, I remember watching News at Ten when younger (ditto, News at 6). We had 15 minutes news, a bit of sport and some off the wall nonsense about a giant pork pie eaten by 500 yokels in Norfolk. They didn’t have the time to cover some of these things or the necessity (much) to compete with lots of other news sources - and I’m also referring to the internet here. Coming from Battersea, I can confirm groups of yoofs would gather on estates and cause trouble. I went to hospital to visit a friend who had been stabbed. Was it on the news? No. Not “news” enough because those things unfortunately do happen. As Crimewatch says, of course, statistically, you probably won’t end up the victim of a terribe crime. That’s not to say you won’t, but to me, I’d bet the probabilty is the same from one generation to the other but you’re more likely to be reported on the news somewhere.

I think these media frenzied times have a good effect: you get to know what’s going on around you and that can only be good if you appreciate that because you know more it doesn’t mean it happens more than it used to; but it also introduces a social paranoia. I used to go out on my bike a lot, with friends or on my own. I used to go around the parks and meet up with other kids, “knock” for a friend (who allows that now? I certainly don’t let my kids do that) and with friends we might challenge stranger kids to a game of football and make new friends in the process. This doesn’t happen any more because of the perceived danger introduced by 24 hour news coverage. The fact of the matter is I probably rode past perverts back then, but I knew not to talk to strange adults and knew to run, scream or ride for my life. I was very wary. Nowadays kids talk to each other on MSN or via text messages and I do believe this will lead to a lack of socialisation skills in the future for some. That’s very sad and a lot of fun is being missed. Kids are probably more likely to meet perverts online than in the park these days anyway. If my son or daughter wants to play with a friend, it’s done like a miltary operation with times and transport all agreed well in advance. I remember knocking for a friend and his parent asking if I wanted to stay for dinner, I’d say “yes” and they’d look at me and say, “don’t you think you should check with your mum first?”. The spontaneity has gone.

The second point is that it’s older people who always seem to bemoan the state of the world and society isn’t it? That never changes. The thing that does change in that regard is that you become that older person yourself and fit the pattern of those old friends of your parents moaning about kids hanging out down by the newsagents late on Saturday evening. You know? Sometimes they’re just bored and watching the world go by, trying to feel grown up, but the older you get, the more intimated you feel and this must mean they’re up to no good. Right? Well, I’d guess that your answer will probably depend on your age!

Bah humbug, that’s what I say!!

They should be banned. I’ll tell you why.

People (and it is mostly women) weave around the pavement, talking on their mobile phones or typing out SMS messages, walk into people or suddenly slow down or stop to spell a word. When I am walking, it has moved me to consider murder.

People (and it is mostly women) talk loudly on the train on their mobile phone, disturbing the whole carriage. Why? Have you no awareness of where you are? Mostly (and it is women) it is complete mundane shit or they are moaning about their jobs. If you don’t like your job, just quit, don’t moan or talk about it, just fucking quit. Blokes who do this on trains are usually IT geeks talking about passwords for firewalls. No one is impressed, mate. We know what firewalls are. We don’t care. We’re not impressed. Murder is permissible in these situations. I’ve done it. It made me feel better.

People - and this is everyone - will stop a face to face conversation because their fucking mobile phone starts playing a stupid ringtone … which is NEVER funny, by the way. The birdie song doesn’t do it, okay? When people smile at you, they’re feeling sorry for you, they’re not laughing at you or with you - IT’S PITY. The call recipient will then talk to the person on the other end of the phone (probably a woman veering across the pavement or sitting/standing on a crowded train), holding their hand up, saying “it’s Sarah, hold on, will you?” I’m going to state the obvious here: if someone interupts a conversation you are having in person by standing in front of you and singing a stupid tune at you, would you immediately turn your attention to this person? No? However if they do it using a mobile phone (or a regular phone, to be fair), this is okay? It’s not. Tell the person on the phone that you are busy talking to someone and you will call them back when you are free. PHONE CALLS DO NOT GIVE PRIORITY ACCESS TO YOUR TIME - YOU CAN CALL BACK!!

Text messaging also allows people to say things that they otherwise would be too scared to say causing people to avoid real life. It’s also actively teaching young people to spell like morons.

They can be used as bomb denotators. Football hooligans use them to co-ordinate fighting. Too many phone cameras have taken too many pictures that will haunt drunken people for life. It’s not fair. When you are out on the pish, it should stay private. That’s an unwritten rule.

Bring back telephone boxes and smoke signals … that’s what I say. Give your mobile phones back to Satan’s army of goons at the Carphone Warehouse and “just say no to mobile phones.”

My son is almost eleven. In fact, he’s eleven tomorrow. He is in year 6 (that’s the fourth year of juniors for older people who grew up 10,000 years ago, like me). We’ve reached the stage where we have to find his secondary school. It’s an absolute nightmare, I can tell you.

There are three very good grammar schools in the area. In fact, two are very close and another a short bus ride away. There are other state schools in the area, but they’re further away. The biggest issue I have with the non-grammar state schools is that they’re completely crap. I wouldn’t send your badly behaved dog there. To get into the grammar schools, you have to pass an eleven-plus style entrance exam. The problem with the exam is that every bastard in South London, Surrey and parts of Kent and Sussex sits it. This means that you pretty well have to be a member of Mensa to get in. They’re kids like the ones on the TV show “Are you smarter than a ten year old” - only much more clever. They’ve been tutored for ten years, five hours a night specifically to pass this exam.

So, I got my son a tutor at the beginning of last year. He went once a week and it helped him, I think. The tutor had to teach him verbal reasoning as the state primary schools don’t teach this - although you have to get near to 100% on this paper to get into grammar school. Erm … how is this fair?

He took the first one in September. He missed out on the pass mark by a fairly narrow margin. However, there were three hundred boys in between him and getting in. The ten year old boy then gets a letter telling him did really well, didn’t reach the mark … and not to apply to the school for at least three years. It was like a punch in the face for him. These exams are very harsh - you fail - you’re out for good - there are no re-sits like GCSEs, A levels, degrees.

So, we turned to private schools. The type of schooling on offer is outstanding. The opportunities breath-taking. It comes at a price, of course. Fees between £11,000 and £13,000. There are bursaries, however and parents are encouraged not to shy away for fear of finances because of this. However, my income is just above the qualification level. They offer scholarships for academic, sports, music, artistic talent. If you are rich, you are okay; if you are poor, you are okay; if you have an outstanding talent, you are okay (presumably, you’d get grammar school education if you wanted it anyway). I would love him to go to private school, but at £12,000 and being a 40% tax payer, this is £20,000 of my gross salary. I can tell you, I don’t have £12,000 in my sky rocket every year with the difficult problem of trying to find somewhere to put it. (”sky rocket” is pocket for you non-cockneys!)

Grammar tests followed in November and January. The two private schools’ tests followed in the same week in January. We were notified afterwards that Michael had failed to reach the 87.5% required to pass the grammar test. This is a school we can walk to, a stone’s throw from his current primary school. It’s rated in the top ten in the country so people travel for miles around to get the chance to go there. I feel penalised for not tutoring him from the age of four and/or going to an average to slightly above average primary school. Michael is in all the top groups in his primary school and has fantastic school reports of which we are very proud.

We were then notified that he had passed both private school tests. For one school, he had scored 95% and they were convinced Michael would be able to choose whatever school he wanted. His English paper was 100% - essay and comprehension. This is the £13,000 a year school, of course. Michael has now been interviewed - and so have the Mrs and I!! - for the two private schools. We still await the results of the third and final grammar school.

My council tax is about £250 per month because of the banding of my house. From this, the council provides schooling for its borough. Schools cannot legally prefer one applicant to another based on the borough in which they pay council tax. The two private schools are even out of borough (but fairly close by), although this is largely irrelevant in respect of council tax given the fees. Michael is eligible for scholarships in both private schools - we’re hopeful of a particularly good one from the one in which he got 95%. My son has now had six exams - one mock added to those mentioned above - and two interviews (with four different people) - at ten years of age to decide which school he goes to at eleven. The results of which are more critical to his future than any others, given he can’t retake any of them. I’m faced with a potential £91,000 bill over the next seven years. (This is not counting my daughter who is six and has less state schools to “choose” from in the area).

My point is simple: what the fuck am I paying council tax for?

The investigation into Madeleine’s disappearance continues and we’re no nearer finding out what happened. That’s disturbing in itself but what concerns me are the antics of the Portuguese police. I use the word “police” because that’s their name, however, it doesn’t appear to relate to their function from what I understand of law and order.

It is completely natural that different nations have different approaches to policing. I’m sure there and pros and cons across the board. I don’t believe our police are perfect - I don’t believe it’s possible for a police force to achieve perfection in what is an incredibly difficult and important job.

I cannot begin to understand how the Portuguese police can justify the way they work. For a start, their secrecy laws don’t appear to give any benefits at all. In the case of a missing child, why keep details back? They can only help, especially immediately after the crime where the public have details fresh in their minds. An innocent observation, easily lost in the fog of memory can be brought out and recorded for intelligence use in the critical hours that follow the crime. Someone spotting a person loading up a car could give the police a much needed lead. Months later, would the same witness remember something so innocent? Of course not. That’s the benefit of quick and informative media reports - not to feed morbid sections of the public. I don’t see how careful and responsible media coverage can assist the criminal with information either. Given the police’s now obvious incompetence, I strongly believe their secrecy laws serve only to cover up inadequate and inappropriate actions. Kate McCann is under threat of jail if she speaks out to defend herself - that is denying freedom of speech - that is unacceptable in a civilised society and must surely breach her human rights. In this day and age human rights are extended into all sorts of strange areas, such as having to take care of the amount of force that you use against an intruder, but a European country can stop you from publically defending your reputation when they are releasing stories into the media? That’s outrageous. You may question such a strong sentiment from me but the incompetence is proven in many ways, not least the facts which show the police failed to seal off the area for clues or even look for clues.

Whether the McCanns “did it” or not is not relevant to my blog here as there are no facts to push an opinion one way or the other. I simply don’t know - however, I do believe you are innocent until PROVEN guilty. As a father I can’t believe they could have done something like that accidentally or not but there are so many things in this world which are unbelieveable that you just can’t be sure without knowing the facts. The fact that the police have been and appear to continue to circulate rumours based on subjective material is nothing short of scandalous. I can’t believe that a police force can be allowed to get away with this. If the McCanns indeed “did it” - this rumour mongering still serves no purpose other than to try and make them confess - which would be unlikely to work now. If they did not do it, then it’s hard to imagine being in a position where your child is snatched and then you are accused of being involved. That’s hell on earth. Who is accountable for that police force? I note the police inspector (himself a suspect on another case) has since been fired but the damage has been done already. Imagine when the young McCann twins grow up and rumours remain that their own parents killed their sister. How do any of the McCanns cope with that?

This “suspect” status conferred by the Portuguese police is baffling too. They appear to be able to give out this status on a whim based on no concrete evidence - both to the McCanns and to Robert Murat. There appears to be no time limit where it HAS to be withdrawn even though they are not charged. That is amazing. If there is no evidence they should be released from this status. We don’t know if Murat was involved - but imagine he was not and only acted in a ghoulish and foolish way, hanging around the scene of the crime. His life is scarred forever, whatever happens.

I went to Portugal on holiday this summer with my family - including my 6 year old daughter. The Algarve is a very attractive proposition for holiday makers. I wouldn’t go anywhere near the place now. It is not a civilised country. Awful things happen all over the world but there is a real danger for innocents to be accused of things with no evidence and with no sensitivity by police who are not bound to say or (appear to) account for anything. Either Robert Murat, the McCanns or both are in this position unless you think they’re all in it together - and what circumstance would have the McCanns colluding with Murat in respect of their own daughter? I honestly believe that all holiday makers and businesses should steer clear of that country until it moves into the twenty first century.

Having a six year old daughter, this is something that really affected me from the start. I just couldn’t and still can’t get the thought of it out of my head. We also holidayed in Portugal this year just down the road from where she was taken and so other than it chilling my blood every time I think about it or see the news, it seemed uncomfortably close.

If the latest rumours are to be believed and whether the blood they have found belongs to Madeleine or not, I can’t believe the Portuguese police did not find that on day one. Although the McCann parents are quick to praise the police and their “investigation”, I think they are probably doing that just to keep in with the police to keep them doing something/anything. The Portuguese police seem to have no idea about anything or what to do. To me their “policy” of not revealing anything to the public is just a cover-up for their immense incompetence. If blood on a wall is not a striking clue or starting point, I’m struggling to think what clues would have made any sense to them - muddy footprints or the intruder dropping their driving license? With those clowns in charge, I’m surprised they manage to find their patrol car. I do hope the British police are now taking over, as seems to be the case.

It’s November the 5th, and all I can hear - and it was worse yesterday, being a Saturday - are blooming fireworks exploding everywhere. The weather forecast says that tomorrow’s expected fog will be thicker because of the amount of bonfires around the country today.

For international visitors, Bonfire night celebrates the failure of Guy Fawkes to blow up the houses of Parliament in … wait for it … 1605. A few years ago, then. Native Americans were running around the United States, unmolested, certainly not drunk and not playing in casinos. Mr Fawkes was caught, tortured and executed (see the below blog on Saddam and capital punishment!). That night on November 5th, 1605, bonfires were lit all over England to celebrate the safety of the King. We’re still lighting them. Let’s face it … the King is dead. He’s been dead quite a while, too, has James the first.

We sell these fireworks to … anyone, really. Kids end up with them. They mess about with them and injure themselves and others. Innocently organised home firework parties have tragic endings too … not many, but enough. One is more than enough. When I was at school, some wag threw a firework in my class and it buzzed around under my seat. It’d have caused damage if I hadn’t lost control of my bowels and covered it with a fire resistent layer of excrement.

I’m going to state the obvious now: “Let’s stop selling fireworks” and “Let’s stop ‘celebrating’ a failed terrorist incident from 401 years ago.” If we celebrated failed terrorist incidents, we’d have firework night many times a year.

Fireworks are stupid. (Unless you’re watching the 4th July display over Manhattan like I did in 2005, which was amazing! (but safe))

So, the almost comical trial ended and a handful of Iraqis have been sentenced to death, including the former dictator, Saddam Hussein. 40 or 50 Iraqis get killed in car bomb attacks regularly, making this trivial in basic human and mathematical terms.

I’m all in favour of capital punishment, but with an important caveat that somehow, the verdict is beyond any doubt whatsoever. I think this case probably qualifies, from what the media have said over the years - and by the Iraqi tanks rolling into Kuwait and the bombed Kurdish villages in the north of their own country.

I don’t like hanging, however. That is barbaric and there should be no need to resort to this. I believe that people who commit murder qualify for “an eye for an eye” and people who commit certain sexual attacks don’t deserve to live and benefit from the rest of humanity. They should pay the ultimate penalty. Surely a lethal injection is sufficient to do this, though? Choking someone on a rope or breaking the neck (whichever kills them) is a throw back to a less civilised time where it was “entertainment” for a baying and bloodthirsty crowd. I guess it also acted as a deterrent, back in those days, but does that apply now - now that death is a part of the average Iraqi’s daily life? I’m assuming the convicts will not be hung in front of the public in the middle of Baghdad but it’s a crazy world and I wouldn’t be suprised to see it on YouTube.

What is interesting is the reaction. The politicians come out in support of the decision, making no mention of the punishment. I’d like to know why we can’t bring back capital punishment for the most evil and vile members of our own society? I acknowledge the opinions of those against it, although I disagree - but I would expect these politicians not to look so smug, now that the sentence has been announced, when child rapists and killers sit in comfortable cells watching DVDs and playing computer games in our own country. There is (like always) a simmering hypocrisy about what they have said.

Apparently “Saddam’s evil reign of terror is now at an end”. I think everyone knew it was finished near the end of the war when the Iraqi propaganda minister said the Americans were being driven out, at the same moment that the tanks were entering the ravaged city. Do you know how long ago that was? 3 years ago. It’s hardly been a garden of roses since. Let’s also remember that no weapons of mass destruction were found buried in the flower bed, either.

Listening to some of the coverage today, I was also struck by the comments of some Iraqi people being interviewed. They said that whilst Saddam Hussein was in charge of the country, their lives were “normal” and now they were frightened to go out and their children could no longer safely go to school. I’m sure some people’s lives are now better - but surely, not much better, given the regular carnage on our televisions - and many more now perceive it to be much worse. With civil disorder likely short-term, and also around the time of the execution, are the best intentions of the West (and I’m sure there are good intentions in there somewhere) causing more problems than they are solving? Will this intervention and action ever deliver democratic order and a good life for the ordinary Iraqi without pushing them towards violent loathing of the West? With the two factions more apart than ever, I’m starting to question how it will ever end.

My wife was almost in tears, watching the sensationalist news coverage of the young children, crying at the death of their father. He had gone to ask some youths to be quiet and was viciously stabbed and left for dead. Just a quick point - we know he had children, we can safely assume they would be upset - was there any need to show them on television? Not really.

The main point is that people who live close by, know these youths and their drug-fuelled intimadatory behaviour. How can this be allowed? Anti-social behaviour drags down the lives of the people exposed to it - and yet you hear of it happening all over the country. If these youths are caught and convicted - at massive cost to the taxpayer - what will they get? Kudos for doing time, to play some snooker, muck around and meet more of their kin, before coming out and resuming their careers.

I heard David Cameron’s speech and phrase stolen from Tony Blair that says he wants to be tough on crime and the cause of crime. Unless he means something drastic, it’ll all be much of the same, spun a different way, with some stats that prove it’s working - ignoring the stats that show it is not. Normally, being “tough” on something would mean that he intends to throw lots of resource and money at it. It’s not enough.

The causes of crime tend to be education, or lack of it - and this is normally handed down by parent to child, and so the vicious circle is established. How do you stop that? It’s not money - the behaviour is ingrained from an early age by their experience - and then it’s too late - at least for the vast majority. On various television programmes, the youngsters and their (normally absent) parents are usually well dressed, in the latest trainers, standing in front of expensive plasma television screens. Most agree it is education - but in some areas and in some schools and with the quality of parenting, how can they possibly turn out any differently? How do you stop the circle? The school may improve, but the home life and environment will not.

More police? More “Bobbies on the beat”? Does that work, or does that just create confrontation? It could be a start, but some areas are no-go areas for the police already, and this may just increase the amount of ghetto areas where those inside are even more scared and isolated. What about areas where people are well behaved? I do mean young children who hang around together with groups of peers - which I completely understand is part of growing up. Is it fair to them to have police coming up to them and asking them what they’re doing and where they are going, just because they’re wearing hoodies and laughing and joking in groups of 10 or more? Sometimes they’re not vicious gangs, sometimes they’re just teenagers growing up.

Perhaps we only have the option of ramping up the punishment? Perhaps people who are caught assaulting people, intimidating honest citizens, selling drugs and the like should be a lot more frightened of being caught? When I was young, the fear of my mother’s temper kept me in check. I was worried about teachers shouting at me - nowadays, the pupil - or worse, their parent(s) - would give the teacher a good hiding. When people tell me they’re a teacher, I automatically think a screw MUST be loose. The pupils, and later young errant adults truly believe that there is no accountability for their actions. At that age, probably being a bit over conscious of their own self, I think they can only be focused by a genuine concern for “what happens if I get caught doing this?”.

So what are the options? What are the options that we have available where the bureaucrats in Brussels would not work themselves into a frenzy, accusing the Government of human rights abuses? Where are they when a man gets stabbed, trying to quieten down a ruly mob of youngsters? In a big house, out in the countryside somewhere, drinking red wine and telling people what a splendid job he/she is doing - that’s where.

I think it’s time we chose between passive tolerance (accepting that the consequences are people have no accountability and nothing to lose) or an agressive intolerance to those actions which are clearly unacceptable.

There is crime and there will always be crime in any walk of life - this much IS life. Sometimes you are unlucky and you are a victim. That’s a fact. We need to work against that as much as possible by standing up and using a firm hand on those that wish to exploit society. Jail terms should last for their entire duration - not this crazy situation where you are out in under half the time. Jail time should be tough (but fair) - you should never come out of there thinking that it wasn’t so bad. I don’t mean that inmates should be allowed to intimidate one another, but that they should work, work for society - and do it for no recompense. Any misbehaviour should result in extension to their time, maybe solitary confinement, and in more extreme cases - corporal punishment. No personal possesions, no comfort at all, no television, nothing should be allowed in prison. If you don’t like it - don’t do the crime. People who commit crime should have reduced human rights - why should they keep them? The victims lose their rights, during and often after the crime. That needs to be reversed.

It will cost money - extra jails, staff. I think it’s worth paying. To tackle the cause of crime would be nice, but we don’t have the time. Let’s tackle the criminals first, and then the cause of crime. It might be a smaller task. It’s too easy to engage in criminal behaviour - let’s turn it into a more risk dominated activity.

This is all quite common sense - but politicians and liberals are blinded by their own desire to be politicians and liberals. I’m sure that if they were to live on some council estates and some of the streets in Britain today, they may soon change their minds.

I’ve been following the “bung” “sensation” in football, after the Panorama programme on BBC recently and the whole thing stinks of the media trying to pick a fight to get viewers and sell newspapers.

Football is business - big business. In any big business, people offer and give sweetners all the time. That’s a fact. Corporate entertainment, seminars in exotic locations, cash, gifts, whatever.

Football agents: for goodness sake - the clue is in the bloomin’ title! Agent - commission - sales. Come on. What do you expect? Some football players get £100k per week these days - plus commercial endorsement deals etc. It attracts seedy little agents who are trying to cream off the top and are willing to pay to seal a deal. It’s natural - not nice - but natural market forces. It’s like being aghast that prostitutes exist - of course they do! They’ve got something and people are willing to pay for it. It’d be nice if everything was fair … but it’s not, so get used to it!

I’d also like to say that that particular programme didn’t really show much evidence - it was all hearsay and bravado. The Chelsea and Liverpool “tapping up” was ridiculous. An agent says to Chelsea’s Frank Arnesen: “here’s a very good young player, and he wants to leave Middlesbrough - would you like him?”. Frank says he would like him … and? Where’s the scandal?! Agent asks Harry Redknapp if he would like Andy Todd from Blackburn - Harry says he would. So what? 100% of managers would like Ronaldinho - lock ‘em up! He didn’t make or ask for any offers. There was no money anywhere.

If someone is caught handing over a bag of money to a manager, and a deal is subsequently done … then prosecute them both. They know the risks. Otherwise, leave it!! They’re trouble making.

As we approach the fifth anniversary of the terrible attacks on the US, I’m wondering what has happened since? Those events, almost five years ago seem recent in some respects and ancient history in others. Have we learned any lessons?

No. The “war” appears to be gathering pace. Since 2001, we’ve had bombings in Spain, London and Bali to name but a few. Countless other attacks have been thwarted - so we’re told by the media. Israel, Lebanon and Hizbollah is a big topic in its own right. It’s also easy to forget the daily attrocities in Iraq and Afghanistan, if you don’t get to page 20 in the newspapers. People are dying every day. How has the “liberation” helped them? It is inevitable that there will be more attacks on the UK and the US too. Tomorrow, it could be you.

I don’t know what the fundamentalists are fighting for, or what they really think they can achieve … do you? I hear contradictory stuff criticising Western society from British Muslims who wouldn’t dream of living anywhere else but in the West - their Nike tee-shirts betray them. I see Islamic clerics calling for Jihad in Finsbury Park, then taking benefit money from the government and tax payers they purport to hate. Hate them, hate their money. I hear inflammatory remarks from fundamentalists who want the blood of any non-Muslims - leaving no place for compromise or any space for victory on either side. What do they want? It is utterly ridiculous to expect the Western world to stop and declare themselves as Islamic. It’s like asking the Sun to turn blue. It just won’t - why would it?

I see the West denying nuclear technology to Muslim states, keeping nuclear stockpiles themselves but allowing Israel to have these weapons too. I see the self-appointed World Police making mistake after mistake, placing themselves on a pedestal, worshipping themselves and acting in the name of “God”. This is led by a man who had previously never set foot outside his own country - probably his own state. How does he understand other people’s cultures? Does Condaleeza Rice tell him? I hope not. It’s a rule of fear - fear of sanctions, fear of attack and fear of losing support that would be catastrophic to their countries - support being military and trade. Imagine the UK without American support - this would cause severe problems, even for one of the leading players in Western Society. “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

I am overwhelmed by the sheer number of Muslims who would die and kill for their belief. There must be something in it. The media says they are brainwashed. I find it difficult to believe so many people could be brainwashed - that is science fiction - their commitment comes from sheer belief. I respect such an underlying faith, but surely the direction is misplaced? They don’t need to maim and kill (including themselves) - surely they should attempt to educate through example? Looking around the western society with all its failings - they really wouldn’t have much to fear from an intellectual argument with the people that run the world in a debating chamber, would they? Whilst they continue down the “lose-lose” path, no one will listen. The World is too frightened. Dropping the guns and bombs and starting to talk would be the start of a very, very long journey, and would require much faith, compromise and forgiveness (on both sides) - but it’s the only path where everyone will not lose.

I read this morning that obese women should not be given IVF treatment. Single women, lesbians and couples with children from a previous relationship should be eligible. This will make well-built women everywhere feel really good and head straight to the newsagents for comfort!

It’s not in the article, but I would guess sexual deviants and people with ginger hair are still below fatties - but they must be coming close.

Does this mean that fat couples should be sterilised for their own good? It’ll protect the health of the mother and the little fat baby, surely? Send fatties to the back of the bus - that’s what I say! Are there any people in Madagascar yet? There must be a final solution to this.

The key word is choice. Obese people should be warned about the dangers of being obese and this should be re-enforced with messages about the increased danger of being obese during pregnancy. There is nothing that will make an obese woman turn to comfort food more - the chance of having children removed by big brother.

I used to read newspapers and the internet news regularly, but I’ve found myself lately completely and utterly turned off by it all.

Politics used to be fairly interesting, and I use that word “interesting” with extreme caution and with many caveats that I won’t specify here. Now, all the politicians seem the same - same ideas, same dull grey-suited dullards with hidden perversions. Maybe they always were and I finally opened my eyes … I don’t know. If a car bomb goes off in the Middle East now, I can’t be bothered to go past a couple of paragraphs because it’s like groundhog day where you’ve seen it all before … many, many times.

A young girl gets snatched, or murdered and it all seems so … normal.

The only thing quite different in the world news today that is different from the norm is the Michael Jackon case. I don’t think anyone can actually offer a valid opinion on that at the moment - as we simply don’t know. The one thing I do know is that case and all that surrounds it, is so out of the ordinary that it takes the “everything is so repetitive” argument and moves it too far - such that it’s simply not believable. Just the guy’s freakish face gives me the shivers.

Is it the after effects of the 9/11 attacks? Perhaps the world-changing event was so shocking that we’re now immune to “normal” carnage and evil.

So what’s going on? Is the world changing or am I just getting old(er). Answers on a postcard (in big letters please) to InvisibleVoices retirement home in Miami.

Watching some music channel today, and they were showing “Do they know it’s Christmas” by Band Aid. My son, 7, says ‘why are they showing all that?’. He’s pointing at the clips of starving people in Africa. I explained why. He asks a few more questions. Then he says, ‘why don’t they just get them all out in helicopters?’ - I said, ‘who?’ - he said, ‘those poor people.’ (Note: they’re not “Black” or “Africans”) - I said, ‘but where are you going to put them?’ - ‘the army could do it,’ he says - ‘but where are you going to put them?’ I say again - ‘bring them all to England,’ he says, looking at me like I’m stupid.

When you grow up, the phrase ‘it’s someone else’s problem,’ is used a lot, isn’t it?

(To lighten the mood, he then tells me, ‘my school think it’s so serious, they’ve put a poster on the wall about it.’)

Coming back from New York (again) recently, I noticed many people telling me to have a safe trip.

That’s nice, but … why?

Air travel is not my favourite form of travel - not by a long chalk. In fact - I’d rather surf on the back on an alligator. I hate it. My sensitive ears make me think the plane is plummeting at the slightest drop, or climbing like a rocket when it hits a tiny air pocket. 3 trips to New York this year so far, and I still think I’m an Al Qaeda target (I visualise them hiding in by those lakes by heathrow with surface to air missile launchers), or the plane’s wings haven’t been screwed on right, or the pilot is busy having it away with the stewardess and too blind drunk to see the mountain ahead, or the auto pilot computer is being re-programmed by my iPod to try and reach the moon …

Anyway - digressing: the “have a safe trip” comments:

Are they implying that on the safest form of transport (unless you live in Russia), that I WON’T have a safe trip? Is this some sort of coded terrorist threat, or do they know something I don’t? Do these giant metal birds crash all the time and no one tells us? Is the safety of the trip really in question? Crossing the road is much more dangerous - but does yer mum say, ‘have a safe trip, son,’ every time you go to the shop for her? The hell she does.

I think subconsciously, people just know that these incredibly heavy things full of people just shouldn’t be flying - it just doesn’t convince the brain properly. We need some evolution time to adjust.

So, Sir Bob is being linked to Real Madrid? Crikey - Sir Alf Ramsey will be back in charge of the England team next… and he’s dead. Maybe they mean p*ss head Bryan Robson? Or Robson Greene?

Well, I’m back from the Big Apple. It was all far too much hard work and long hours. I had to move room 4 times - which included one hotel change because of having to extend my stay. Both times the room was like trying to sleep on a runway. Funny thing? You complain - and I did have good reason - and they instantly move you to a better room. I said, “you might want to get someone up here to listen,” to which the front desk said, “no, we’ll just move you.” Well, cool banana, I say. The first time I moved, they moved me into a suite for a week and a half! Customer service in the US is legendary, but a friend pointed out, and I totally agree, that it’s either brilliant or total rubbish. They either want to make you feel like a movie star, or an annoyance. I went to the Apple store in Soho to buy a mini-iPod - and they’re great! - it’s a posh shop, very nicely done, but I wanted help in choosing the right bits for it. I queued up and the guy refused to help - “I’m ringing,” he said. I said, “you’re saying you can’t walk around the counter and pick up what you suggested?” … “I’m ringing,” he said. I noticed he walked around the counter when a lady customer asked the question. The all-American dickhead in full effect. I went to Bloomingdales and Macy’s. I heartily recommend both to no one. I do absolutely hate shopping however - so listen at yer peril. I went into KFC - may fav junk food place - and ordered a meal deal thingy. I opened the box … and no chips! Just some hot bread thing. And they roast their chicken … eh? World’s gone mad. I walked all through Central Park to the top, and then walked all the way back to the bottom … that’s 100 blocks in total. An amazing place that - right in the middle of a big city. It’s perfect land to build skyscrapers - because of the rock in the ground - but they resist… so they got that right. Lastly, the people I dealt with have no memories - these are people in an investment bank. By the time they walk from the room in which you just had a meeting - they’ve forgotten what you said. This is most people all of the time. From my experiences in the US this year - been there over a month so far this year alone - I wonder how they are the world’s only superpower. It’s probably just a lack of global competition and the 5% of people who are very sharp folks indeed. I’m half American … and I can’t remember what I just said.