Aplogise and Move on...

I was reading an article on the beeb there about how Robert Redford has called for the US leaders to apologise for the war in Iraq.

I must admit though that after reading this article and thought about the whole thing, i'm quite puzzled as to who should be apologising to who?

I think Redford's point is that the American people trusted the government to act on their behalf after 9/11 but the government betrayed this trust. But I have a few problems with that.

Was it not revenge and retribution that America wanted? Now 50,000 Iraqi civilians are dead and when people are watching the pictures of Saddam with his throat wide open and his head at 90 degrees they're not feeling so blood thirsty anymore...

We all know Bush is a twat, much like the UK now doesn’t trust a thing that Blair says but I don't think everything can now be blamed on Bush. He didn't fool everyone into thinking he was a nice guy, he's always been thick and he's never even tried to hide it. The US happily voted in someone who if properly subjected to psychological testing, would probably be defined as special needs.

I don't think that leaders should be apologising to the electorate, after all it was the electorate that put them there. I do however think that the people of the US and UK should be apologising to the world. Instead of acting like the responsible elder brothers of the world, we've been acting like kids.

There's an incredibly complicated game of political chess going on at the moment. With the middle-east far from peaceful and China playing some sort of global version of "tin can alley" with satellites, it's not really a time to be letting the monkey try it's hand at chess, is it?

I do think that there is a good chance of some stability in the near future. It certainly looks like the Democrats will stump up a serious candidate for the next elections and hopefully the US can resume some form global diplomacy. Although, exciting though the prospect is, I fear that there will be some backwater mentalists out there who simply won't accept a female or black president.

As for the war on terror, how is anyone really expecting to win this fight? The "Kill ever Muslim in the world and hope you got the terrorists" policy seems to have a few flaws that are quite obvious to most of us. It's time to start to diffuse the situation by backing off and strong diplomatic channels to stop the tensions in Israel and the genocide in Darfur. Again, this isn't possible whilst the monkey's in charge. Other world leaders just seem to laugh at him as he tries to find the door off the stage.

You really have to think that the US twenty-second amendment could well have saved the world! It's probably something that the UK could do with come to think of it...

Devolution - Is it Working?

I think the answer, like that of most essay answers is that it's been a success but only to a certain extent.

To deal with the parliament building first, i'll admit it's a disaster from start to finish but a poorly managed building project is not just a scottish phenomenon. If anything, it was one of the worst estimates in history. Originally estimated to be around £50 million, it did come in at a staggering £432 million and counting. But you also have to remember that the millenium dome was estimated at £399 million and came out at £789 million and the new wembley was originally expected to be around £757 million and is now at around £832 million. So I think we can safely say that it's a feature of many british projects to run over budget. On that point, I really do fear for the London Olympics!

In political terms, devolution has been a step in the right direction. I'm not really a supporter of shortbread nationalist politics as I think that has scotland retained it's identity throughout the union and will continue to do so. It's often conviently forgotton just how much Scotland gained from being a core component of the british empire.

Regardless of the nationalist issues, political and fiscal independence at local level is a framework that can only benefit Scotland and it's people. Particularly when it comes to scottish social issues, Holyrood is in a much better position to make more informed decisions than westminster.

When assessing the success of scottish parliament it's also important to seperate the institution from the administration of parliament. The institution has got some solid foundations in terms of structure, the design of parliamentary procedures that provide a greater say for civic interests and those of businesses. The powers of the 17 committees of parliament have also made the process more transparent to the general public. With a system of proportional representation and a comparitively high number of female members (37%), Holyrood is arguably more representative of the people than it's westminster equivalent.

In terms of administration there have been some problems in terms of political consensus within a coalition govenment and of course the resignation of Henry McLeish. Despite the problems experienced during the debate on tuition fees, the parliament has since repealed the section 28 equivalent in Scotland and reformed long-term care for the elderly. So in terms of social policy, the parliament has made a significant difference to the scottish people.

It's fair to say that it's not been without it's problems but I think that devolution has been a success and regardless of whether Scotland ever achieved independence, I think that this was the best path to take. The country is in a good economic state and despite some evident social problems I think we're starting to get there. However, one of the things that Scotland does lack (and the UK for that matter at the moment) is a strong leader with a clear path that's in the best interests of the country. I fear that regardless of how good the mechanisms of parliament are, without this it won't be as successful as we hope it is.

Anti Social Behaviour - Let's Stop It!

I must admit, as I read this story there were tears in my eyes…

Where ever you’re from and who ever you are it’s worth taking time out to look at this. It really makes you think what kind of a society you live in.

For me, it’s not just the fact that a family like this exists. It’s more that the safe guards were not there within our society to protect a young girl and her parents from this kind of evil. If anything, the current social habitat nurtures people like this. I just don’t believe that the ASBO is the answer. It’s a weak answer to a tough problem.

The authorities had been informed that a problem existed between the two families but like a little child saying, “what’re you going to do about it?” the Connor family realised that there was little the police could do to stop then and continued their campaign of hatred.

The parents are unfit to be parents and as a consequence their children are unfit to be members of our society. The more we let this go on, the bigger the problem is going to get. You can issue ASBOs till doomsday it’s blatantly obvious that it’s not the answer to this problem.

I think there’s a need for a two-fold approach to this problem:

i) We need to send out a clear message that this behaviour will not be tolerated within our society and those who continue in this fashion need to be removed from society.

ii) We need more state influence in the life of teenagers. There are large numbers of parents out there who are struggling to cope with bringing up their children. Whether it’s because of less or no support from partners or lacking the parenting skills required to control their children, we need to face up to the fact that certain areas of society have a problem with this. It’s not something to be ashamed of but I think it should be the government’s duty to support the family unit before supporting wars in far off lands and a larger stockpile of nuclear warheads.

As I mentioned in an earlier article on this blog, it should be society’s responsibility to bridge the parenting gap that currently exists. By engaging kids in a full curriculum of activities within the community, they won’t have to hang about on street corners and simple problems can be solved with simple solutions.

I just can’t understand the lack of common sense or creative policy making within our government and the opposition parties. Enough is enough…

Sex Offender Sentences - Enough is Enough

When on earth are we going to learn? Reading today about another case of a sex offendergetting let out on bail early only to offend again . The case i'm talking about is that of Richard Ewing who had been sentenced to 18 years in prison. In 1995 he was convicted of raping a mother-of-three in 1989 as well as a woman who was out walking her dog in Devon.

He was sentenced to 18 years and let out on license after 10. He has now admitted 2 accounts of rape and 3 other charges. How long are we going to let this go on?

Now first of all, it's worth noting that this is not the fault of the courts or the probation office. They follow strict guidelines that are set out to them and this if this guy behaves well during his stay in prison and completes the necessary courses, he gets released early.

Where we have went wrong and where we have let down both the 17yr old girl and the mother who would've known that he'd been released, is that this guys should never be released from prison and especially not into a situation where he could easily offend again.

Our laws have let these people down and it really is time that something was done about it.

The first question that I want answered is what we are hoping to acheive by imprisoning rapists for 4yr and 10yr jail terms. I can only assume that someone somewhere thinks that by taking someone's freedom away for this period, they will learn their lessons and not have any uncontrollable sexual compulsions ever again? In short, we've got it all wrong.

It's quite obvious that a our methods of punishment (which haven't really changed for hundreds of years) just weren't really designed for this sort of thing. If I steal something, you lock me up (well, if i did it 50 times or so), I learn that if I steal, my freedom gets taken away and I don't steal again. Society believes that I can reform my character and I may have been driven to this by a set of circumstances such as poverty or drug addiction but again I can clean up my act and integrate into society, go into shops without stealing things...

Now, if I molest a child or rape someone, can I clean up my act, can I learn my lesson? After four years in prison would you let me live next to your kid's school or live next door to you? Go on, i'm a reformed character! Exactly, I didn't think so.

I think the first step that we have to take is to acknowledge that not all crime is the same. By that I mean that not all prisoners deserve the "second chance" that we as a society currently afford them. I think that we have to take a stand and say that if you commit one of these crimes, you will not be given a second chance and you will be removed from society permanently. Alternatively, you can release these people in a state that doesn't allow them to commit the crime again. If that means through surgical mean, so be it...

It sounds extreme but really it's just common sense. The world has a massive population and society has a massive burden in providing for everyone. Is it really right to ask the tax payer to fork out £37,500 plus maximum security costs to keep these people?

I know that this country is compassionate in it's nature and I think it's admirable that we choose not to have the death penalty. But again, it comes down to this idea of different levels of crime. I do believe that someone can commit murder, be fully rehabilitated and never come into contact with the courts again. I've read quite a bit of the background of Jon Venables and Robert Thompson who abducted Jamie Bulger. I know that it must be unbearable for the Bulger family but we, again as a society have to accept responsibility for the boy's rehabilitation and hopefully we won't hear about them again. However, I don't believe that people charged with certain types of sexual offence can be reformed. If there's a 1% chance that they will reoffend, they should never be allowed out again. We are compassionate but we have to realise that we owe more to society than we do to them.

Enough is enough, there have been too many of these cases. It's time to put an end to it.

Trident Upgrade & the Nuclear Question

OK, so they're wanting to go ahead with the £20 billion Trident upgrade.

When looking into this one I think it's important to note that Blair, Brown and Beckett (as was the whole Labour party) were not so long ago vehemently opposed to the theory of a nuclear deterrent. So what's happened to make them all of a sudden see it a great way to blow 2% of the UK's annual income?

I do forgive them for this, they just grew up I guess. We all have those great ideas when we're young but as we get older it becomes tougher to stand by these ideals. Obviously power comes at a price, just leave your principles by the door Sir, you won't be needing them in here...

I think it's one of the fundamental problems that I have with what we call democracy, it's a bit of a smoke screen really. We're chatted up, like the look of them then they screw us and next morning they blank us. It's just human nature I guess but no doubt Mr Blair had an idea when he was young that if he became PM he'd do everything right and not end up hated and out of touch like Thatcher and the tories were. Unfortunately as I mentioned before, the public vote only gets you the top prize. To get yourself a shot at the title you have to make all sorts of promises and sticking up for what's right, just and common sense will probably get you laughed at. The corridors of power are no place for the naive Sir, you'll have to toughen up, form relationships...

Anyway, how can it be democracy when we don't get a say in how our money is spent and who or what we wage war with. Yet, it is that very same democracy which we are told that our government (and King Louie of America) are fighting for. Don't question democracy kids because you might end up losing it! It's a tricky position, get rid of Labour and your looking at You (are a) Tube Cameron, question democracy and we end up with Islamic Fundamentalism. You might be asking yourself, was it not communism that democracy was at war with? Yes, it's all starting to sound like an Orwellian nightmare only the twist in the tail is that you thought freedom had won the war, didn't you?

So the question still remains, why is it that whilst the NHS is in trouble, young people are running riot in our streets and our schools are falling to bits, why can we afford to spend this kind of money on something that we just don't need. Mr Blair seems to think that we could still have to defend ourselves from a rogue state with nuclear capability. Excuse me Mr Blair do you mean there's a rogue state out there with WMDs? There wasn't the last time I looked?

At the end of the day, it's all quite sad really. I'm pretty sure that our nation is not a majority of pro-american, pro-war and pro-kill all muslims. We're not fundamentalists (christian or muslim) and we should take pride in this. The edge we should have over everyone else is our wisdom and commitment to our own society and values. It's something to bear in mind before we commit to 25 more years of being King Louie's nuclear stepping stone.

You can say what you want about the french but you wouldn't see them doing it...

Muggers do it for the kicks!

Stop the press! The Economic and Social Research Council decided to commission a study and they’ve found out that many muggers commit the crime “just for the kick” of committing the crime.

Did you hear the one about the government using common sense to work anything out? Two minutes and I’ll commission a report to find out if they did or not…

Of course people are doing these things just for the kicks. If you walk round the streets of Glasgow you’ll find a number of individuals sporting the “Glasgow smile”, in other words someone’s kindly cut a smile into their face. I firmly believe that the majority of these crimes are done just for the hell of it or because someone was a bit pissed and looked at someone else the wrong way.

I was having a look over the BBC have your say pages (which I do frequent from time to time). There have been plenty of suggestions from the general public. These include bringing back national service, tougher sentences, stopping benefits, reform the criminal justice bill and public flogging!

I think these are all fair points but as much as I would love to see the stocks brought back to the city centres, I think we have to face a few facts….

FACT 1
There is a problem!

I know this seems like a simple one but much like a reforming alcoholic, the powers that be have to acknowledge that there is a problem and this seems to be something that they are reluctant to do. Now I understand why they don’t, if your job was on the line would you start saying that your department or company was completely in the wrong and you wanted to just start again?

The public know there’s a problem, we don’t want to have to get more alarms and street cameras. If we keep going this way, woollies will be selling back to school stab vests.

Now note that i’m not attacking Labour. It’s not that I think they’re doing a fine job, I just think that the whole system and approach is wrong. In truth I think our democratic system is wrong but that’s something for another day.

The government doesn’t care by it’s very nature, it’s not their fault, it’s just the system…

FACT 2
We’re not tough enough!

It’s a fact that we’re just not tough enough. The complexities of the system that we’ve created have tied us up in so much red tape that parents can’t restrain their children for fear of assault charges and people don’t report crimes because they know nothing will happen. There are people walking the street who have committed literally hundreds of burglaries, yet if we found them in our house and belted them we’d be the one’s in jail?

Our justice system is too confused between punishment, rehabilitation, reform and human rights. A classic case is that of the drug addicts who received an out of court settlement from the government when they were forced to go cold turkey.

People should have more faith in the justice system more importantly everyone should know where the line is drawn. Social services, parole departments and prosecution services are all tied up. All this does is cost us more money whilst we lose what little faith we have in the system.

FACT 3
You get nowhere just treating symptoms!

Tougher sentences are one thing but at the end of the day it’s just really about an improved common sense approach to the whole problem. Labour’s idea was the ASBO. Well guys, here’s some free advice that you won’t have to commission me to give; it’s just not going to work!

Did anyone think for a second that because someone’s been given an ASBO they’ll think, “hang on a second, I don’t want to be anti-social!”. Of course not, they’re anti-social in the first place because they’ve got very little to look forward to, even less to lose and the only role models in their lives are anti-social people. It’s not rocket science…

What we need is a fundamental approach to solving the problem and I think that begins with kids themselves. I know I’m fortunate in my life to have turned out (kind of) alright but I also know that when I was a teenager there was nothing to do, so I hung about, smoked and skated and even then the council refused to build any skating facilities.

Now I know Adolf Hitler’s hardly the saint of the century but when it came to sorting the kids out, he knew how to get them organised and focused. I guess it kind of goes back to people suggesting bringing back national service. I think we need a new Hitler youth idea with a bit less of the Hitler megalomanic tendencies.

So I know it’s going to sound like a way out there radical idea but why don’t we have a revised school system that supports the kids in everything they do? And I know that it’s going to sound way round the bend but why don’t we have the schools open beyond four in the afternoon? So if kids just want somewhere to hang out, play football or even (god forbid) do more study, they have somewhere to do it. Also if we formalised processes and incentivised kids for doing things like hip hop classes, or even graffiti art classes, providing money and training for more teachers and social role models to help them out, would the maybe not feel so anti-social?

At least if we did take this approach, it means that by having more contact with the problem families, we’d be able to spot the problems quicker and maybe even stop them from mugging, killing or even spitting at us.

Shucks, it’s just an idea I commissioned myself to do. I know you’d all rather spend the money on £20 billion trident nuclear submarine programs or more effort into punting £1 billion worth of arms to Africa. Do you not? But you voted for it, didn’t you??

Why don't we stop the rot...?

The Environment – Let’s Face the Truth

I wasn’t planning to write about the environment today but it seems to be the government and media’s latest distraction. Yes, the government, media and some mob sitting on top of easyjet’s headquarters have all had a meeting (they didn’t invite us!), they’ve had a vote and decided that the impending environmental disaster is, wait for it…….OUR FAULT!!!

Yes, did you forget to switch the tv off standby last night? Did you leave your car running whilst waiting for the kids this morning? Did you want to go for a cheap weekend break? Then it seems that it’s your fault that the polar icecaps are melting and loads of dolphins, whales and other cute creatures are dying. Hope you’re feeling guilty!

OK guys, calm down and stop crying because it’s not really your fault. The environment’s a mess and it is a global problem but is it really our fault? If we stick an extra tenner on short haul flights is that going to solve everything? Of course it isn’t.

I’m not saying that these “plane stupid” guys are…er, well it is a rather unfortunate name. Anyway, I do believe their heart is in the right place and obviously their main aim today was to raise the profile of this issue so I guess they’ve succeeded. In fact, there’s some nice information if you have a look at their site, in particular “10 reasons to ground the plane”.

Although I don’t question their motives, I do question their methods. At the end of the day a stunt like this is going to get the issue on the beeb and clock up a few more hits for their website. In fact, with some well placed ads they could’ve earned a few quid for the cause today….

What today’s action won’t do is the following:

i) It won’t stop the expansion of airports

ii) It won’t stop the air travel being the immediate future of passenger travel.

iii) It won’t convince the public to join the cause.

Most importantly though, it’s not going to save the environment!

I’m sorry guys but this sort of thing is pointless. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that this kind of action doesn’t get results. I honestly think that the “father’s 4 justice campaign” has raised the profile of this issue and in time it will be properly addressed. This type of action doesn’t just work for anything. It’s all about progress. When Emily Davison threw herself in front Anmer it was an act that broke big enough hole in the dyke to ensure that no one could hold back the force of change. Unfortunately, where this issue is concerned, it’s not something that the public are going to warm to in their droves. That is what makes it different from the ending of apartheid or the start of female suffrage.

I agree that we should be making a plan to save the planet what I don't think we should be doing is fooling ourselves! I think recycling is a good idea but just collecting rubbish every second week is a daft way to force people into it, of course rubbish is just going to pile up outside people's houses. Why not provide more recycling facilities, maybe even incentivise recycling with money off shopping? Imagine you took everything to Tesco and they gave you a voucher for money off your shopping, how cool would that be? Where there is stupidity, bring common sense....

As economic, political and practical barriers to travel are broken down I quite honestly increasing the cost of flying is really the answer. If you think for a second that businesses are going to start sending people to Europe by train because of increased flight taxes, you need locked up.

More people are going to need to fly in the future, demand is going to increase; that's a fact that there's no getting around. The problem with regard to flying is that we have to fly more whilst polluting less. The only way we can do that is by driving technology forward to provide a solution. Encouraging that is a whole problem in itself.

The solution to the environment issue is quite clear; it's how to implement it that's the difficult part. For starters there has to be a clear commitment by every government on the planet to reducing emissions, recycling, stopping the destruction of animal habitats. If everyone doesn't sign up, it won't work. That means if China and the USA don't get involved now, there's no hope of doing anything. It's that simple. The way to get these guys together is to bring Europe together and speak to the rest of the world with one voice on this issue. Strong leadership, a single voice and less bureaucracy is quite frankly our only hope.

Poorer nations and individuals within these nations need to be given incentives to not pollute the planet or cut down trees. Telling a poor man with no fuel to cook food that he can’t cut down a tree because it’s illegal is surely ludicrous and ultimately a death warrant for the world we live in.

I know it sounds like a big ask but it’s the only way to go. If we can’t come together as a planet, it’s all over. No sitting on top of Easyjet HQ is going to stop that. Let’s accept the needs of the planet, draw up a plan and ruthlessly enforce it.

UK youths 'among worst in Europe'

They needed to commission a study to find this out???!!! I could've told them for bugger all!!!

The part that i find the funniest is that we've commissioned the study, we've confirmed our worst fears, what are we going to do about it? Bugger all is the answer! I think the main problem is that our current government doesn't have the kind of powers to stop the rot in this country.

I love the term "Ned", it's a Scottish term that was around to describe these individuals long before the word "Chav" came into pop culture. If you need a run down of what a ned is have a look in good old wikipedia.

Now the problem that the government currently faces is that neds make up a very large proportion of the population (in fact a study into just how big a proportion would be an idea!) so the problem is that they either have to:

i) Turn neds away from ned behaviour.
ii) Reduce the number of neds in the country.

Now these are two very different approaches to the problem. The first is a utopian solution that is simply impossible, yet it seems to be the favoured solution of the government. I think we'd have more of a chance of convincing lions of the benefits of vegetarianism than getting this bunch to change their ways. Without getting right into the age-old "nature vs. nurture debate" I do believe that if a Nedism is probably 90% nurture and 10% nature.

The second solution is the practical way to approach the problem. Now, I'm not suggesting that we all grab a gun, jump on a horse and start rounding up neds. What i am saying is that you need a license to have a gun, own a dog, sell drink, drive a car, to travel to other countries. But, any f**cker can have kids? It just doesn't make sense.

I remember being a kid and listening in School as the teachers spoke in disgust of how you required a license in China if you wanted to have a kid. Is this such an outlandish backward idea? I think the main argument against this has always been that it's a violation of our human rights to have children will nilly. Obviously I think that human rights are important, but surely we're letting the lunatics take over the asylum here! I don't see how showing a greater responsibility for the people that we bring into world is somehow infringing on human rights?

I'm sure there will be some who will compare this view to some Nazi vision of a master race but it's just actually common sense. If you're not fit enough to be a parent, then why should you be allowed to be a parent?

One case I've previously read involved a kid who didn't know his father and his mother was a drug addict. He was raised in a series of children's homes and eventually when he was seventeen he went out and stabbed another kid, a student who was just minding his own business. The parents of the child who died have never recovered and the kid who stabbed him was sent down for murder and sent to a psychiatric ward for ten years.

I'm not going to go into great detail on the rehabilitation subject as I'll no doubt tackle it at some other point. What I will categorically say right now is that although society does have a responsibility to all parties concerned, a responsible society would have prevented the situation from arising in the first place. The most practical way of doing this would have been to not allow the junkie and the man with no name to bring a kid into the world and if they did they should have never have been allowed to raise him.

It sounds harsh, it sounds radical but it's a new way and I think it's just plain common sense...

If we did adopt this approach, i'm pretty sure that we could start doing something about binge drinking, anti social behaviour and other such problems. Don't blame the kids, blame the parents.

Britain - A Surveillance Society

OK, big brother is watching you! I must admit though, i'm a bit more worried about a nation that watches big brother...

It does spark a wider debate about monitoring people at work and shopping habits but to tell you the truth I don't see what the big deal is. Surely if you're working hard, it would be nice if your work knew about it? Are the objections all from a bunch of skiving gits who don't do anything at work all day? Who know's, maybe we'd finally find out what half the public sector do all day apart from drink tea, pointless meetings and write pointless documents?

There's no doubt that there are some extremely practical uses for them, after all who could forget seeing Jamie Bulger being led away by his two murders, or the London bombers at Luton station heading for their London targets. To tell you the truth I can't think of any point where they've had a negative effect on my life as yet, so what's the big deal?

I suppose there is a rational fear that if every move is monitored and our biometric data is stored on our passports or identity card, we will just end up pawns of the government and multinational businesses who will be able to control us as they wish. OK, in an Orwellian sense I suppose it is maybe something that we should be aware of but if we're not doing anything wrong, why should we fear such things. After all, I hate to be a kill joy but Winston was breaking the laws of the society that he was part of and that is why he was arrested. It wasn't the telescreen's fault, it was a dodgy government and dodgy laws that let to Winston's downfall.

I think identity cards and CCTV cameras are a good idea. In fact, i'll even go as far as saying there should be a national DNA register that is attached to our birth certificates. This is just common sense and only an idiot, anarchist or criminal would disagree. Imagine the clean up rate in rape cases where the attacker is unidentifed? A quick look in the DNA register and we'd have the culprit, even standard burglary cases that never get solved could see a better clean up rate using this system.

OK, if you're a low radar law breaker and you like the odd joint, or you'd like to go faster in your car, you're never going to like this sort of thing. But overall it just makes sense, what's the point in becoming some sort of Cyborg-Luddite?

Anyway, i'm all for keeping checks on business and government where possible (should i maybe say "if" possible?) but lets not go smashing the telescreens....!

The Male Pill

Now, this is a funny one. I remember that there had been talk of this for a while and to tell you the truth, I quite like the idea. This week scientists have completed “100% effective trials” with no apparent side effects.

I passed a news stand today and noticed the headline “Would you trust your man to take the pill?”. Now I see what the headline is getting at, we’re not exactly the best at this sort of thing. Come to think of it, I don’t think I’ve ever finished a course of antibiotics in my life? Having said that, my girlfriend can probably be a bit forgetful as well, we all can! You only have to walk down any inner city street to see that she’s not the only one who’s been forgetting…

I guess that women are going to have to be a bit weary of drunken blokes saying “trust me, I’m on the pill” but at the end of the day whether the reason is trying not to catch some genital endangering disease or getting pregnant, contraception is a pretty selfish thing. I would take a male pill or wear a prophylactic (I love that word!) mainly because I don’t want to have kids or my dick drop off and believe it or not ladies I have a lot of friends who also don’t want any unexpected kids or their dicks unexpectedly (or expectedly for that matter…) falling off so they act responsibly.

I think the final reason that it’ll be a good idea is because if it has fewer side effects than the female version then surely us guys should be taking it. Anyway I’m sure we’ll see in time what happens but I reckon even for some selfish reasons it’ll end up pretty popular.

Free Speech on the Net / Web (whatever you want to call it...!)

I've just caught a story on the beeb regarding freedom of speech on the netweb (couldn't decide what to stick to...). Have a gander at it here, it's worth a look. The rough gist of the story is that amnesty international want bloggers to publicise plight of bloggers who basically get banged up in prison for writing their online journals.

It's pretty thought provoking to read this guy's story on his own blog, the poor bastard's probably getting his finger nails pulled out as we speak. It's worth having an online drift through this to some of the other links mentioned. This is quite a disturbing one that some of you might remember about a 16 yr old girl in Iran who was executed by some sadistic islamic nut (who happened to be a rather ordinary , the guy even kindly put on the noose himself, how nice of him....

Must admit that if I had my way, I'd line all these bastards up and shoot them. You might start thinking "wouldn't that make you as bad as them"? It's a tricky one that always prevents us from doing anything to help. Debating morals rather than taking action. Even when we do take action, it's often the wrong action and as we all know it's for all the wrong reasons. However, there's no doubt that our lack of action will result in our downfall eventually. Well, that and the fact that the thinkers are tending not to have 10 kids a pop.

I take my hat off to the beeb though, they're quite happy to publicise a blog that slags them off on the first page (specifically targeting Radio 4 for pro Islamic republic article). Good stuff beeb!

Anyway, i've noticed that the UN have decided to set up a conference to discuss the future of the webnet. I'm sure they'll decide on something this side of the next ice age.

It's certainly interesting to look at different perspectives on the internet. It seems that the Chinese quite simply see it as another channel of communication that should be controlled, simple as that. Policy towards the use of the internet for free speech has been exactly the same as the approch to TV and press, i.e. there shouldn't be any! It certainly brings a reality check to those who thought the internet was free entity with no geolocation. Unfortunately in China, the internet is chinese and is owned by the state. Whether this is a good thing or not doesn't really matter, it's reality at work.