Peter Leeson - Things and Whatsits

Thoughts about Religion

2012-01-02T17:20:00.002Z

Maybe it is because of Christmas, but I have had a few discussions on religion lately and the good/bad influence that they may have in the world. Mainly, because of the culture in which I live, the good or bad influence of Christians.
First of all, I believe that religion is the belief that you have the ultimate answer, whatever the question. I do not restrict religion to Christianity, Islam, Sikhism and others - as far as I am concerned atheism and science can be religions, just like the others. Their followers can be just as intolerant and self-satisfied, believing they have the truth and all others are idiots.
Probably the major problem with religion - any religion - is that it is taken over by humans as the unquestionable justification of all their baser instincts, desires and hatreds. Religion is not the cause for wars, but is frequently used as the justification by people who want to go to war but have not good reason. Most of these events attributed to religion, would have occurred even without religion: Mao Zedong, Staline, Kim Il-sung, Pol Pot, Hitler did not need religion to justify their hatred (and that is restricted to the 20th century).

The focus of religion has always been to bring peace and a sense of community to groups. But nearly every religion in the world has sooner or later been taken over by someone who wanted to use it for personal gain - I say "nearly" because I am sure there must be one somewhere which remained true to the original message, but I do not know it. Generally, the religions have all pushed education and forgiveness. The Hebrew texts are largely based on the concept of studying and understanding history, not forgetting what happened so that you do not repeat the same mistakes. Muslims lead the world in the study of mathematics throughout the European dark ages. Most of the schools and hospitals in the Western world until the end of the 19th century were founded by Christians. Confucius encouraged learning. The Buddha's philosophy is largely based on introspection and self-study.

Because of my education and environment, I need to focus on the Christian faith. It seems to me that in the times of Jesus, religion had fallen into the hands of the few, who were eager to promote themselves and condemn others. When he came, he came to explain the basic concept of forgiveness. His teaching was about the fact that there is nothing you can do which would earn you the favours of any God. He also taught that you are no better than the people you condemn and you need to judge yourself with the same rigour as you judge others, not seeking to condemn until you know that you are sin-free yourself. He did not promise "pie in the sky", he did not encourage the building of cathedrals or the selling of pardons. He humiliated himself and taught his followers how to be humble.

Then, the powers that be (in this case the Roman emperor) decided to take control of this new faith, and a new religion was born. A religion of the powerful, a religion that justified genocide, a religion that included well-paid bishops, expensive buildings, private collections of art. This was a religion that forgot about the poor and the needy, a religion that sought to replace Jesus' command for forgiveness with one that explained that all those who were not baptised, had not mumbled the "magic prayer" were not forgiven. Those who had joined the club were "saved"; they could feast, they could mock the poor, they could steal the money because nothing could take their salvation away from them. This is the religion that justifies all excesses.

The prophet Mohamed tried to counter-balance these excesses by reminding people that they still had duties and not just rights and that the lives of the Christians condemned them, just as the lives of the Pharisees had led to Jesus' condemnation before. Unfortunately he, like Jesus, trusted his followers to remember what he had tried to do, but they too wrote down texts which could misinterpreted to give power to the few, to justify the massacre of the non-believers, the oppression of the poor and the condemnation of all those who were not among the selected few.

As always, religion stole the faith of the prophets, and was used to keep in ignorance, condemn the many and enrich the few. Over the years, the teachings of Jesus have been removed; every day, there are Christian reciting one of the "Creeds" - those short texts that bring Jesus' life down to birth and death and ignore everything he said about the poor, the wealthy, the sinners, the religious elite, leadership and servanthood, pride and humility... Man-made rituals have replaced the life that he wanted us to have, a full life, a life of love, of forgiveness, outreach and support here and now, for the kingdom of God is within us, it is in our hands, waiting to be given.

Solving the world's problems

2011-10-27T09:16:00.000+01:00

The European Union - or at least the "Euro-zone" - has come up with a solution to the financial crisis.
Just for memory, the crisis started a few years back because of excessive borrowing, people could not pay back their debts, so the banks, who had pushed borrowing beyond what people could afford were rewarded with a large influx of tax-payers' money.
As people realised that they could no longer afford their debts, they stopped buying and industry slowed down. Many governments decided to correct this by offering money to people who scrapped their cars and bought new ones. This encouraged people to get rid of a car which was still working and take out a new loan and buy immediately instead of putting off their purchase for another couple of years. The old car was required to be scrapped, to increase the great pile of litter with which we are covering our little planet. Of course, the people who bought their cars under this scheme will not purchase the one they wanted a couple of years later, but that is OK, because the crisis, if not solved, had been pushed back to beyond the next elections; it is now some other politician's problem and we can blame them.
Another approach is "quantitative easing", which means that the governments printed more money, with no value or standard to back up the currency, and gave this money to the banks who had already received tax-payers' money. Printing money worked so well to boost the economies in the past (see the Weimar Republic and Zimbabwe) that it would surely do the job here and now.
Some countries continued to suffer, such as Greece, whose main economy is tourism and people do not travel a lot during a financial crisis. Normally, when a country finds itself indebted to that extent, they change interest rates and devalue their currency; however, Greece and the others were not allowed to do this because the value of their currency and their interest rates are set by Germany and France, who were doing very well, thank you. Realising that some countries within the Euro-zone were verging on bankruptcy, the governments got together to work towards a viable solution. This includes

writing off 50% of the debts,
creating a large reserve of money to pay off other countries' debts in the future,
giving more tax-payers money to the banks to encourage them to continue to lend money to people who cannot afford to borrow.

As I understand it, these clever people who run the countries and make decisions on our behalf have performed a thorough and comprehensive root cause analysis, understood the underlying causes of the current problems, and then done everything in their power to reinforce those causes.
Next international economic crisis scheduled for end of 2012.

The environmental questions

2011-09-28T11:23:00.000+01:00

I am a strong believer that we need to be careful with our environment and stop wasting fossil fuels wherever/whenever possible. I do my share of recycling and try to be careful how I use resources. In fact, I went as far as getting myself a Toyota Prius a while back and enquired into installing a wind turbine on the house (I gave up on the latter, defeated by endless miles of red-tape).
However, I do believe we (including all of the above) have not been thinking this through correctly.
Electric batteries for cars and solar panels are intensive users, completely dependent on what is known as "rare earths"; similar rare earths are needed for critical computer components (such as microchips) and "environmentally friendly", low-power light bulbs, LCD screens. And rare earths are running out fast - that is why they are called rare. Some estimates state that a few of these, such as indium and platinum, will run out in 10-15 years. The price for a kilo of indium went from $60 in 2003 to $1000 in 2006.
Each Prius battery contains some 20 to 30 pounds of lanthanum, this will increase as they continue to seek to be more efficient.
Recently a Chinese fishing trawler was stopped by Japanese coast guards in waters which have been disputed since the first world war (legally owned by Japan, claimed by China). As a result, China decided to impose an embargo on rare earths - and they supply 93% of the world's resources!
The dream of electric cars and hydrogen powered cars ignores the problem of both manufacturing and the extensive amount of CO2 produced by the mining and refinery industries required for the rare earths, they also ignore the fact that the electricity is produced by coal-fired generators. Hydrogen needs to be separated and bottled in order to create the reservoirs for the cars, this is done by consuming large amounts of energy, produced through coal-powered generators...
In fact, over the past years, all we have managed to do is push the blame for pollution to someone else. I drive an emission-free car, therefore I am a good person - I don't care about the much higher levels of emissions generated by the manufacturer in another country. Just like we would rather blame the airline industry for the amount of pollution they generate, but completely ignore the much higher levels being generated by the building and concrete-based industries.
So, what's the conclusion? I don't know. I do believe we need to rethink it, in the mean time, why not just reduce the amount of energy you use?

The enemy in the mirror

2011-09-12T10:30:00.000+01:00

Original	English
Il y a dans ma maison quelqu’un dont je me méfie, qui me défie, qui s’assied à ma place, qui me ressemble comme un frère, qui respire mon air.	There is someone in my house someone whom I do not trust, who challenges me, who sits in my chair who looks like me - as a brother, who breathes my air.
L’ennemi dans la glace, dont le regard me glace, oui, mais je le connais bien. L’ennemi dans la glace, dont le regard me glace, ne me veut pas de bien.	The ennemy in the mirror, whose look chills me, but I know him well. The ennemy in the mirror, whose look chills me, does not wish me well.
Il y a chez moi un hôte indésirable, insaisissable, qui vit sous mon toit qui dort dans mon lit qui jamais ne m’oublie.	There is in my home an unwanted host, uncatchable, who lives under my roof who sleeps in my bed who never forgets me.
L’ennemi dans la glace, dont le regard me glace, souris, mais je le connais : L’ennemi dans la glace, dont le regard me glace, il ne me laissera pas en paix.	The enemy in the mirror, whose look chils me, smiles,but I know him well: the enemy in the mirror, whose look chills me, will not leave me in peace.
Dehors, je croise des étrangers, des ombres qui marchent dans le noir ; ce n’est pas d’eux que vient le danger mais je reconnais, chaque soir, mon pire ennemi dans ce miroir.	Outside, I meet strangers, shadows walking in the dark. It's not them who bring danger, but every night, I recognize my worst ennemy in this mirror.
Je me souviens de l’homme que j’étais mais un traître l’a fait disparaître. Et moi, qui je suis, chasseur ou chassé ? Qu’est ce qui s’est passé ?	I remember the many I used to be but a traitor made him disappear. Who am I? Hunter or hunted? What happened?
L’ennemi dans la glace, dont le regard me glace, oui, mais je le connais bien : L’ennemi dans la glace, dont le regard me glace, ne me veut pas de bien.	The enemy in the mirror, whose look chils me, smiles, but I know him well: the ennemy in the mirror does not wish me well.
Dehors, je croise des étrangers, des ombres qui marchent dans le noir. Ce n’est pas d’eux que vient le danger, mais je reconnais, chaque soir, mon pire ennemi dans ce miroir.	Outside, I meet strangers, shadows walking in the dark. It's not them who bring the danger, but I recognize, every night my worst ennemy in this mirror.

2011-08-16T11:42:00.000+01:00

Don't believe everything you see:

Atheism is a religion

2011-04-04T09:17:00.000+01:00

Atheists tend to discount religions because religious people cannot prove the existence of God; yet they cannot prove the non-existence of a god either. Therefore, atheists express a firm faith in something they cannot prove, just like any other religion. Add to that the fact that we have militant "evangelical" atheists such as Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens and Polly Toynbee (president of the British Humanist Society) who seek to oppose any form of faith with profound hatred and few arguments, other than their own circular arguments - similar to the Christian proof that "the Bible is God's word, because the Bible says it is".
Unfortunately, they do not seem to be really promoting anything positive, with the exception of liberating humankind of the weight of religion. What a shame that they continue to claim that religion is the foundation of most wars and destruction, rather than acknowledging Stalin, Mao ZeDong, Pol Pot, Hitler, Napoleon and the other atheists who provoked more deaths than any religious person. What a shame that there is not a vast majority of atheists who reject these extremist views, in the same manner that most Muslims reject the teachings of the Taliban and Al Qaeda, the way that most Christians reject the teachings of the (mainly US) right-wing fundamentalists...

On sin...

2011-03-28T10:52:00.001+01:00

I recently had the opportunity of participating in a discussion on sin. Not a fashionable term, in most contexts. Even most religions try to avoid the subject now. It made me think what is my definition of sin in today's world. Being of a Christian upbringing, the Christian language tends to influence my understanding; in particular two sentences from the Christian Bible:

Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind: this is the first and the greatest commandment; and the second is like it: love your neighbour as yourself. All the law and the prophets hang on these two commandments. (Matthew 22.36-40)
There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, for all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. (Romans 3:22-23).

Added to this, I truly believe that the "Kingdom of God" is for here and now; it is not a promise of "pie in the sky when you die", but something we are expected to live today.
So, I translate the love of the Lord your God, as a commandment to seek to make the world he created into a better place, ensure that our children, our grand-children's world is a better place than the one into which I was born. The love of your neighbour fits into that concept very nicely.
Sinning is a parallel to "falling short of the glory of God", meaning that none of us are able to really do what we could, what we should to make the world a better place. And that is where the concept of sin comes into my mind. Sin is not doing what you could to improve the world for your neighbours and for future generations. Sinning is not living up to your potential, not doing what you could have done, and doing what you should not have done. We sin when we pollute, we sin when we do not write a letter or visit an ill person, we sin when we put our own desires before the needs of others. We sin when we do not stand up to our government and our religious groups when they seek to oppress others in one way or another.
I do not believe that sinners go to hell (especially if all have sinned), however I do believe that sinners make this world hell for themselves and/or others...

Voting methods vs democracy

2011-03-11T08:56:00.001Z

So many wish to change the voting system in the United Kingdom. The political parties, mainly the Liberal Democrats, are trying to figure out which way would suit their own needs best.
The current system is simple: you vote for your local representative in Parliament and the one with the most votes gets the post. You know who is your MP and you can follow the votes, activities, etc - and on a regular basis, they come back to speak to their local constituents (most of them weekly).
One option which has been considered is "proportional representation", meaning that, after the elections, the parties decide among themselves who has won the elections. We would no longer have a local MP, but we would have someone representing their party in Parliament. There is no longer someone representing the local area in Parliament, but a group of people representing much larger areas, with no particular local representation. This case option, in which everyone loses except the larger political parties, was so flawed that it was rejected. The probable result would have been a situation such as that in Belgium who, with 30 different political parties, has been without a government for the best part of a year, as they cannot decide who won the last elections.
The option that is being considered is "AV" (alternate vote) system. This is the system which will most benefit the smaller parties, and probably bring the Liberal Democrats to the forefront. The idea is that you vote for your preferred candidate, then your second choice, and so on. Once the votes have been counted, if no one has over 50% of the votes, the second choices are counted, until someone gets past the 50% mark. Now, a great many people in this country fall into one of two camps: "Labour, or anything except Conservative" and "Conservative, or anything except Labour". As such, they will place their second option on a third party or independent candidate. The consequence is that there is a strong probability that the third party will end up elected, with the smallest number of first choices, but the highest number of alternate votes. Having a government run by the people with the least number of votes is not a democracy.
The other option, used in France, is to have two elections: after a first election, all candidates except the two with the largest number of votes step down and a second election is run between the two leaders. This would lead to one candidate having more than 50% of the valid votes (except in extremely unlikely circumstances where exactly the same number of people vote for each, but that's very unlikely). This would be the most democratic approach, but it would mean that the party in government would feel that it has a true mandate and create stronger large parties - as none of the parties want the others to be identified as strong and have unquestioned legitimacy, this approach is not being considered.
With the exception of the French two-election approach, I believe that the current method, in which I can elect the person who will represent me in Parliament to be the most democratic and fair. I am not voting for a political party, I have certainly never voted for the leader of a political party. I have always tried to meet the candidates and decide who is the individual I believe most appropriate to represent me in Parliament.

LGBT History Month and the extradition of a lesbian to Uganda

2011-02-09T09:29:00.004Z

LGBT History Month kicks off with a court-case (see Guardian article).

Brenda Namigadde is being tried to be deported to Uganda. As she is (said to be) lesbian, she is in serious danger. The Uganda government holds inflamatory language and turns a blind eye to the killing of gay and lesbian people. This case has been heard in Britain by a judge who needs to decide whether Brenda is an illegal immigrant in this country or a political refugee, however this would require her "proving" that she is lesbian. If she can make this claim, then anyone can make any claim and expect the UK to provide automatic asylum to anyone who asks for it. The question that remains is related to the difference between a claim with insufficient evidence and a false claim - two very different things.

Unfortunately, coincidentally, this court case is happening at the beginning of LGBT history month, during holocaust memorial week and the week after the brutal murder of David Kato, a gay rights activist in Uganda.

For more information on the situation in Uganda, you can turn to blogs such as "http://gayuganda.blogspot.com/" or many posts on "http://changingattitude-england.blogspot.com/" - you can probably read more information on the websites of several US based "Christian" organizations that are sponsoring and promoting this intolerance in Africa.

While I understand the problem of being required to prove your legal claims in an extradition case, I do feel that the situation in Uganda is such that Brenda, being an identified and "confessed" lesbian is in the same amount of danger as anyone who might be in a public, demonstrative relationship or a regular attendee of lesbian bars and nightclubs. If she is sent back home, we can expect her to be in serious danger of rape and murder.

Let us hope that the British government does no allow LGBT history month 2011 to be marked by another murder. I am glad to say that "my" MP is backing Brenda's defence and appealing directly to the minister.

We're all made of glue

2011-01-21T10:28:00.000Z

I just read a wonderful book called We Are All Made of Glue. Third book by Marina Lewycka which I have enjoyed (the two previous ones being A Short History of Tractors in Ukrainian

and Two Caravans). Like the other two, the book is funny, tragic and educational all at the same time. Here it is dealing with poverty, estate agents, divorce, Armageddon, the British care system and the tragedies of Israel and Palestine (and glue). Highly recommended.

To Bob Diamond, chief executive of Barclay's bank

2011-01-17T08:38:00.001Z

Dear (very dear) Mr Diamond.
Before I leave, I wanted to tell you that I perfectly understand that when you get the opportunity to pocket several million pounds you cannot pass by the offer. I also understand why that you use that tired excuse of saying you need to pay your people, otherwise they will go work for banks in other countries. Interestingly, while you are saying that your best people will move to Switzerland if you cannot give them millions, the Swiss bankers are busy telling their government that if they cannot give similar bonuses, the best bankers will move to London - empty threats all around.
Anyway, what I wanted to say is that, even though I understand your motivation and your greed, particularly in this period of financial hardship (you never know if you will lose your jobs, like all the people to whom Barclay's has refused small business loans), I do not need to support or encourage it. That is the reason why I am closing my account at Barclay's, cancelling my Barclaycard and moving my money to the Co-operative Bank. I will also encourage as many people as possible to do the same.
Farewell Mr Diamond - I hope you enjoy your money.

Student Loans

2010-12-10T21:38:00.001Z

The argument goes on regarding the funding of students, largely I find the reactions are based on knee-jerk reactions and gut feelings.

The problem is related to the British national debt, which, as we can see in the graph hereunder is unsustainable.

The interest payment on the debt is getting close to £70 billion, making it the fourth largest department of the government (after social security, health and education). The interest on the current debt is a burden we have placed on the next two generations, at least. As the population continues to age, the debt will get worse.

The government needs to do something in order to reverse the situation and the choices are limited: either increase taxes or reduce expenditure. Increasing taxes is not an option because there comes a time when increased tax rates provokes a reduction in taxes collected as those who pay the higher rates move their assets to less expensive countries, frequently bringing jobs with them – just like Cadbury-Schweppes’s move to Poland in order to save £300 million, at the cost of 700 UK jobs.

So, we need to reduce expenditure. Reducing expenditure means cutting something somewhere. Obviously the focus should be on the most expensive departments, which are: social security, health, education and defence.

Following the defence cuts, BAE Systems has announced that they will be cutting 1700 jobs and a number of expensive programmes have been cancelled; the government has even signed an agreement to share assets with the French.

What should we cut next? Close hospitals? Reduce care for the elderly? Stop maintaining the transport infrastructure, which is already in a pretty dire condition? Close down primary or secondary schools?

The proposal which has angered so many young people these last few weeks involves the following steps:

1. Raising the maximum fee a university can charge from £3000 to £6000, and, under exceptional and justified circumstances, to £9000 per year. In exchange of which, universities are required to increase the number of bursaries they give out to those who cannot afford it.

2. Raising the minimum salary at which graduates will start repaying their debt from £15000 to £21000 – if you earn less than £21000, you never need to repay a penny.

3. Establishing an automatic repayment system equivalent to 9% of the income earned above the £21000 mark, so, if you earn £22k, you will only pay back 9% of £1000 or £90 per year towards your debt.

4. Guaranteeing a low interest rate on the loan, including the fact that the interest rate is tapered so that people earning £21k will pay 0% interest, while those at the higher-end of the range (£40k+) will pay 3% (+ increase in the cost of living).

In other words, the government is placing on the people who have benefitted financially of higher education a tax on that education. If they do not get a better income following their studies (e.g. nurses who are still notoriously under-valued), their education will not have to be refunded.

I do not understand why students believe that their studies should be funded by the tax payer, including all those people who have not had studies and who would have to pay taxes towards the well-being of others – as I read somewhere: the dinner-lady should not have to pay towards the accountant’s expensive studies.

And so, I maintain that, in times of economic hardship, when so many are struggling, this is a very fair approach. If you can find a fairer way of paying for studies, I am sure the government would be happy to hear it. We would all like something for free, unfortunately it seems that has gone out with the twentieth century.

Irish "bail-out"

2010-11-23T22:24:00.000Z

First, I know it is not a bail-out, the British government is lending money to Ireland, if it was a bail-out, the British would be paying off the Irish debts, which is not the case.
Apparently, there is a need to support Ireland at this point in time, because, after years of profiting more than most from the European Union, they are now all but bankrupt and cannot pay their debts. There is a fear that, because of the levels of investment under threat, there is concern that this might provoke a bank crisis similar to that of 2008.
The banking crisis, which led to a global recession, was caused by the banks lending money to people who were unable to refund the amonts borrowed. Now, when the Irish cannot refund the money they have already borrowed, the answer appears to be to lend them more.
Maybe I am missing some critical point here, but it does look like the British government (which is already more than strapped for cash) is lending money to a country which they already know is unable to refund. Isn't this precisely the same short-term, money-grabbing attitude that got us into his trouble?
The British government defends its actions because it is an interest paying loan. I guess the bankers loaning money to the "sub-prime" market could have claimed the same thing!

Accepting history

2010-10-15T12:06:00.003+01:00

A recent news item announces an exhibition in Germany about Hitler and the people (see BBC article). It is still illegal in Germany to have representations of either swastikas or Hitler outside a "scientific environment".

For a long time, I have been telling people that you cannot become a leader if you are not willing to accept and acknowledge your mistakes; only then, can you learn from them. The censorship of Germany's past does not appear to me to be a healthy attitude. While I understand the motives, I have my doubts. The next fascist militaristic dictatorship is unlikely to be German, Italian or Japanese. They have done that, previously we had similar attitudes by Napoleonic France and others. We need to accept and learn from our past, and I believe the Germans need to accept their past - as hard as it may be - in order to help them recognize the same situation when it occurs elsewhere. But then, I also think the French need to learn that Napoleon was not a hero and that there were more French collaborators, fighting with Germany, then members of the Resistance. Also the British need to learn about the way they ruled the British Empire and the Israeli need to learn about the way they treat the Palestinian people.

Politics, politcs, politics

2010-10-09T11:51:00.000+01:00

Yesterday, the new leader of the Labour party in Great Britain announced his "shadow cabinet". As a result, a number of politicians were interviewed on the radio and went out of their way to demonstrate what is wrong with this system.
A surprise nomination: the number two position, chancellor of the exchequer (=finance minister), was not given to the most likely candidate, but to someone who admits to know nothing about finance or economics. One commentator mentioned that this was likely to be because the new leader was worried about having someone who was so intelletually superior to him so close!
The interviews of the various Labour representatives were astounding. They all backed their leader, saying that these were the right choices. They frequently said that the goal was to get the party elected (I thought they wanted to do what was best for the country, but they admit they only want what is best for the party). When asked about policies, one senior member stated that the opposition's role is not to have policies, but to criticize the government's policies. Someone who was in government under Tony Blair, and supported him to the hilt, said that Blair was wrong and the new guy is right and she supports him.
The sound of obsequious self-serving turning coats was deafening.
I have not included any names in this, because that is not the point. The same would probably have been true with any political party, in any country.

Goodbye Las Vegas

2010-10-08T03:13:00.001+01:00

I am sitting at the airport, leaving Las Vegas. I have been here for 5 days, for work. I do not like this town. My apologies to the person who told me how much she loved Vegas before I left (you know who you are), but it really does not do it for me.

Venezia

The town is centred on the "Strip", where the most extraordinarybuildings and reproductions of European landmarks have been built completey with the money of losers who came to pursue the dream of instant wealt with no work. Inside the buildings we have the casinos; there are a few games which require minimal skill rather than just luck (baccarat, poker...), but mostly they are just one-armed bandits - not even, as the "arm" has largely been replaced by buttons so as no to tire the players to much.

Indoors

On the street, there are groups of people every few steps handing out cards to all who pass (at least all the men) advertising "sexy girls" in your hotel room in twenty miutes. I have, for a long time, believed that the principle of gambling is to take the money from the poor and gullible and give it to the wealthy and crooked.

Other things that bothered me were typical US problems that annoy me every time: the shops never give you the price of the products, when the time comes to pay, you suddenly are charged extra for taxes. Somehow shops in the US believe that when they give us a price, we actually want to know what they are receiving rather than how much we need to pay. When purchasing a service rather than a product, you are then told that the person providing the service (the waiter, the taxi driver...) are not actually paid minimum wage and you have to give them a tip.

When walking the back streets, away from the centre, I got to see where the people who work in the casinos live. These are small appartments, with bars on the windows. The green of the golf courses and the flowing water fountains are all gone here: we have the reality of Nevada: sand and cacti and desert bushes, children toys left lying outside (nearly never rains). These are the people who make Vegas work, the ones who are paid minimum wage, the ones who get fired as soon as there is a downturn (one of the highest unemployment levels in the US) - 3000 people lost their job in just one hotel last year, because fewer people could afford to lose their money during the recession.

On my last day, I went to visit the the "Nuclear Testing Museum". This is a museum showing the funds and effort that went into building the atomic and other bombs (which were largely tested in the Nevada desert outside Las Vegas). Again, I kept on thinking that if half the amount spent had been used to help provide basic necessities to the poorest people of the world, we would not need to have these; but the principle explained was that they continually needed more bombs because the Communists had them, they also pointed out that the Commies had stolen the plans from the US to build their bombs. Apparently no contradiction in the concepts that the Americans needed bigger bombs because the Russians had them, copied from the ones the Americans had! The museum of nuclear testing includes a section on the WTC and 9/11. No, this has nothing to do with nuclear testing (other than maybe that the root cause was the continuous blood-thirst and aggressivity of the US governments), I guess it was just included to show that, even though the "cold war" is over, we still need to continue to build more and bigger and more destructive bombs - just in case someone as those elusive WMD - at least one of the bad guys.

Homosexuality in Africa

2010-10-05T15:10:00.000+01:00

A recent book is a timely reminder of the pre-colonial homosexuality in Africa. Recently, there is a strong push in Africa to claim that homosexuality is a "Western" import (in quotes, because colonialism often came from the North, not the West). In fact, it is homophobia that is a colonial import.
The original article can be found at: "Afrique: Quand l'homosexualité était rituelle"; the English (Google) translation can be found at: Google Translation.

The dying throws of capitalism?

2010-10-03T18:57:00.001+01:00

I am in Las Vegas, Mecca of the capitalist society, for the #CMMIWorkshop and wanted to capture some first reactions to being back in the USA.
Service here is largely provided by people who are not paid correctly to perform their work. As a consequence, they are desperate for tips or gratuities. This does not make them efficient or friendly, but encourages them to plaster false smiles and cheerful, meaningless banter, asking questions without listening to answers ("how are you today?" being the most common).
Television programmes - and this includes some of the best programmes in the world, exported successfully to most countriies - are seen as largely interruptions in the continuous flow of commercials. Just so that you don't miss out on the difference between the commercials and the programme, they turn down the volume for the programmes, then turn it up again for the commercials.
Products are made to minimal standards, ensuring that the revenue can be translated into profit as rapidly as possible. So the orange juice you are served is significantly more watery than what comes out of oranges, the coffee tastes like cr*p.
As you cannot live without air-conditioning, my hotel room has a large AC unit in it. This is not the type that you would find in other countries, where the unit is a common unit, with a thermostat in each room, ensuring efficiency over energy consumption, this is a a large unit placed under the window, with a loud fan that runs all night. And this is not because the hotel is in an old building, where the unit was added later: the hotel was built from scratch and opened 8 months ago.
Wherever you go, the scenery is completely dominated by advertising. Billboards, neon lights, flashing, gaudy - the advertising slogans are tedious and rarely memorable. They show no creativity, humour or inventiveness, just cheap.
I have just walked down the "Strip", the main avenue in Las Vegas, where all the best-known casinos are found. They are nearly all focusing on historical European aspects (Caesar, Venice, Monte Carlo, Paris, Riviera...), plenty of shops and stores called "shoppe" (which is classified by the OED as "pseudo-arch", meaning this has no origin in the English language). Nearly all the establishments have signs outside stating they were "voted best..." best odds, best breakfast, best show, best value, best iality). Of course, it does not say who voted, other than the establishment's management team. But then, this is the country of exageration: my room is on the third floor, which is called the fourth floor, they use the word "billion" to mean only a thousand million; the television screen in my room is about a metre across, even though the picture, enlarged to fill the screen, is pixelating.
This whole town is aimed at encouraging the gullible and the needy to give their money to the wealthy and corrupt in exchange of dreams and debts. I was particularly disappointed to see one of the casinos advertising Marie and Donny's show: two nice, clean-cut, upright, evangelical Mormons encouraging gambling and promiscuity.
It's a shame, this is a country that had a lot going for it...

World Habitat Day

2010-10-03T04:43:00.000+01:00

The United Nations has designated the first Monday in October as annual World Habitat Day to raise awareness of the need fo improved shelter worldwide.
Every week, more than a million people are born in, or move to, cities in the developing world. As a result, the urban population of developing countries will double from 2 billion to 4 billion in the next 30 years. (Kissick, et al: 2006)
By the year 2030, an additional 3 billion people, about 40 percent of the world’s population, will need access to housing. This translates into a demand for 96,150 new affordable units every day and 4,000 every hour. (UN-HABITAT: 2005).
Habitat for humanity is seeking support for this - you can find more information at http://worldhabitatdaynews.org/.

Trade Unions and Recession

2010-09-13T17:24:00.000+01:00

Over the past few years, excessive government spending and the lack of control of big finance has facilitated the creation of a massive recession within the UK. Now that the coffers are empty, that the level of debt is unprecedented and unsustainable, the new government faces the need of serious cutting in spending and working at increasing revenue in order to avoid bankruptcy. Indeed, just like every family in the country has had to cut their spending and work harder, the government needs to do the same thing.
The trade unions have voted today that this is nonsense. The logic appears to be that in order to reduce the level of debt, the government needs to spend more. The fact that there is no more money available should not stop the government from spending increasing amounts... I am not sure that I understand the logic, but, if I push this logic to its natural conclusion, I would have to believe that the workers who may lose their job because of the cuts, should spend more money as well.
This does not make sense. I know that it is a good time to blame the Conservative government for the cuts, but the cuts the three main parties were considering before the election varied very little from one party to the other. When there is no money, we need to stop spending. That is not difficult to understand. Of course, we may discuss where to save money but we all need to do something to try to resolve the issue in which we are. And, yes, it will be painful for all concerned. It would be nice if the banks, who recently proudly announced their ridiculous profits, were to participate in helping out. Other places we could save money is by cancelling the black hole of the Olympic games, the renewal of Trident and other areas. We could also stop the pressure to get everyone into universities, we could focus the NHS budget on preventative care instead of curative...
But one thing is certain: strikes and putting small companies into bankruptcy will help no one and create more unemployment!

Beware of technology

2010-08-15T13:50:00.001+01:00

When I saw this tweet (on twitterdeck) from Stephen Fry, I felt I needed to go to the Twitter page to find out what the *** he was talking about. On the Twitter page, it comes out a little better. I guess that's the problem with trusting in technology and not thinking that people are using different tools. Also, maybe that's the problem with trying to be too smart (please note nearly 1.7 million people follow Mr Fry and read this...

OK, this is what it was (nearly) supposed to look like - I wasn't going to include this originally, but I am a nice guy...

Luton - striving to be the most unfriendly airport in the UK

2010-08-11T07:13:00.000+01:00

London Luton airport appears to believe that there is a prize worth the effort for being the most unfriendly airport. For some time now, they have placed the expensive parking in a pot-holed unkept area a 15 minute walk from the terminal building. But now they have implemented a number of new penalties for their customers.
It will cost you £1.00 to drop off a passenger. This does not mean you can close to the building, the drop-off area is in the short-term car park, and requires you to queue to take a ticket and to pay, while the passenger still gets the 15 minute walk to the building, in rain or shine. The result of this is that most people appear to try to drop off passengers on the street, meaning that there are traffic jams making the last half mile approach take between 30 and 60 minutes.
There are escalators to reach the upstairs security control, but you need to pay a supplement of £3.00 to use them instead of the stairs.
I was required to pay a supplement of £26.00 because my bag was 2kg overweight (after I had already paid for the privilege of checking in a bag).
You are only allowed a single carry on-bag (other British airports did this for a while but stopped some time ago). This means that if you have a carry-on bag, you may not have a handbag, camera bag or laptop separately. They do specifically say that you are allowed, in addition to your carry-on bag either a telephone or a coat.
At security control, not only do laptops and liquids have to be checked separately, but they require phones and keys to be x-rayed separately as well.
Obviously parking and food at the airport is exorbitantly priced, but that is standard in all airports. I have yet to see a single person here (staff or passenger) smile or even just not look angry, bored or fed up.

Derry - Bloody Sunday

2010-06-16T09:06:00.000+01:00

Twelve years of enquiry have come to an end. The British government has apologized for the unjustified and unjustifiable murder of a dozen people as the army over-reacted to the pressure and fear.
I look forward to the return game now as the leaders of the IRA, currently in government acknowledge and apologize for the hundreds of unjustified and unjustifiable civilians they murdered in cold-blood.

Cloud computing vs fair usage

2010-05-31T09:21:00.002+01:00

I followed the recommendations of the specialists and have moved to cloud computing: I have moved my work files to "DropBox" and my backups to "Carbonite" and I am in the process of moving my accounting to "ClearBooks". The result is that I feel comfortable that my backups and files are readily available, if my computer goes down, I can bring a back up to date fairly quickly.
Now I have received an e-mail from "British Telecom" telling me that I am using the internet too much and, even though I have an unlimited, unrestricted contract, they have decided to limit the speed of my access, making it more difficult to access any of these. This is based on the "fair usage" clause that they include in their contracts which basically says that they reserve the right to limit your access on your unlimited broadband contract if and when they feel like it.
BT, working hard to keep British economy in the past century?

Sugar

2010-05-14T13:06:00.000+01:00

I watched the new "Apprentice", in which Alan Sugar has changed from bullying obnoxious 20/30 year-olds to school children. In this rip-off of the US show, Sugar, who now is no longer to be called "Sir Alan" but insists on "Lord Sugar" teaches school boys that the purpose of life is to make money. In order to do that, you should cheat, have no scruples, ignore other people's feelings and blame whoever you can for anything that goes wrong. As long as you can get your hands on other people's money, you're OK.
Lord Sugar became a Lord because he supported the Labour government and party. How do the apparent representatives of the worker, until recently known as socialists, justify working with this representative of everything that is wrong with self-centred, egotistical capitalism? Also, how does the BBC justify running this programme encouraging young people to be selfish and focused only on money?

PR Vs Democracy

2010-05-11T11:02:00.000+01:00

I am going to go against the popular understanding at this point and stress why "Proportional Representation" is un-democratic. For anyone who is not up to date on the sorry state of British politics, a quick word of explanation - if you know this, jump down to the next paragraph. In the recent elections, no one won, the three largest parties all got around 30% of the vote with the Conservatives slightly more than the others and the Liberal Democrats slightly less. They are all now trying to form a government by claiming to agree. The Conservatives who have ignored or mocked the Liberal-Democrats are now agreeing that they are very nice and their policies are largely the same. Labour is busy saying that they are planning on doing all the things that the LD want, they believe this is correct and just have not had time over the past thirteen years during which they had an absolute majority. The thing the LD want more than anything else is electoral reform so that if 20% of the people vote LD, then one out of every five members of Parliament will belong to their party - this is called proportional representation and sounds good as long as you don't think about it too long.
The current system used ("First past the post") means that every area ("constituency") gets the opportunity to elect the person whom they believe will best represent them in Parliament. If there are ten candidates in your area, after the vote, the one with the most votes gets elected as the Member of Parliament ("MP") for the area. The Prime Minister is then chosen, typically the leader of the biggest party. The PM then chooses the government, largely (but not exclusively) from the elected MPs. If you find that the person who is supposed to represent your area is not doing a good job, you get the possibility of voting him/her out of office at the next election. Simple and effective.
Under PR, you will no longer have a local MP, there will be no one representing your particular regional concerns in Parliament. Instead of voting for an individual, you will be required to vote for a party. Once the votes have been counted, the parties will get together to decide who has been elected. Parties that get only a few votes will be entitled to be represented in government. This will largely benefit the extreme parties, both from the extreme right and left who will finally be given a legal voice to rant. MPs will be chosen based on percentages.
Let's say that, in today's system, Milton Keynes votes for a member of the Conservative with an overwhelming majority of 95% of the electorate and Southampton votes Labour with a very small majority - say 23% of the electorate because there were 12 parties. Today we would have a Conservative MP for Milton Keynes and a Labour MP for Southampton. Under PR, this would not be the case as the 95% means that a lot more people in the South-East area are Conservative than Labour and more power will be given to that party. The people of Southampton would be considered second rate citizens and their voice would count less towards placing representatives of the smaller parties in Parliament.
If you do not like what the government is doing in your area, under PR, there is nothing you can do about it. Suppose that the government decides to clean up the South-East of England by emptying all the litter, trash and rubbish in a giant landfill in Slough, the people of Slough will have no recourse. The rest of the South-East will be happy to get rid of the smells and will therefore encourage this to continue; the people of Slough will be the oppressed minority, over which no one will lose their seat in Parliament.
Finally the most obvious point: the government will be chosen behind closed doors, as is happening today rather than in Parliament, because agreements will have to be reached, not between the three main parties as today, but between the twenty-five parties that have been elected.
Of course, the current system has its problems. The main issue being that the constituencies are determined by the government and are not based on the current population. Every constituency should have the same proportion of the electorate. Today the Labour party has redistributed them so that strong Labour areas are subdivided into several constituencies that elect several MPs, while the Liberal-Democrat areas are rather large so that only one MP gets elected by a large section of the population.

Political Discussions

2010-05-11T10:32:00.000+01:00

Yahoo links to news items - as I look at the top news items, I cannot help but wonder at how MM Clegg and Cameron are beginning to look more and more like each other...

Christian Aid Week 2010: Let's end poverty

2010-05-04T13:56:00.000+01:00

In the current election, the main subject appears to be the financial situation. Over the past years, we (individuals and government) have been spending more that our income permits. Borrowing to pay has been the easy option, now we need to pay. The discussions have largely been around who will reduce government expenditure and who will raise taxes; every political party has been promising miracles while warning of the terrible consequences of someone else being elected.

And yet, our problems are those of one of the richest people in the world, without understanding the conflict between our dues and our duties. We want to maintain our comfort without spending a few pennies more.

Elsewhere in the world, they are fighting for their lives, trying to survive without basic essentials - have a look, think about it...

Google loses my way

2010-04-25T16:14:00.002+01:00

I asked Google Earth how to go from the tube station to the place where I am to meet people tonight. The map was a little strange - to say the least: check the purple line:

Farewell, doggy

2010-04-23T11:55:00.000+01:00

Goodbye my little Becks. You have left a big hole in my heart.

Tests, education and the right to choose.

2010-04-20T10:39:00.000+01:00

Everyone know the truth, unfortunately everyone has a different idea of what that is. Anyone who believes that they *really* know the truth will welcome challenge and contradiction. Anyone who knows that what they believe will not stand up to scrutiny feels obliged to keep people from questioning or listening to other voices. This is true of religious, political and scientific ideas.
Even in our Western, liberal societies, we are not encouraged to look out and learn. We are encouraged not to compare or to seek out the truth.
We need to teach people to be curious and encourage them to learn and seek. Children in schools need to be taught to think. They should be taught foreign languages and culture from the beginning - really foreign: Chinese or Arabic rather than French and Spanish.
Today's schooling is focused on passing the test. You learn what you need to learn to pass the test, no more no less. The school's are encouraged in this by "league tables" in which they are judged based on how many people pass the test. As children grow up they discover that politicians promise whatever they need to promise in order to pass the test (get elected). They are not planning on doing half of what they say, but they will promise it because they are only interested in the short-term test results (they are the only group that is excluded from the "truth in advertising" legislation). Companies maintain that focus, where they aim to provide dividends, not to do any good. Many business men, after spending their life ruthlessly amassing profits with no consideration for the rest of the world, decide - once they retire - to generously give a small percentage of their large fortunes to the needy. But, until then, they are only interested in amassing dividends. In fact, they are required by law to work for the good of their shareholders rather than the good of the community or the nations. Even charities are required to focus on competing ruthlessly with each other in order to collect as many grants and donations as possible - even when they claim to have the same objectives.
The result of this is that most people have never been taught to think for themselves. They are not interested in the rest of the world, they are only interested in the biases that support their own prejudice. Right-leaning people do not read left-leaning newspapers. Bigots of all boards maintain that you should not listen to the others.
A long time ago, in far away lands like Greece and China, they taught philosophy and dialectic... maybe it is time to turn the clocks back to more civilized times.

British Elections (3) - LibDem

2010-04-19T09:59:00.000+01:00

Charisma is defined as the "capacity to inspire devotion and enthusiasm" (OED). Of the three political leaders currently running for election, Nick Clegg is without question the most charismatic. One of the side-effects of having a political debate on television is that the most charismatic person has the best chances. When the debate is as regulated as the one held last week on British television, which did not allow for questions, dissent, discussion or debate, but just gave the opportunity for the three leaders to recite their brief sound-bites and party slogans, there is no room for depth of argument or covering some of the policies being proposed. It should be of little surprise therefore that the Liberal-Democrats suddenly appeared as potential dangers to the two traditional parties.
Of course, we live in a TV based world and anything that requires more time to explain than a "Sesame Street" skit is banned as boring. While some of the things that the Lib-Dems would like to do are praiseworthy (e.g. more focus on renovating houses rather than building new ones and their environmental ideas), others are of greater concern:

Closer ties to the EU, including joining the Euro and giving over, not just the currency (I don't care) but the interest rate's control over to Frankfurt; this is what led to the problems found in Greece, Portugal, Italy and Ireland, where the deficit grew out of control and they did not have the option to devalue the currency or perform "quantitative easing" (print more money).
Removal of the concept of your local MP. By implementing "proportional representation", no one will represent you or your area in Parliament any longer. The MPs will be selected, after the election, based on the number of votes received nationally. Parliament, as well as government, will be run completely by political parties and the value of individuals will be reduced to towing the party line. Should an MP speak out for his/her region against the party line, that MP's standing in the party will automatically be lowered, giving less chance of being re-elected.
An immediate withdrawal of the British troops from Afghanistan will be a great victory for the Talibans and AlQaeda, which would be significantly reinforced in their activities. While I maintain that the invasion of Iraq was not justified or necessary (or planned), the removal of the terrorist supporting government in Afghanistan was. Now, we need to help ensure that the country can govern itself and that the people no longer need to depend on the culture of poppy and the support of oppressive religious fanatics to survive.
Replacing the House of Lords with a fully elected house means that it would become a carbon-copy of the House of Commons and lose its value of "checks and balances". The house of Lords should be based on a completely different system, separate from the party political aspect of the Commons and filled with people whose prime purpose is not to be re-elected. Only in this manner can they perform their role as checking proposed legislation.
Cutting defence is a nice populist proposal. Of course, it means that the armed forces will go to either strengthen the unemployment numbers (or they can remain in fighting order without equipment), it means trusting that the governments in ten, fifteen and twenty years time will all be nice and friendly people who would not dream of attacking a nation that has an army so out of date.

It is a shame that people do not bother to find out what parties are standing for before an election. BTW this does not mean that I think all the policies in either of the other two main parties are perfect, in fact, considering the policies of the three parties, LD would probably be my second choice among the three.

British Elections (2)

2010-04-11T06:31:00.002+01:00

Who is responsible? One thing that always baffles me – whether in an election or not – is the identification of who is responsible. If you listen to Labour, it seems that Gordon Brown is responsible for everything that went well, and cannot be held responsible for anything that went wrong. If you listen to the Tories, Gordon Brown is personally responsible for everything that went wrong and accidentally benefitted from anything that went right. If you listen to the Liberal-Democrats, everyone is responsible for everything wrong and nothing has ever gone right. If you listen to UKIP and BNP, we are in this mess because of foreigners.
The past is there to be re-written during election times.

British Elections (1)

2010-04-09T14:44:00.000+01:00

A few days into the official election campaign, my take on the situation.

The main thrust of the campaign is, surprisingly, not a review of what the outgoing government has done, but what the main opposition party is planning on doing. This is surprising so early in the campaign.

The main issue is, obviously, the financial status of the country. According to the Labour candidates, the recession is completely due to the international recession. I believe a few elements are missing in this analysis. It does not take into account that the man in charge, previous chancellor of the exchequer and current prime minister, encouraged the “limited” regulations on the banking system, which is the cornerstone of the current British economy. Over the past twelve years, we have gone through a period of financial growth, the ideal time to put money aside “for a rainy day”, however, throughout this period, the government continued to borrow systematically more than the tax revenue. Throughout this time, he continued to be optimistically wrong, every year, on his forecasts – financial analysts pointed this out at every budget announcement. Currently, they are claiming that the Conservative plans will cost many jobs, stating that the Conservative refusal to increase taxes on employment or jobs is the equivalent of taking money out of the economy, while in fact, the money is remaining with the employers and employees, who actually create the economy, rather than with the government. There is a report on the effect that Labour’s proposed tax hike will have on the economy, but the Chancellor has requested that this should not be published until after the election…

A Labour candidate in Scotland (Moray) has been kicked out of the party because of the offensive comments he made on “Twitter”. It should be noted that these offensive comments were made a year ago, he has now been punished by people who were looking to be offended but were not aware of these comments made for the past twelve months. They had to go searching for something they could find offensive.

Finally, I continue to have doubts about the sudden social turnaround by the Conservative party. It seems that no so long ago, they were the “nasty party”. Has the period of "section 28 and the diferent ages of consent really gone? The latest issue was a discussion on whether a couple running a Bed&Breakfast were entitled to refuse accomodation in their house to a homosexual couple...

The Financial Risk of Democracy

2010-03-28T17:07:00.000+01:00

The British national debt is at an all-time high. Over the past decade, the government has gone from owing £350 milliard (or, in the US, billion) to £776 milliard/billion. The chancellor’s recent budget proposes to double that again over the next five years (1406) – meaning that the national debt will be around £57000 per household. Of course, in his latest budget, this was presented as a return to the good times (his forecast is based on the fact that next year, we will return to an economic situation that is comparable to what it has been at the best of times with a growth never going below 3.5%); it was also presented as “halving the national deficit”, which does not mean reducing the debt, but reducing the increase in borrowing.

When people get into this level of borrowing, they are declared bankrupt. They are required to cut their expenditure and stopped from borrowing anything for a long time. But that is not a popular message and, as we approach a general election, all the political parties are busy avoiding admitting how bad things are. Should the Conservatives win the election, they will spend the next year telling us that Labour left it in an “even worse situation than we expected”. Should Labour win, they will blame international finance and global recession. In any case, we are due for some very heavy tax increases and benefit cutting after the elections. But, because we are in a democracy, no one is willing to admit how serious the situation really is. Politicians are busy pushing back the tough decisions they should have taken several years ago.

Of course, we like the concept of borrowing. The idea that we can pay later for what we use today is a very attractive proposition. We have seen this illustrated during the current economic crisis. The recession was brought on largely by the unregulated house market, pushing up the prices of homes beyond reasonable as estate agents pushed up the price in order to get a larger revenue as their percentage of selling something that did not belong to them. Once the “credit crunch” hit, many countries implemented a method by which people were encouraged to scrap their car (fully paid for) for a new car (for which they had to take out a loan which, in the current economic context, they could ill afford) in order to promote the car industry – and thereby providing revenue, at tax payers’ expense for foreign manufacturers. This was also seen more recently as the Greek debt (which they cannot afford to pay) was eased through the EU lending lending them more. Reducing debt by increasing borrowing is not a solution. But democracy does not allow us to admit that we need to make cuts.

Finally, we need to accept that the people who need to make the cuts, the highly paid politicians in a position of power, need to demonstrate what they believe before they can recommend any cuts. After all, an increase in taxing and cuts in government expenditure means a cut in income for the electorate. Surely this needs to be preceded by the politicians cutting their own expenditure (salary, pension and expenses) in order to demonstrate they believe what they are saying. But the British members of parliament have recently voted to increase their salaries: it is up to the rest of the world to pay for their excesses, isn’t it?

It is easy to criticize, but what are the options? How can we get out of the cycle of lies and omissions by politicians? There are several possibilities. The first, and most obvious, is to cancel all elections and implement a system similar to that in China, in which a small group of people is established in power for all of eternity; they do not need to worry about elections or pleasing the people, their only concern is to ensure that the people do not know or understand enough to overthrow them.

The other option is to put in place a really democratic system instead of the one we currently call democracy. The government should not be formed of the biggest party, but should be representative of the electorate: while I like and will continue to support the concept of my “representative” in Parliament (although my current member of Parliament seems to believe that she represents the government in her constituency rather than her constituency in Parliament), I think it is time that we introduce multi-party proportional representation in government itself. This can then be backed up with a “House of Lords” or “Upper House” based on its original concept: people who are there because of their skills and competencies, who are not dependent on the short-term need to be re-elected but can focus on what is best for the country in the long-term, encouraged to challenge and question the government at every stage. Members of this house should not be allowed to have an official link to a political party but should be encouraged to use their own skills, competencies, knowledge and judgement. Pay for members of Parliament should be equal to the national average wage, with an expense-allowance directly proportional to their constituency (e.g. £1.00 per mile and the town-hall of their constituency for every day they spend in the debating chambers).

British Telecom Support – or lack of Customer support

2010-03-27T06:49:00.000Z

Recently, my BT Internet service has stopped allowing me to send e-mails. I have regularly had emails refused when sending them, and received a comment that there was an “error 553”. Apparently the email addresses I have been using for the past few years need to be “verified” before I am allowed to use them again. I have received instructions on how to do that, but the instructions provided are erroneous. When pointing this out to the “support” call, I have been told that this is what I need to do. I have also had requests for clarification deleted without being read. As I do not appear to have any luck in getting support directly from them, I have decided to go more public.

The instructions received start as follow:

When going to this site, you are informed that you are the right place with the welcome:

respectful and personal?

Next step:

This is the drop down menu, which does not include a “Mail Options” possibility:

“More options” seems to do something that appears reasonably similar.

Next step:

For the past two or three years, the screen appears to always be:

Slow update, but let’s not lose hope. I am sure that someone at BT remembers… Let’s try the “Add or edit an account”, this brings us to something that resembles somewhat the screen promised previously:

Now, in order to validate an account I have been using for many years, I need to “Add” an account with the same information.

Next step:

The screen actually looks like this:

Note that I am creating an email account that I am already using. I am assured by the BT support service that this “add” option is not restricted to adding new accounts.

Next step:

I skipped the step as recommended and come immediately back to the first screen, asking me to add or edit an account. So I selected the address and pressed “Edit” – this led to the following screen:

This screen does not have a “Send Verification” or give access to the “Verify Account” options that I am supposed to access next.

My email still does not work.

Welcome to Transylvania

2010-03-23T21:20:00.002Z

I arrived in Cluj-Napoca, largest city in Transylvania. My driver from the airport gave me a brief run-down of the geography, history and architecture as we crossed the town on the way to the hotel. I did not make any inappropriate comments about being in Transylvania, after all it is just one of the three historical regions of Romania.
As I walked to the lift to go to my room, I smelled smoke and was surprise to see that there was a large room (bar? dining-room? conference room?) in complete darkness, but with quite a lot of people sitting inside (some obviously smoking) in complete silence...
Very nice room, large modern, airy. I locked the door.

Advertising on my blog

2010-03-19T09:00:00.002Z

Please note that Google places advertising on my blog page - this does not mean that I support the products being advertised. In particular, as I have made a few political entries lately, I have found that there is a video of David Cameron placed in the middle of my page. I did not place it there and its placement is solely due to Google's advertising, not my political preferences.

Proportional Representation

2010-03-15T07:02:00.003Z

I like having a representative in Parliament, someone who is required, by definition, to represent me. Proportional representation does not allow that as the make-up of people in Parliament would be based on the average number of votes over a large region: there is no one representing my region or myself in the European Parliament, as I am part of "South-East" which includes Norwich and Brighton, which very different needs that my own town.
However, I agree that there are shortcomings for the current voting system in which the percentage of people voting one way or another is not reflected in government. The "first past the post" system does not distinguish between the person elected by one vote and the person elected by 98% of the voters. Recently, the government proposed a "preference" way of voting in which the elector can vote for their second or third choice candidate. This would be great news for the Liberal-Democrats as a large section of people would vote "Labour or Lib-Dem, but not Tory" or "Tory or Lib-Dem, but not Labour". The result would be that the party elected could be the one with the least number of votes!
So, here is my proposal for electoral reform. Leave the "first past the post" system in place as we are electing our local representative, this is not a presidential system in which we elect the Prime Minister. The national government, on the other hand, should represent the electorate as a whole, so the government (meaning the ministers, etc. rather than the members of Parliament) should be constituted by proportional representation rather than only representing the party with the most MPs.
This would mean that the different opinions will be represented and have to argue out the differences early in the process, while Parliament would not be systematically voting along party-lines without bothering to think about it.
Of course, this will never happen...

Supplies for the army

2010-03-06T16:20:00.003Z

While the debate continues as to whether the former chancellor was responsible or not for the lack of equipment available to the British army in Iraq and Afghanistan, the BBC posts this photo of his latest visit to the troupes. It appears that he is the only one wearing a bullet-proof jacket!
The two soldiers on the right appear to staring at his jacket as if in envy or curiosity.

Poor old Beeb

2010-03-03T19:38:00.002Z

It seems that the BBC cannot win. Apparently there is now one gang complaining that the BBC is funded by license fee, while another group is complaining that it is providing access to news without charging. There is a recommendation out that they need to downgrade the quality of radio 1 and radio 2 because they are too good and it is unfair to the commercial competition!
What a ridiculous state to be in.

The 11th Doctor

2010-02-27T11:00:00.002Z

I am willing to be convinced, but I remain to be convinced. RTD is a tough act to follow, even for Stephen Moffat - not to mention David Tennant!

Reality check

2010-02-24T06:06:00.003Z

Belgian news: a number of supermarkets are closing down in order to save the company that owns them from bankruptcy; a competing supermarket has shown interest in buying those that are closing down. The Belgian television reported on this, however every single person interviewed was a trade union representative; no one gave the other side of the story. Several said that they were not happy to work for someone who used to be competition and do not want their supermarket sold so that it can remain open.
UK news: British Airways pilots are complaining that their holiday money does not take into account the premiums they would receive for longer hours and being away! That's right, they are complaining that their additional bonus paid because they are away from home is not being paid when they stay home!
Greek news: general strike because the civil servants are unhappy with the fact that they have spent all the money they had.

Considering the levels of unemployment throughout Europe, considering the economic crisis... am I the only one to think these people are not in the real world?

Time to vote intelligently

2010-02-07T16:12:00.002Z

In the UK, we are approaching another general election. I would like to encourage people to vote intelligently. This means a number of things.
First, understand that you are voting for your representative in Parliament, not for the leader of the party: this is not a presidential race. So you need to choose the person who most clearly represents you and your area best at a national level. If the system is one day changed to a "proportional representation", this right will be taken away from you and you will get to vote for a party; the various parties will then negotiate how they can create a "majority" by uniting very different parties. In Belgium, they use this approach and last year went six months without a government because they could not decide. Of course, if we have a hung parliament we could get a similar situation, as happened a couple of years ago in Israel, when the two parties with the least votes decided to form a coalition, leaving the party that had most backing to form the opposition!
Consider the parties priorities. Do not trust the easy slogans and short phrases; get the parties' manifestos and read them, mark them up with what you like and don't like.
Remember your local representative. If you get the opportunity, ask them for their personal manifesto for the area where you live. Again, don't go for easy slogans, ask for a studied, realistic description of what they would plan to do.
Not voting is never really a good idea, however it is understandable that voting in a "safe seat" (no matter the party) is not really useful, your vote doesn't really count - except to strengthen the turn-out and, therefore, the "mandate" of whoever wins. I would like to encourage everyone living in a safe-seat to vote against whoever holds that seat.
It is time to prove that the electorate does understand the issues and can be the system work.

Civil Partnerships and Marriage

2010-02-05T14:14:00.003Z

Please see the following email from Dr Starkey

Dear Peter

At the LGBT Assembly last Saturday, one question related to civil partnerships and how (if at all) they differed from civil marriage. I said I was not able to give a full and definitive response but would check the information provided by the House of Commons Library and then get back to you. Here is the information I collected and I hope it is useful. As I mentioned at the LGBT Assembly, religious marriage ceremonies are not regulated by the civil law but by the relevant religious authorities. It is therefore entirely a matter for the various faith communities to decide whether their theological beliefs encompass same-sex marriage or not. Religious marriage ceremonies are not recognised as marriage unless the parties also sign the registrar of marriage documents. (see my note at the bottom of the page on this topic - PL)

Yours sincerely

Dr Phyllis Starkey MP

Information from the House of Commons Library

Civil Partnerships Act (2004)

Registered civil partners have the same rights as a married couple in areas such as tax, social security, inheritance and workplace benefits. It follows, therefore, that on registration, civil partners may acquire new legal rights and responsibilities, including:

a duty to provide reasonable maintenance for their civil partner and any children of the family;

a right to apply for parental responsibility for their civil partner’s child;

equitable treatment to that of a ‘spouse’ for the purposes of assessment for child support, life assurance; tax (including inheritance tax); employment and pension benefits; inheritance of a tenancy agreement;

recognition under the intestacy rules;

access to fatal accidents compensation;

protection from domestic violence; and

recognition for immigration and nationality purposes.

How does civil partnership differ from marriage?

As outlined above, the Government has sought to give civil partners parity of treatment with spouses, as far as is possible, in the rights and responsibilities that flow from forming a civil partnership.

Civil partnership is a completely new legal relationship, exclusively for same-sex couples, distinct from marriage. There are a number of differences between civil partnership and marriage, for example, a civil partnership is formed when the second civil partner signs the relevant document, a civil marriage is formed when the couple exchange spoken words.

However, in both a civil partnership and a civil marriage, the couples are required to give advance public notice of their intentions. The records of both are kept as official and public documents with the registry offices. It should also be noted that same-sex couples who form a civil partnership have parity (equal) of treatment in a wide range of legal matters with heterosexual couples who enter into a civil marriage.

Are heterosexual couples prohibited from registering a civil partnership?

It is correct that the Civil Partnerships Act 2004 (CPA 2004) specifically excludes heterosexual couples from the option of registering a civil partnership. Civil Partnership is a legal relationship exclusively for same-sex couples, distinct from marriage. As far as possible, the Government has sought to give civil partners parity of treatment with spouses in the rights and responsibilities that flow from forming a civil partnership.

The Government’s stated position is that heterosexual couples already have the option of civil marriage, and the legal consequences of a civil partnership are very similar:

We have considered the position of opposite-sex couples, many of whom now choose to cohabit instead of marrying, and other people who live together in a close supportive household environment. The Government believes that these situations are significantly different from that of same-sex couples who wish to formalise their relationships but currently are unable to do so.

It is the Government’s view that heterosexual couples (referred to as ‘opposite-sex couples’) do not have the same need for a civil partnership registration scheme:

Opposite-sex couples already have the opportunity of obtaining legal (and socially recognised) status for their relationship by entering into a civil marriage. Some couples choose not to marry, and that is entirely a decision for them.

[...]

The Government recognizes that unmarried opposite-sex couples share some of the problems faced by same-sex couples. Indeed, equality arguments may at first sight support making civil partnership registration available to opposite-sex couples. The creation of a new legal status that is open only to same-sex couples and not to opposite-sex couples would amount to a difference in treatment. However, the Government believes that this difference in treatment is justified because it would remedy an inequality that already exists between opposite-sex and same-sex couples.

---------

Personal Note from Peter: the questions raised in the discussion do not appear to be answered in this response:
1. Why the discrimination? (and for how long?) Would it be acceptable for the government to say that black people, or Jews were not allowed to marry but could have "civil partnerships" with the same rights?
2. Civil partnerships are equated to registry-office marriages. As such they may not be held in a religiously significant location (Church, Mosque, Synagogue, Temple...) and no religious language may be used at the ceremony (that includes reading a poem that makes a reference to angels). Saying that it is up to the religious denominations to decide whether they recognize them or not is incorrect as the law says that the ceremony must be 100% religion free.
3. The Civil Partnership is a purely British invention which is not recognized in other countries. When travelling in countries where same-sex marriages are completely legal and accepted, the British will still be considered as not married.

Haiti and poverty

2010-01-23T11:49:00.002Z

The disaster in Haiti is not necessarily the one on which most people are concentrating. Haiti shares the island with the Dominican Republic (the latter takes about two thirds of the island). Yet, we only hear about damage on the one side of the island.
This is an island wracked by poverty, the infrastructure is insufficient, the people uneducated and undernourished.
One thousand kilometres (625 miles) from Florida, there is an amazing wealth of people, a workforce that is ready to be trained and educated, willing to produce products at salaries that would put the Chinese and the Indians to shame. Yet no one seems interested in making the investment. It is so much easier to buy everything from China, than put in health and safety issues, human rights issues and trade barriers, when things get a little difficult or a new election is getting close. Investing in poor countries to build up a willing work force is too much trouble.
Building an infrastructure that can survive the difficulties is too much trouble.
Educating poor people is too much trouble.

They probably don't even have any good minerals we could steal, do they?

Iraq and Straw

2010-01-23T11:37:00.002Z

Jack Straw says that had he resigned before the Iraq war (maybe because he might have objected to the Falklands war for reasons of conviction that a military solution was not a good idea, rather than just political opportunism), Great Britain would probably not have gone against the majority of its electorate to join Pres. Bush.
At the time, it was known that the army was not ready. It was known that Gordon Brown had refused to give the finances necessary for the military to prepare (because it might have looked as if they were preparing for war!). It was also understood that G W Bush stood alone and needed the support of another nation in order to give some legitimacy to the idea that this was not just revenge for the Kuwait invasion in which his Daddy did not do as well as he hoped.
The understanding at the time was simple: "Saddam Hussein says he does not have weapons" + "Saddam Hussein is a liar" = "he has WMD". The fact that no evidence was found of any evidence, only reinforced the idea that he was hiding his weapons because he was a very naughty boy. If he was hiding them so well, it must mean that he had very evil intentions.
As even such slick politicians could not really make this sound credible, they decided to announce that Saddam Hussein was 45 minutes away from destroying the world and they had a little flask of something so horrible, it should not be opened or analysed.
Following the war in Iraq, thousands of innocent people have died; extremists and terrorists have found new support (whether they claim to do this in the name of Islam or not). The state of the world has gotten to be more dangerous as a direct result of this war; the state of the Iraqis has gotten to be even worse. A few American petrol companies and weapons manufacturers have benefitted greatly.
Jack Straw is willing to take personal responsibility for this.

Panning for gold

2010-01-11T11:20:00.003Z

A recent radio broadcast included an interview with a woman whose hobby was panning for gold. She would go to rivers and spend all day, sifting, clearing, panning only to find, from time to time, a tiny spec of gold in the bottom of her pan.
This brought an analogy to my mind...
In the river of life, you need to pan for yourself. It is only when you have removed all the rubbish, the nonsense, the materialism, when you have sifted through and eliminated the education, the traditions, the culture, when you have washed away the could-haves, should-haves, might-haves and why-didn't-Is, when you cleared out the guilt, the complexes, the fears and the worries, then, and only then, sometimes, rarely, can you find a tiny spec of gold. Not enough to hold, you pick it up by sticking it to the end of one finger. That bit of gold is you - the real you, the one that is precious and needs to be protected.
The further downstream you go, the more rubbish you accumulate, the more difficult it is to have the patience to find out who you really are...

Dear BBC...

2010-01-01T15:34:00.002Z

I thought I would help you out with a few little facts to help you along...
- 2010 is not the beginning of a new decade. There was no year zero between 1AD and 1BC, the new decade starts in 2011, just like the millennium started in 2001, not 2000.
- a billion is (in English) is a million million, not a thousand million. Our American cousins decided to use the word to describe what in English is called a milliard in order to sound bigger and more expensive.
- TV presenters are staring at a camera. Everyone over the age of five has understood that, even though we can see them, they cannot see us - they should therefore be ending programmes saying things like "see you tomorrow".

Happy new year.

Should homosexuals face execution?

2009-12-17T10:04:00.002Z

The BBC put up a discussion board with the above title. It was nice to see someone taking the Uganda question seriously and putting an appropriately provocative title in order to attract the needed attention. Of course, this did bring out some of the more extreme loonies raving and ranting. Interestingly, one of them suggested that all homosexuals should be put on a desert island until they die out... he seems to believe that homosexuality is hereditary!
The other side effect of this is that the Beeb was once again vilified as being institutionally homophobic. Somehow they can't get it right, it seems. If they have shows involving Graham Norton, Alan Carr and Gok Wan, or shows like "Gimme, Gimme, Gimme" and "Beautiful People", they are accused of portraying stereotypes. If they portray ordinary gay people - you know, the kind that you would not recognize as such because they don't fit the stereotypes and are not in your face - they are told that they are not; if they produce programmes like "Torchwood", the LGBT community does not react or respond in a positive and encouraging manner.
Now, when they provoke the discussion and attract attention to the proposed Ugandan massacre, they are still told they should not use a title that attracts attention like this.
Sorry, Aunty, it seems some people will never give you credit.

British Airways strike

2009-12-14T20:46:00.002Z

As there is continued pressure to reduce carbon emissions (still no comment on the emissions of the concrete and building industries, which - alledgely - are higher than those of air-travel) added to the continued recession (lasting longer in Britain than in most other countries), British Airways are losing money at a ridiculous rate. The BA personnel, who are paid more than most others in the industry, have decided that savings are out of the question and they would rather push their employer further over the brink by calling twelve days of strike over Christmas.
Unison believes that is better for BA to go bankrupt and let all their members lose their jobs rather than having already well-paid staff's salaries frozen for a couple of years.

Whatever happened to democracy?

2009-12-09T13:11:00.002Z

I have always admired the British principles of government, but it seems to be very different from what I believe it should be. As I understand it, the British government was meant to be composed of the following parts:
- The Cabinet which was the seat of the government, in which policies were created
- The House of Commons representing the people from all regions of the realm, in which the proposed policies were given for scrutiny to the representatives of the people. All individuals in the country have the opportunity to vote for the person they believe will best represent them personally when reviewing the policies and challenging the government. These representatives will then select from their midst the person who will be proposed as prime minister and choose his/her cabinet.
- The House of Lords, in which people who are there because of the honour bestowed upon them. These people are not worried about losing their job at the next election if they make unpopular decisions but are there to represent the best interests of their specialty (farming, business, arts...). Some of them have inherited titles as they descend from someone to whom an extraordinary level of recognition was considered due.
- The Crown which establishes the balance between the previous groups, naming the prime minister, being a counsel and a guide, understanding the country in terms of centuries rather than in terms of elections, educated specifically to have the understanding of the people, the world and history so as to be able to fill this job wisely and sensitively.

Unfortunately, none of this seems to be in place any longer.
The people do not vote for the person who will best represent them personally, but think they are voting, presidential style, for the leader of the party. When I met and brought my issues to my MP, she told me that she was not going to do anything about it, but that I needed to trust the PM (in fact she repeated a dozen times, in answer to anything and everything, the sentence "trust Tony"). Debates in the House of Commons are not based on facts or reason, but strictly drawn by political party lines - everything the other party does is wrong, everything my own party does is right. The PM only attends once a week for Prime Minister Question Time, during which he does not answer any questions asked by members of other parties but states how things would be worse if they were in power, then gets some nice, friendly, prepared questions from representatives of his own party - frequently giving the impression that the person asking the question has to read it out without real understanding, while the answer is prepared with all the data to demonstrate what a great job the PM is doing.
The House of Lords has been drained, making room for political appointees who take the same position as their party in the other place, whatever the topic.
The Crown is not entitled to an opinion or to express themselves. They are told what to say, what to sign, what to do, where to go, what to believe.
Proposed policies are not given for debate to the House of Commons any longer, they are first presented to Rupert Murdoch and co for their approval.

This is not democracy. I don't know what it is, but it sounds like party political rule.

Stupid ideas to save the world

2009-12-08T12:59:00.003Z

1. To reduce energy waste, stop direct-debit orders. Instead of being able to ignore your electricity and gas bills, knowing that it will just magically get paid, you should be required to pay in cash every time, realizing just how much it costs.
2. Sea levels, flooding, droughts and desalination plants... The sea levels are going up, at the same time, the aquifer (underground water) and groundwater levels are going down as they are being continuously being pumped out for human consumption - add to that the fact that we are covering the surface more and more with concrete, stopping the rainwater from replenishing them. Through a systematic effort of desalination and the bottling of purified sea water instead of Evian and others (and using it in domestic distribution), we could allow the underwater levels to start rising again, improving drought and flood problems - OK, it would not do much for sea levels...
3. More on aquifers - how about permeable drainage pipes, allowing the water to pass through?

Global Warming

2009-12-06T13:12:00.003Z

...and the debate goes on: is global warming real or not? Is it due to human activities, natural change as we continue to move away from the last ice-age, or burping cows?
Actually, I don't care. As far as I am concerned, burning fossil fuels without control is wrong, polluting the world is wrong, destroying the natural environment is wrong, hunting species to extinction is wrong, waste is wrong. If human activities have no impact, if global warming does not exist, I continue to believe that we need to consume less, destroy less, burn less.
Why the discussion?
I feel there are people out there who are pushing the concept of "survival of fittest" to mean "I do what I want and if you don't like it, adapt or die!"

Support or ignore proposed genocide?

2009-12-02T12:48:00.004Z

Global authorities, whether political or religious continue to ignore the proposed legalization of oppression and homophobia in Uganda. Under the new legislation:
- Anyone suspecting homosexual practices is required to tell the authorities within 24 hours or face 3 years in jail;
- The minimum penalty for homosexual activities is life imprisonment;
- If a person has AIDS, is a "serial offender" or a "person of authority", the penalty is death;
- If the partner involved is under 18 years of age, the penalty is death.

The reason for this legislation is that homosexuality does not exist in Africa, it is something imported from Europe, apparently. By killing off homosexuals, the Ugandan government appears to want to protect the purity of the African race. This may have echoes of what was installed under the Nazi regime in Germany, but that does not seem to bother the rest of the world. In fact, US evangelical Christians (in particular Scott Lively, Don Schmierer and Caleb Lee Brundidge) have all three expressed their support.

The Commonwealth, the established churches, governments around the world remain silent. The Ugandan president acknowledges that this means they may have to withdraw from the UN treaty on human rights, but that does not seem to worry anyone. Apparently the UN treaty carries no weight...

It is high-time to take action. In the UK, sign the petition to the prime minister (http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/ugandangays/). You need to hurry, the Uganda government is hoping to pass this into law before the end of 2009.

Full text of the proposed law: http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/10/15/15609

Articles: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/29/uganda-death-sentence-gay-sex; http://www.beyondchron.org/articles/The_Family_and_Uganda_s_Anti_Gay_Legislation_7602.html; http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2009/11/the_familys_ties_to_ugandas_an.php; http://www.standingonthesideoflove.org/blog/ugandas-proposed-anti-gay-legislation/; http://www.changingattitude.org.uk/news/newsitem.asp?id=455

Alan Turing

2009-12-01T09:44:00.002Z

Alan Turing is one of the great unrecognized heroes of the twentieth century. By creating the first programmable computer, he should be recognized for his science, his technology and the highlight of British engineering. The fact that his computer was used to break down the German secret code, means that he saved millions of lives and is generally recognized of having shortened World War II by as much as two years. Time magazine said about him that the "fact remains that everyone who taps at a keyboard, opening a spreadsheet or a word-processing program, is working on an incarnation of a Turing machine."
After the war, his work in chemistry and morphogenesis was worthy of national recognition.
Instead of this, he was convicted for having a homosexual relationship, forced to undergo "chemical castration" and take hormones that made his breast grow. As a consequence of this, he committed suicide.
Recently, an apology was issued by the British government for this treatment. Maybe it is time for more. This man arguably did more to end the second world war than Churchill did, yet remains largely unrecognized and unknown.
This man, more than any other, deserves formal recognition and I would like to start a movement to place a permanent statue on the empty 4th plinth on Trafalgar Square. From a military, scientific, engineering and humanitarian point of view, he truly deserves it!

Sports and Money

2009-11-12T13:55:00.002Z

Apparently discussions are going on to make a number of sports events classified as "crown jewels", meaning they would have to be shown on "free-to-air" television rather than on subscription based satellite or cable stations. This includes Wimbledon tennis, the Ashes in cricket and others.
Apparently this is controversial because it means that less money will be available for these events. A journalist stated that this meant that the sports would not be able to put on shows of the same quality. I thought sports was to encourage participation and healthy lifestyles, but apparently it is about showmanship and money, nothing to do with admiring athletes' performances!

Christology, Ecclesiology and Anglicanism

2009-11-08T14:07:00.003Z

Last Friday, I had the pleasure of listening to a powerful talk on worship music given. One of the topics covered was the fact that our christiology should determine our missiology, which should determine our ecclesiology. In other words, our understanding and our belief in Christ and his message should determine our choice of how we should best serve Him. That, in turn, should determine the manned in which we "do church". This is very much the thing that is guiding me in my current quest. The speaker also pointed out that, too often, we do this the wrong way around: the way we "do Church" determines how we serve Christ/God/the Church, which determines our view of Christ.
This morning, we went to a traditional Anglican service. This service very much reflected, in my eyes, the manner in which this has been done in the wrong way. As it was Remembrance Sunday, I cannot claim that this was the usual manner in which this congregation celebrated, however, this morning... The service was based on (an extract of) the "Book of Common Worship", Scripture was read, but Bibles were not available. While I enjoyed the hymns that were chosen and the contents and delivery of the sermon, the remainder of the service was very much reading this printed order of worship, regularly referencing the appropriate page numbers. Some people were actively involved with speakers and projectors and doing the admin, a few said "Good Morning" to us, but no one really made us feel welcome. At the end of the service, we were requested to leave rapidly by the side door, because people were coming for the next service, no time for people, get on with the ritual.
Two other thoughts related this service (in my mind) to the talk last Friday:
1. The music was not there to praise God, or to move the service on, it was used to break down the services into constituent parts - very similar to the use of advertising on commercial television. While I really did enjoy most of the music, I did not feel it was part of the worship.
2. The speaker on Friday talked about our tendency, particularly in the Anglican community (to which he too belonged) to take the Word made flesh and turn Him back into words, to change the wine back into water... This was particularly visible during the Eucharist/Lord's Supper/Communion (or whatever you want to call it), when the minister handed out the wafers and walked on before he finished the words that went with the offering: he did not have time (or the interest) to stay, make eye contact, mean what he was saying, just move on: we have another service after this.

Kristina

2009-11-03T15:49:00.002Z

The ABBA composers come of age in their new musical "Kristina"

Science V Politics

2009-11-02T08:48:00.003Z

It apears that the debate has suddenly changed from religion vs science to politics vs science. It is probably the same debate, though. When a small group of people believe that they have the ultimate power and authority over others (whether through a calling by a god or through a semi-democratic* election), they believe that they have the power to know the ultimate truth.The result is the current debate in the UK between the two Johnsons on the side of the politicians and Blair (Ian, not Tony) and Nutt on the side of the science.
Being elected, does not mean that you know things that are not in your area of expertise. The secret of good leaders is to be able to surround themselves with knowledgeable people, then listening to them. When Alan Johnson fires David Nutt because he said something that was backed by science but contrary to the party line, he proves himself to be incompetent. When Boris Johnson fires Ian Blair for giving his experienced and knowledgeable opinion on effective policing, contrary to the party line, he is proving himself to be incompetent.
Politicians need to shut up and listen to people who are more knowledgeable than themselves, admit their own weaknesses and trust those they have place in positions to provide expertise and counsel. They need to understand that leadership means listening, that "public servant" and "minister" both refer to the fact that they serve (or minister to) the public.
Otherwise, they will remain untrusted, seen to be lining their pockets.

The Hand of God

2009-11-01T14:46:00.002Z

For the past few weeks, we have been visiting churches. For reasons into which I will not go, we have left our "home-church" and are seeking for something different. After a few visits to different places, this morning was different.
This morning we went to visit a "Meeting of Friends", better known as the Quakers. A transforming meeting as far as I am concerned. Many things happened this morning. For those who don't know, the Quakers meet largely in silence. The idea is that everyone is there for one hour, sitting in silence, thinking their own thoughts. From time to time, someone feels called to share ("to minister") to his/her friends, stands up and speaks. In other words, people are taught to listen to whatever they call God. In the past few weeks, we have visited some very different churches, and all of them seem to have focused on telling us what to believe instead of listening directly to God:
In the past few weeks, we have visited the church of an old friend and really enjoyed seeing and hearing him again, but not sure if liking the preacher is a good enough reason to join a small village church some distance away. We also visited a Roman-Catholic church were we found a ritual being recited, without much conviction. A minister sat in a throne like chair in the centre, behind the altar and glared at people. The general message was that the Roman-Catholic church knew best and we should follow. Last week, we visited a Charismatic-Evangelical church in which loud music (all post-1980) repeated the same simple lines over and over. I very much go the feeling that the purpose was to attack your emotions so strongly, you could not think - in any case, you were not given time to think as one inane song followed another. The message here was that if you say you love Jesus, he will give you everything you need, health, wealth, whatever.
This morning, I was required to create my own message; and I created my own message. I am the hand of God. I need to reach out and deliver his blessings to the world, he entrusted me with his kingdom. I am not saying that I am God or Jesus or anything special; I am only saying that the message of Love of God (inner light, spirit guide, or whatever you want to call it) is something that is ours for the sharing with our fellow humans. We have been blessed, materially, physically and mentally; it is our duty to share that blessing. We are to bring love and forgiveness, not accusation or condemnation - that much I had already said before this morning.
What came to me this morning is that "man is created in my image" - yes, my image, me personally. Those who I love tend to like me; those I hate despise me. The people about whom I don't care, don't care about me. The people I help are there to help me. The people I betray will betray me. They are all created in my image and I am responsible for forming that image on earth.
It is not up to me to reject people - either their friendship or the wisdom of what they have to say - simply because they are black, or French, or Muslim, or atheist, or Japanese, or gay, or dress peculiarly, or are from Essex, or... If I want to reject someone's ideas, it must be based on my understanding and listening; and it is only by listening and understanding that I can persuade them to listen to me - an maybe understand.
I believe that spending one hour in silence this morning has made me a better person - not a lot, but a step in the right direction...

Tessa Jowell and the Olympics

2009-10-27T14:27:00.000Z

Ms Jowell was interviewed on Radio 4 this lunch time for an hour about the 2012 Olympic games. It was a fascinating bit of tap dancing, during which only her continuous stumbling, stuttering, hesitating betrayed the fact that she did not really believe what she was saying.

When questioned as to why the Olympics were London centric, she argued that this was going to benefit everyone, everywhere – there is even some steel coming from Wales. When questioned as to why perfectly good, modern, existing infrastructure was not being used, but new ones were being built, she argued that everything needed to be close to one another in London. She laboured the point that this was an effort of regeneration of an area of London (the wealthiest and most crowded area of the country), and when asked why not regenerate areas that need it, like the North of England, she said because the Olympic committee told her that it was London or nothing. She pointed out that the long-term benefits were going to be extraordinary and explained what the objectives were, adding that no country had succeeded such a positive long-term benefit in the past. When challenged about the cost, she pointed out that 2 billion pounds were being provided by private enterprise; when asked for more details, she said they had only got 600,000 pounds committed.

This is a bankrupt country (we cannot pay our debts) organizing a ridiculously expensive exercise destined to bring tourists to one of the premier tourist destinations in the world, at the same time seeking to bring regeneration to one of the wealthiest cities in the world. This will (like all the other Olympics) be run at a loss, today it is pumping all the money that the National Lottery was to invest in sports and arts, it costing every tax payer in the UK, even more to the poor sods in London. However it largely believed that the current government will have left the building before this all happens, and the new people will be left with the deficit; they can then be blamed for the loss and taxes required to pay for it – just as Labour was blamed for the Millennium Dome fiasco that had been launched under the Conservatives.

Additionally, I was irritated by the condescending, falsely caring voice that Ms Jowell used to talk to the people who called in, stressing every second word, speaking down to them. Why when someone says “good afternoon, minister” to her, does she feel she has to answer “why, hello Bill”. Show a little respect for the people who pay your salary, minister. Public service means you are at the service of the public, not that public is to serve you. “Minister” means “to serve” – time to remember a little humility.

I am a Christian fundamentalist

2009-10-25T11:44:00.001Z

What I mean is that I believe in the fundamentals that I believe Christ tried to teach so many years ago by opposition to what many Christians (and people of other faiths) are doing today.

The teachings of Jesus are clearly focused around forgiveness and compassion. There is no focus on condemnation, except for those who do not show appropriate levels of welcoming, outreach or forgiveness for the poor and the needy. Jesus did not preach of a God who is a combination of Google and Argos, offering to provide you with what you need if you just ask and he provides. My understanding of Christianity is what I would call “Jacobean”, i.e. in line with the old testament Jacob and the new testament James: stop talking, start doing, stop condemning, start reaching out, stop accusing, start helping.

I count myself as one of the most blessed people in the world. I do not suffer from droughts, earthquakes, famine or a deadly disease. I am surrounding by people who are friendly and nobody (as far as I know) is trying to kill me. I have work that ensures I live in comfort and am fed every day. And yet, I still see Christians, in similar situations to myself, believing they need to ask and condemn the needy.

God, in my view, would like to use me. He offers me forgiveness: I have made mistakes, I have screwed up, I have hurt people – “OK, says he, that’s in the past, forget about that, stop living with the guilt and move on! What are you going to do with that?”

He challenges me daily to understand and support the illegal immigrant – the person who has left a land of poverty or torture, seeking justice and food, who has left his/her loved ones and possessions behind in search of support. He challenges me to reach out to the oppressed in every area, those who are living with guilt, with fear, with pain.

When representatives of the Church preach hatred and condemnation, encourage, in their words or their deeds, acts of discrimination, condemnation, racism, xenophobia, homophobia and others, I do not believe they represent the fundamental teachings of Jesus Christ who only condemned those who condemned. I feel that the modern Church and today’s Christians appear to actually want to turn people away, through hatred, discrimination and condemnation.

Christianity is not about Church, it is about people. It is not about me, it is about those who need me.

And that is why I remain a fundamentalist Christian.

Recession? What recession?

2009-10-23T22:03:00.002+01:00

Thanks to the prudence of Mr Brown, our former chancellor, we are in a better place than any other country in the world to weather the global recession - according to statements made recently by our prime minister Mr Brown. So how come the recession hit the UK first and we are apparently the only country in Western Europe not to have come out yet?

Nick Griffin on the BBC - 2 pictures

2009-10-23T13:36:00.007+01:00

One picture of the menacing crowd that so intimidated the leader of the BNP, the other picture shows his kindly entourage. I know you should not judge a book by its cover, but I am ready to jump to conclusions!

Iceland and data

2009-10-22T20:30:00.002+01:00

Iceland has suffered from the economic crisis at least as much as any other country. They have now decided to become a global data centre. Because of the climate, cooling for the servers would be free, additionally they generate all their electricity through geo-thermal sources, meaning they have more electricity than they can use, and it is entirely from renewable sources. As a consequence the financial savings to the data centre will be dwarfed by the savings in greenhouse gases.
This sounds wonderful, but I still have a doubt... The geo-thermal sources are available because of the volcanic nature of the island (which is located between the continental plates).
Does Google really want to store all their data centres on top of a volcano?

Pause for thought

2009-09-25T14:21:00.000+01:00

I came across this and found it thought-provoking at least: http://www.cs.earlham.edu/~hyrax/personal/files/student_res/straightprivilege.htm

Middle-East peace

2009-09-25T13:54:00.002+01:00

Presidents Obama and Sarkozi and PM Brown have used serious words. They have managed to get a nuclear disarmement resolution passed by the United Nations, now they are strongly arguing that Iran has broken a UN resolution by seeking to build nuclear weapons. The language used was similar to that used by Bush and Blair a few years ago to justify invading Iraq in retaliation for what a Saudi, living in Afghanistan did to the WTC.
It gives me hope to trust that they will be using the same language with regard to Israel and the 221 resolutions the UN passed regarding their treatment of the Palestinian people since 1948 - and particularly resolution 242 (1967) requiring to withdraw immediately from the occupied Palestian territories.

Habitat

2009-09-22T23:18:00.002+01:00

October 5 is "World Habitat Day". Attempting to get decent housing for the poorest people does not seem like such an outlandish idea. Surely a home is key to the delivery of education, and education is the way out of poverty... Homes have been quite a bit in the news lately, whether it be the building of illegal houses by the occupied Palestinian territories by the Israeli government, or the ridiculous inflationary prices that arguably are a good deal of the current recession. The houses in the news are the houses for the rich, causing financial hardship. Maybe it is time to put affordable housing in the news as well?
More information on World Habitat Day can be found at http://worldhabitatdaynews.com/.

Once again in Nanjing

2009-09-21T06:02:00.002+01:00

So, I have once again travelled to Nanjing in China, the town that used to in be the capital of China (before Beijing) and is famous for “the rape of Nanjing” (the massacre carried out here by the Japanese when they invaded China last century).

When changing planes in Frankfurt, there was a request for people willing tIo downgrade their seats for €1500.00, apparently they had overbooked as this more or less covers the cost of the ticket, I decided I would accept the deal. In addition to the money, they allocated two seats to the people who accepted. Then, I got a seat that had no seat in front of it due to the layout of the cabin, so reasonably comfortable and travelling more or less for free (depending on the exchange rate I get when I cash in the voucher).

I will be in China until October 2. On the way here, I was reading (Time magazine) that October 1st is the 60th anniversary of the communist revolution. 60 is an important anniversary in China which has a tradition of respecting the wisdom of elders, so they are planning big celebrations, with lots of parades, tanks and everything. According to Time, they have, in view of these celebrations, cracked down on foreign criticism. This includes a stronger censorship on the Internet (sites like Facebook and Twitter are blocked*) and a strange warning to foreigners living in the compounds built for them in Beijing on the route of the parade. Apparently, they have been told not be on their balconies or open any windows giving onto the street during the parades or the rehearsals, under the risk of being shot! I am in Nanjing, nowhere near the parade route in Beijing, so don’t fret for me.

*I have a programme on my laptop called "OnSpeed" which is used to speed up internet connections. When it is running, it uses its own address and coding, which bypasses the censors and allows me to access them.

Patrick Swayze has died

2009-09-15T08:29:00.003+01:00

He was 57 years old. I remember my parents commenting that someone had died quite young because he was only 60; at the time, I thought everyone over 30 was ancient.
Swayze was a couple years older than I am; I now understand what my parents were saying. This is the sexy hunk of man from "Dirty Dancing" and "Ghost". Surely someone like that could never grow old? In those films he looks as young as I still frequently think I am, as fit as I wish I had ever been.

Nightclub with a conscience

2009-09-03T08:33:00.002+01:00

I went to visit a nightclub yesterday evening. I have not been in one of those for the past thirty years, but this was difference: the place was not open, this was a guided tour for people over the age of 25. I was very impressed with the social conscience of the place. They do make a lot of money from the entrance and drinks, but they put a lot of that money back into the community and into the neighbourhood. This includes things like tight security (13o cameras filming the place), their own taxi rank (off the street - free coffee and tea for taxi drivers), zero-tolerance towards drugs and drunkenness, having two local street-cleaners to pick up litter, etc during opening hours, a double-decker bus that is loaned out for various events, sponsoring events (such as a street-party with the neighbours), facilities available for various activities (such as a fully-equipped conference centre and possibility of offices for charities), first-aid centre to avoid dumping on the street people who have had a problem, they also avoid dumping on the public people who are drunk or whatever, and so on...
What really impressed me was that this is a nightclub taking its social responsiblity seriously instead of just making easy money out of drunk teenagers. Meanwhile, the local churches seem mostly preoccupied with themselves and their own internal issues.

China - PS

2009-08-31T08:53:00.002+01:00

Following a recent post about China on this blog, there appears to have been some confusion between what was comment, amusement and gripe.
Yes, Chinese towns are largely dirty places. They are fast growing, high-industry cities. They are building faster than anywhere else in the world, the place is over populated. If it has not rained for a few days, everything is rapidly covered in dust. Because of the high levels of poverty in China, they are a lot less choosy regarding cleanliness and hygiene - when I travel to a city for a week, it is normal for the Chinese to travel with only one change of shirt for the week. They carry everything they need for a week in a hotel in one paper shopping bag. They wear the same trousers for several weeks without a problem, I don't know about underwear - considering their reaction when I have laundry done at the hotel, I must assume that this is not seen as something necessary.
Driving in China is chaos, and they know it. Traffic rules are not respected. Anyone attempting to drive according to the regulations will never arrive.
The food is strange for us Westerners, but I really enjoy it. We eat strange things, things that are often not acceptable to the delicate Western palates. It is amazing how many tastes we miss. I like Chinese food, as it is served in China; I do not like the watered down bland Western version of Chinese food, which (as one Chinaman said to me) would be the equivalent of what KFC is to Western food. Also, eating with chopsticks, I find a lot more pleasurable than forks.
I recently had a bad experience in China for a variety of reasons, but generally, I like the Chinese. They don't mind asking personal questions, they tell you what they think, but they tell you politely. At first, this is difficult for us as we do not understand what is actually being said, as we are blinded by the friendly words used.
It is important to understand that the Chinese are natural born salesmen - or tradesmen. They build beautiful demos, their buildings and roads are for show, they like their cars to be big, shiny, black with darkened windows. Surprisingly for a nation so old, they are not interested in the long-term: they are looking at making quick wealth and will do what is required to make it happen. But then, that is the guiding rule here as well, isn't it?

When GPS goes wrong

2009-08-25T23:54:00.004+01:00

I have GPS and Googlemaps on my phone. Very useful when you are in a strange city or country and need to find your way. Particularly, I thought in China it would be helpful, as I was hoping to have some time off to walk around and maybe do some shopping (it turns out that I did not, but that is anothe issue). What to do when the map goes strangely wrong. Luckily I realized this before I got into trouble when I checked out the way to go from the hotel to the office and the system gave me directions that avoided most roads and send me through buildings instead! I am glad that I was not relying on the tool to get me home!

Back to China

2009-08-23T12:20:00.002+01:00

I am back in China after several years. So many things I had forgotten... The driving, in which lanes and arrows painted on the road are purely informative, to be treated as suggestions. Seat-belts (and helmets for bikers) are only there to demonstrate your complete lack of trust in the driver, I believe the taxi driver might actually take offence and through you out if you attempted to put it on. The dirt that seems to be everywhere; I understand that this is a very dry indrustrial country, but the level of dust everywhere is amazing - this includes the food stalls that are open on busy thoroughfares.
Then, we have people who speak English, but I haven't got a clue what they are talking about - I remember that it takes a few days to tune the ear to Sino-English. The censorship of the news on the internet and the lack of news on TV (I have 40 different Chinese channels).
We went out for dinner and had Chinese food, including frogs' legs, beef stomach, pigs' tails, something they claimed was a muscle, but didn't look like it, an enormous fish (complete from head to tail, to be eaten with chopsticks), chicken feet... The place was grimy, the waiters wearing shirts that did not appear washed and had certainly never been ironed. They give you the menu and remain there immediately to take your order - and will argue about what you ordered!
Different world...

Health care in Britain

2009-08-15T09:37:00.002+01:00

So the Americans have decided to take the British healthcare system to task to explain why they should not provide healthcare to the Americans. I am not a great fan of the NHS, but I feel called to defend it.
Contrary to US propaganda, there is no a price placed on a month of someone's life, there is no decision somewhere that certain people (like Stephen Hawkin, who lives in Britain and is cared for by the NHS) should not be let to live, etc.
If in Britain, your job or personal fortune allows you, you can have private health care and private insurance which is at least as good as that provided in the US, only a lot cheaper, because we still have healthcare prices set by the healthcare professionals, and not, as in the US, set by the litigation lawyers.
Additionally, in Britain, if you cannot afford private care or insurance, you can still get good care, in a reasonable time. You are checked into hospital even if you don't have a blue-cross card, you will get your surgery, your medication, your care - even if it is only something small, something that does not warrant a visit to an emergency room. You will be treated according to the gravity of your situation and the time at which you arrived - you will not have to surrender your place in the queue to someone who has more insurance that you do. In fact, no one will ask you for money or insurance papers, they will just take care of you!
Of course, the care you receive for free from the NHS is not at the same level as the care for which you pay a fortune in the US, of course, there are improvements to be made (too much paperwork, you get to sleep in a ward rather than a room...) however you do get care. And, if I understand the current US Republican attitude correctly, I believe that caring for people who cannot afford private insurance is still better for the economy than just hoping that all the poor people may die off soon.

Lockerbie - US vs UK

2009-08-13T10:21:00.002+01:00

Apparently there is a possibility that the man who has been imprisoned for the "Lockerbie bombing" of flight Pan Am 103 may be let out of prison for compassionate reasons, as he is busy dying of prostate cancer.
Various family members of people who died in the crash were interviewed this morning and we came up with two very distinct groups of people.

Every American person interviewed was scandalized. Comments were all along the lines of: "the man showed no compassion to my son/wife/... and therefore should rot in jail"
Every British person interviewed said it was about time. They referenced the doubtful evidence used in the court-case, the damning evidence that was hidden from the case, the confusion in the verdict and selecting the right accused.

It may be bias on behalf of the radio and television stations (could the BBC and Murdoch's Sky actually be colluding to falsify information?), but it made me feel how wide the cultural Atlantic continues to be. Several of the Americans interviewed were probably could evangelical Christians, who sing every Sunday about forgiveness and redemption, but are willing to condemn and accuse anyone who is not White-Anglo-Saxon-Protestant...
Why does this bother me so much...?

Respect and Litter

2009-08-10T13:11:00.002+01:00

I was in the tube today in London. A man came in with a badge saying he was a "litter picker". As he went through the relatively small carriage, he filled a reasonably large plastic bin-liner with cast-away copies of the local free newspapers. It is quite amazing the amount of litter and rubbish that is produced through these free papers, "metro", "london lite" and others...
The other thing that upset me was the man, wearing "London Underground" tie and badge, who looked down at a paper lying at his feet and, from his superiority, kicked towards the man whose job it was to pick it up. Even though the one was white and the other black, I don't put this down to racism. I think it was just pure arrogance.
People just don't care about the environment or others...

How to hammer a nail in

2009-08-06T15:40:00.001+01:00

Harriet and the politics of equality

2009-08-06T10:09:00.002+01:00

Harriet Harman, vice-prime-minister of the UK, has announced that she wants the two top posts of the Labour party and of the government to always be occupied by a man and a woman in order to ensure that variety is understood and the points of view of the whole population. I agree completely with her. I also believe that those top two spots should always be occupied by one white person, one black person, one asian person; by one Christian, one Muslim, one Buddhist, one atheist and one Sikh; by one straight, one homosexual and one transvestite...
She also went on to say that half the "winnable" seats should have all-women candidates (the others should not be all-men) in the name of equality. She also wants longer maternity leave...
I think Ms Harman has a very bizarre understanding of equality and balance. In fact, I think she is dangerously off her rocker.

Schooling - again

2009-07-29T22:59:00.002+01:00

So I complained about failing schools - what can be done about it. Maybe it is time for me to put down some ideas instead of just moaning and complaining.
First of all, I think we need to focus schooling on education, not on knowledge. Knowledge can be found everywhere today, the internet and books, computers and libraries; in the modern Western world, knowledge is easy to find. An education is rare. Schools should focus on imparting a desire to learn, a desire to know more, an understanding of what matters. They should also teach children how to read - I don't mean how to decipher Dr Seuss, but really how to read, how to find the information that is useful and read it in a critical and analytical manner so that they actually understand the information when they find it.
I believe that children aged 7 to 10 years old should be taught three foreign languages. At that age, they can absorb languages easily. It will open up their minds to different cultures, because the culture is reflected very clearly in the grammar and the structure of languages. I only learnt to truly appreciate the Chinese when I bothered trying to learn their language (I failed, but so much made sense, even with the little that I took onboard).
Next, the children should be taught about philosophy. I mean here philosophy in the widest sense of the term. They should of course be taught the thought process of Plato, but also the philosophy of religion and the philosophy of science. Philosophy courses given to ten to thirteen year old children should include classical texts Greek texts, as well as the Bible, the Bhagavad Gita, Einstein and Stephen Hawking. Today these are not seen as philosophies in most schools, so there is a tendency to put them in opposition to each other instead of supporting each other. Completing the philosophy courses with lessons on Leonardo da Vinci, Matisse and Picasso, Lord Byron, Jorge Luis Borges and Jacques Brel. In other words, teaching children to think.
Teenage years should be spent in more physical activities, getting them to spent some of the energy that is so frequently channelled negatively today. I was never a keen sportsman, so I am not now recommending sports; I am suggesting that teenagers spent time helping farmers collect the potato crop, build houses for "habitat for humanity", etc. In other words, useful physical activity rather than chasing balls.
The British school system today (and, I suspect, many others) is based on "league tables" in which the school is judged and its budget established based on the number of children who pass different exams. The result is that there is no incentive to teach children to think for themselves: the whole school system is focused on teaching to pass an exam. Nothing else. Schools should be judged on practical results. A school should be judged based on the number of students who successfully make it into the best universities. Every time a student is enrolled in a university, the schools would get one point per year that student spent in that school. As a result, the schools would focus on providing a useful education, so that their students can be able to receive higher learning.
But then, that is just my opinion.

Schooling and Universities

2009-07-21T11:24:00.003+01:00

A lot of discussion today on the news complaining that too many high-jobs (such as judges) and university places are taken up by students from private schools (which are called public schools in England) rather than from state schools.
This is identified as elitism and the response is that more top jobs should be made available based on the background of the person instead of school results. Indeed, this is presented as an unfair advantage for the rich of the world who can afford to remove their children from failing state schools and give them an education in which they learn something!
Stop blaming the private schools! It is the state schools that are failing and should be improved!

What's the point of "church"?

2009-07-15T11:26:00.002+01:00

Nope - no statement, just an open question. Please feel free to comment and answer (on blog, not on Facebook), no discussion, no argument. I am not asking what is the point of faith or whether you are Christian or whether God exists, the question is clear: what is the point of "church".
All answers received will be posted.

Torchwood 3

2009-07-12T12:16:00.002+01:00

I spent Saturday watching five hours of Torchwood and want to comment - please note that if you have not seen it, I am including plot spoilers in this text and maybe you should stop reading here.

---

OK - I am assuming the rest of you have seen the "Children of the Earth" (Torchood series 3 - also called by some TW3, not to be confused with an older TV programme called That Was The Week That Was, also abbreviated to TW3).
Sorry, fans, I hope that was the end of the Torchwood, one of my favourite TV series of all times. I don't want a series 4. This has wrapped up the story nicely, drawn a line under it. Several reasons for this:

John Barrowman has been playing the same character for five years. One of the characteristics of this character is that he never changes, never ages, never dies. I think he has managed to pull it off, but as time goes by, he is going to have to be more and more heavily coated in make-up to hide the fact that the actor ages, even if the character does not.
RTD (Russel T Davies), the author has said he wants to move on and is stopping with Dr Who and Torchwood. He is an absolutely brilliant writer and the new author will have difficulties maintaining the same punch for a programme like TW.
Some of the best series on television in the past: Fawlty Towers (12 episodes ever made), Blackadder (four seasons), the Office (two seasons), Extras (two seasons), Queer as Folk (the original, also two seasons, also by RTD... They all stopped when they were ahead. They did not let time and continuous repeats kill them off slowly as happened with the Simpsons, Friends and others who struggled regularly to try to regain some of the original life
The alternative is a never ending series, like Dr Who, which started in 1964 and is still going strong 45 years later (is this the longest running TV series in the world?). However, the actors change regularly. Dr Who, like Captain Jack, keeps on going, but he ages, he dies, he regenerates, he turns into a different actor. In addition, one of the great features in Dr Who is the different ways of presenting something everyone already knows (e.g. the Daleks have been completely, definitely and finally destroyed in every season since they first appeared in 1964 - don't worry, they will come back next year).
All the main characters are now dead. That is very realistic considering the life they lead.

Sorry to see TW go, but it was a good ending. I hope commercial interests don't encourage the BBC to produce imitations and sequels with a different (obviously inferior) author and some Barrowman look-alike or an aging Barrowman. I am looking forward to more Dr Who, RTD and John Barrowman in new adventures and stories, somewhere else.
PS: RIP Ianto - we'll miss you.

Giving 110%

2009-07-06T16:20:00.003+01:00

What makes 100%? And what does it mean to give MORE than that? Ever wonder about those people who say they are giving more than 100%? How can you get to that level? We’ve all been in a social situation where someone wants us to give over 100%. How about achieving more than that? Here's a little mathematical formula that might help you answer these questions:
If:
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
is represented as:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26,
then:
H-A-R-D-W-O-R- K
8+1+18+4+23+15+18+11 = 98%
and
K-N-O-W-L-E-D-G-E
11+14+15+23+12+5+4+7+5 = 96%.
But
A-T-T-I-T-U-D-E
1+20+20+9+20+21+4+5 = 100%
and
B-U-L-L-S-H-I-T
2+21+12+12+19+8+9+20 = 103%
and
B-U-R-N-O-U-T
2+21+18+14+15+21+20 = 111%
and
A-S-S-K-I-S-S-I-N-G
1+19+19+11+9+19+19+9+14+7 = 118%.
So one can conclude with mathematical certainty that while hard work and knowledge will always come close, attitude will get you there, but it's the bullshit and ass kissing that will put people over the top.

(This is not from me - I copied it - which explains the US spelling of "asskissing" and added the line on "burnout")

Ryanair hits a new low

2009-07-06T15:08:00.003+01:00

A few months ago, Ryanair decided to start charging people to use the toilet in flight, now, in its continued pursuit to minimize service and maximize profits - sorry, I think they call it cost-cutting - Ryanair has come up with the ultimate solution: passengers will not be give seats! No, I don't mean that they will not have reserved seats, they got rid of that a long time ago. This time, they are planning on removing seats completely and allow passengers to "squat on stools" according to the news report on BBC Radio 4... (also on Sky: http://uk.news.yahoo.com/5/20090706/tbs-ryanair-fly-for-free-if-you-stand-up-327c223.html)

Belgium

2009-07-06T08:25:00.002+01:00

One of the nice things about visiting Belgium is discovering how nice it is in Milton Keynes. On a single trip to Mortsel, where I used to live, we got to see:

Two lane roads brought down to one lane, for no particular reason, through white lines and bollards - not a bus lane of an HOV lane;
Waiting over three minutes at a red light, when there is no traffic;
Light traffic brought into a big traffic-jam through "traffic controlling measures";
A shopping district where there are no shops left because people cannot access the shops any longer;
High levels of pollution through cars standing still due to the changes brought on by the "ecologist" administration;
A new apartment building with very few windows, all of them very small...

Milton Keynes, an Urban Eden

2009-06-28T15:34:00.000+01:00

Our Urban Eden from Colin Barrett on Vimeo.

20 year democracy

2009-06-24T19:16:00.003+01:00

The Iranian government is using force and riot police to stop the calls for democracy.
20 years ago, tanks rolled on to Tienanmen Square in Beijing.
20 years before that, Russian tanks rolled into Prague to stop their calls for democracy.
20 years before that the Democratic German Republic (East Germany) was created.
I did not search 1929, but I still feel that there is trend here - perhaps the great depression had an impact.

Disability is ugly

2009-06-20T10:41:00.002+01:00

I am not saying so, the fashion clothes manufacturer Abercrombie and Fitch and the BBC are saying so (see the links for full stories); they both claim that disabled people should be kept away from their customers.
Surely if a global leading fashion name and a global leading media outlet are both claiming that disabled people are too ugly, they must know best, right?
Think about your reaction to this news story, I don't think it deserves to go by completely unnoticed...

Things I don't like about summer

2009-06-17T10:10:00.002+01:00

1. Dog poo on the lawn when it needs mowing
2. Ice-cream which you have to eat too quickly before it melts
3. Ice-cream which you did not eat quick enough and drips on your favourite shirt
4. Beautiful young people in sexy skimpy clothes who will not give me a second glance
5. Overweight/middle-aged people in ridiculous skimpy clothes who want to take up my time
6. My beautiful skimpy clothes that make me look overweight and middle-aged
7. Having to work through nap time
8. Having to work on a beautiful day
9. Why does it get cloudy on the day I don't want to work?
10. Beautiful weather and no work at the same time as a very good television programme
11. The neighbours talking loudly outside until the middle of the night
12. The neighbours complaining that we have a few friends over in the evening
13. Gin and tonic - always need a second one; in the winter I drink whisky and don't need a second one
14. Church and other barbecues, fetes, etc where I have to be friendly
15. People whom I swear I have never met before who greet me by name at church barbecues and proceed to demonstrate how well they know me, my family, my job...
16. Laundry hanging outside and getting stiff instead of being stuffed in a dryer with chemicals to make them fluffy and smell artificially good
17. People who turn out to have hay-fever when I tell them to smell the flowers or the freshly cut grass
18. Getting annoyed at myself for getting annoyed at the birds who wake me up at 4.00 am
19. Too hot for covers or PJs when I go too bed, yet it gets cold once I am fast asleep
20. People reading this list and calling me a grumpy old git - you know who you are

More on ministerial expenses

2009-06-16T14:03:00.002+01:00

This morning there was an item on the radio about the expenses of members of the House of Lords - will this never go away? The (New) Labour government, in the past 12 years, has created more laws and regulations than the sum total of all laws in history. The answer to the expense scandal is typical of that mentality: they are putting in more laws and regulations regarding expenses of MPs. These are required because the people elected have proved themselves untrustworthy. Because we can not trust them to act honourably, they will write legislation to help legislate themselves and to stop themselves from breaking the existing laws.
I think it is time to invite Madame Guillotine back to Westminster. I wish the Queen would act according to her powers and dissolve this government and force an election!

Iranian elections

2009-06-15T22:47:00.002+01:00

There appears to be a new Iranian revolution going on. I don't know (and I don't think anyone does) who won the election, whether they were fair or a complete cheat. I don't know if the ruling party got re-elected fairly or not. However, the people have gone to the street, they are fighting for democracy, arguing that the elections were a fraud.
The US have announced that they will stay out of this discussion completely because this is internal Iranian business.
Have they learnt from the military defeats in Iraq, Kosovo and Afghanistan? Or is it something else?...

Pandemic in Westminster?

2009-06-03T11:45:00.003+01:00

It seems that all the MPs are busy resigning - not straight away, but next year. The resignations have nothing to do with the fact that they have all cheated the tax-payer through their expenses, it is strictly related to personal reasons and needing to spend more time with their family. Also, if they are all waiting until next year it has nothing to do with the fact that they will only get a full pension if they stay till the next election, it is just that they don't need to spend time with their family just yet... All the Labour members of government are busy explaining what a great job all those who are quitting did and gently mocking the press for reading too much into this... it's just that all their families suddenly need more attention, next year.
Of course, we believe them.

20 years ago today

2009-06-03T07:25:00.002+01:00

The Chinese government turned its guns and tanks on its own youth in Tiananmen square, the "Gate of Heavenly Peace". The Chinese people still do not know what the rest of the world knows. This "incident" has been largely erased from Chinese history.
There still is no enquiry into why so many people were killed in an earthquake in China last year, in the cheap, badly built buildings put up by the Chinese government.
Religious movements like the Falun Gong are still banned under penalty of death, while the Roman Catholic Church must acknowledge that the Chairman of the Chinese Communist Party is wiser than the Pope.

Youth and age, body and mind?

2009-06-02T09:54:00.005+01:00

Our society has, over the past hundred years, changed its focus from respect to desire. I don't think that we have switched 100%, I do not believe that everything was wonderful then and terrible today, I just believe that we have passed to the other side of the bell-curve.
The human being, in my opinion, is composed of body, mind and soul. The three work together and change together through experiences and events. In our increasingly materialistic society, the focus has moved (I believe) from soul to mind and from mind to body.
What you believe, your honesty and your faith are of little importance today.
What you know is continuously losing importance.
Diplomas are considered higher than experience.
What you own is more important. The money, the house, the car, the beautiful spouse or partner. Even your body is considered as one of your prime possessions. Our celebrity obsessed society is fascinated by beautiful wealthy people; even if these people have never done or said anything of interest. You will find more people in the gym than in the library.
The elderly are not considered as people who have given their lives, who have worked hard, who have accumulated a wealth of experience and wisdom. They are not honoured or respected. To the contrary, they are considered as out of touch because they do not understand how to work an iPod and don't really care about SatNav. We don't listen to them, we don't welcome them into our homes. The elderly are largely considered as slightly embarrassing expenses.
Does it matter?
I think it does. In fact, I think that the loss of focus first on the spirit, then on the mind, explains most of the issues in the world today. I will not go into the British MPs expenses as that is fairly obvious and simple to understand. Let's look at something bigger than that.
The global financial crisis is largely due to the fact that we have to forgotten that we need to work and save in order to buy. The desire of youth is closely related to the desire to own things immediately, when we can "enjoy" them. This has led people to borrow more than they can afford, running up debt that they will never be able to repay. This started some time ago, and the people who borrowed are now reaching pensionable age, when their income has dropped dramatically, while their debt remains. As a consequence, they can no longer afford to pay for the luxuries they desired in the past. "Work, save and then buy what you can afford" is one of those wisdoms that we have lost. Our politicians are in line with this. The great statesmen of the past would no longer be acceptable today as we long for young, good-looking politicians rather than intelligent or wise ones. The result of this is that we have politicians who are borrowing money from our children's future in order to pay for the errors of their past.
The great teachings of the past, whether they are as old as the Bible or Plato, or as recent as JFK or Martin Luther King Jr have been thrown out in favour of "renewal" and "modern" ideas.
Like everyone else, I would like to be young, handsome and fit again. However, I do believe that it is time that we start change our focus from the body to the mind, from youth to wisdom, from knowledge to understanding, from the mind to the spirit.
In a few years I will be dead, my body dust. Only my thoughts can remain in the minds of other people. Only my spirit will remain.

Paid to be positive

2009-06-01T08:53:00.003+01:00

A while back, I added "Ads by Google" to my blog (see left column). This is an "intelligent" system that reads my text, and determines what I am talking about, then selects appropriate advertisement to place next to it. The idea is that if people are reading this topic, they must be interested in it. Any time someone clicks on the link, I am supposed to get some fraction of penny-dust (not sure how they plan to get the money to me). I had a look at the advertising this morning - not something I would normally do as I avoid advertising and don't read my own blog - and was amused by the result. Following a recent ranting complaint, I see that all the advertising seems to be selling the very thing I was complaining about. If anyone reads my text, they will obviously not be using those links.
So here is the profound lesson to be learnt from Google, greed and capitalism: I need to talk positively about things I like instead of always complaining and bitching, otherwise I will advertise things I do not like and not make any money out of it.

Satan is Swedish

2009-05-29T21:35:00.002+01:00

It has often been said that God is an Englishman. Today, I went to Ikea and discovered that Satan is Swedish. Go to buy something, they don't have it, you can't remember the unpronounceable name of what you want, you end up buying something you did not want, you then get to carry it home (it just doesn't fit in the car), you get to build it up, replace the missing screw with Blue-Tack. It all collapses three weeks later.
We actually wanted to buy a table, but they only had one table leg left. We could order the other three, they might get one in a week and the remainder in four weeks.

A sad day for politics

2009-05-28T14:08:00.002+01:00

The honourable Ms Kirkbridge has announced that she will not be running for re-election. This has been announced as a great loss. Apparently she was a very efficient person and this is a discouragement to any young mothers who want to go into politics.
This is indeed a discouragement to any young mothers who want to represent a town where they don't live, while their husband represents still some other place, any young mothers who want to be able who want to build a £50,000.00 extension to their house in order to house their brother who, in exchange, offers "free" childcare from time to time, any young mother who does not understand that stealing money from the tax-payer in order to pay for private expenses is theft, any young mother who believes that tax-fraud is not applicable to members of Parliament.
This is indeed a sad day for Parliament as we know it when people are being forced to resign simply because they are lying, fraudulent crooks. If this continues, will anyone be left?

Whack a kitty

2009-05-26T14:40:00.000+01:00

ecrase un chaton, whack a kitty
by jean070