Wednesday:
So there I was, boning up for Conference by reading my homework, with my big fluffy nose stuck inside Consultation Paper 87 – pithily entitled "Europe" – considering issues to consider (unlucky) No. 13: "In either case, would a referendum as part of the ratification process be (a) appropriate or (b) unnecessary", when who should stalk in but Sir Mr the Merciless declaring that he has worked it all out for us!
"We do not need a referendum on this!" he said.
Well, goodness, THAT was very cross-making! Aren't we supposed to "Trust in People" (to make Greenland Fairly British for Free)? What about the Maastricht Treaty? We said that THAT needed a referendum, even if that wasn't a Constitution either. And this is just a big a change!
I was not the only one to get hot under my fluffy collar! Lots of Liberal Bloggers all marched out to plant their soap boxes on Sir Mr the Merciless's lawn (and some of them to defend his window boxes).
Had our beloved Sir Mr the Merciless gone round the twist? Had he fallen under the EVIL INFLUENCE of Mr Frown? No, it turns out we had all MISUNDERSTOOD!
Do not look at me funny, Daddy!
"Ah," said Sir Mr the Merciless, "what I MEANT to say was: we do not need a referendum on this… we need a referendum on the WHOLE Europe Question! Should we stay or should we go?"
Which as lot better, isn't it? Well, isn't it? Or is it?
Well, I suppose so. It DOES let Sir M row back off of a slightly sticky wicket, taking the question of being too close to Mr Frown and knocking it for six, and leaving Mr Balloon sunk in the referendum race.
[R: could this metaphor GET any more mixed?]
But it is – obviously – the NUCLEAR OPTION as far as Europe goes. Many, probably most people, realise that it would be TOTAL MADNESS for Great Britain to pull out of the European project. Even apart from the fact that they are our closest neighbours and that we've lost the Empire and that the Americans were never going to consider us as anything other than insignificant even if we hadn't just pis quite annoyed them by pulling out of Basra and embarrassing them, then even apart from all that the thing about Europe is that is WORKS!
What has Europe done for us? Well, apart from the peace and the prosperity and the aqueducts and the cheap holidays and the investment and the environmental protection and the economic stability and the… I think you get the picture. No one wants us to give up on the GOOD LIFE and go back to well, the Tom and Barbara Good Life!
So – again obviously – from a PRO-EUROPEAN point of view, a referendum on "Do we stay in the Space Age or go back to the Stone Age" looks a JOLLY SIGHT more winnable than "Shall we accept this treaty that you've probably either not read, not understood or already made your mind up to dislike anyway and by the way would you like to kick the government?"
But isn't it also very slightly CHEATING?
Giving people a "Europe: take it or leave it" option is hardly geared to INCLUSIVITY, is it? It is not going to make people WARM to Europe: quite the reverse it is going to reinforce the stereotype of Europe as cold, isolated, far away place with which we have little in common… er… but which has so much power over our lives.
What we want is not STERILE exchanges on whether to stay in Europe or not, but a real debate on what we want Europe to be and how we are going to get there, how we are going to get there TOGETHER.
Saturday, September 15, 2007
Friday, September 14, 2007
Day 2444: America Declares Victory (and prepares to scarper)
Tuesday:
UNLIKE the Grand Old Duke of York, then, Mr General Patraeus has left his unfortunate troops in a hole in Iraq while he marched HIMSELF to the top of the Hill.
If it didn't involve a DEVASTATED Middle Eastern country, this whole business would be entirely PANTOMIME.
The "surge" is working, says the Monkey in Chief.
"Oh no it isn't!" say the people of Iraq.
"Oh yes it is!" says the General.
"Oh no it isn't!" say the Democrat Senators.
"He's BEHIND YOU! (in the opinion polls)" says EVERYONE…
Anticipation is high that – after weeks of US Generals calling the British "cowards" and "defeated" for withdrawing troops from Iraq – the Monkey-in-Chief will be appearing on television to announce the US will be withdrawing their troops from Iraq.
Okay, so the (first part of the) plan is only to go back to "pre-surge" levels, i.e. a-hundred-and-thirty-eight thousandtargets troopers instead of a-hundred-and-SIXTY-eight thousand.
And don't ask for them to be sent home before the middle of 2008 (unless you want the country to implode)!
But I think it is PRETTY OBVIOUS to everyone (and that especially includes President Armageddon-jab in Iran) that we have reached that stage of the conflict when one of the powers decides to make a discrete series of STRATEGIC ADVANCES in the direction of THEIR OWN BORDERS, quietly leaving the locals to SLAUGHTER each other until they can pull themselves into a settlement.
This being the Iraq conflict, quite naturally NO ONE is thinking of coming up with an actual PLAN; they are all FAR too busy doing the important PR work of covering their shiny military asses, as they say in America-land.
If the BRITISH have anything to say about it, though, then it will no doubt result in PARTITION – see also Israel and Palestine; India and Pakistan; and Northern Ireland. The Kurds will get their Kurdistan (to the HUGE annoyance of the Turks); the Sunnis will get the westerly province of Anbar (though that looks a lot more difficult today) and the Shiites will get the rump of Iraq, but, hey, they will get most of the OIL! This will, as usual, result in many decades of hostility, feuding and open warfare before eventually… actually, we don't KNOW what will happen eventually as we've NEVER got past the hostility, feuding and open warfare – see also Israel and Palestine; India and Pakistan; and Northern Ireland (oh, all right, the last one seems to be working out now that after 9/11 the Americans have stopped funding the terrorists 'cos they don't see the funny side any more).
The factions continue to prepare for the day after the Americans go, while the ordinary Iraqi-in-the-street (or more likely NOT in the street, but hiding at home) is just exhausted by it all. 70% of Iraqis think their security is WORSE… and that's in the area where the surge actually IS! And a similar number think their government is rubbish too, and only being held up by the US army.
Things are NEVER going to get better while we are still there making things WORSE.
Isn't it time we all came home?
Meanwhile, while the Democrats go on the offensive, and the Monkey-in-Chief continues to be REALLY offensive, all the US army can hope for is some COVERING FIRE from their top brass.
Oooh, and look what an EXCITING collection of MERIT BADGES Mr General Patraeus has got!
UNLIKE the Grand Old Duke of York, then, Mr General Patraeus has left his unfortunate troops in a hole in Iraq while he marched HIMSELF to the top of the Hill.
If it didn't involve a DEVASTATED Middle Eastern country, this whole business would be entirely PANTOMIME.
The "surge" is working, says the Monkey in Chief.
"Oh no it isn't!" say the people of Iraq.
"Oh yes it is!" says the General.
"Oh no it isn't!" say the Democrat Senators.
"He's BEHIND YOU! (in the opinion polls)" says EVERYONE…
Anticipation is high that – after weeks of US Generals calling the British "cowards" and "defeated" for withdrawing troops from Iraq – the Monkey-in-Chief will be appearing on television to announce the US will be withdrawing their troops from Iraq.
Okay, so the (first part of the) plan is only to go back to "pre-surge" levels, i.e. a-hundred-and-thirty-eight thousand
And don't ask for them to be sent home before the middle of 2008 (unless you want the country to implode)!
But I think it is PRETTY OBVIOUS to everyone (and that especially includes President Armageddon-jab in Iran) that we have reached that stage of the conflict when one of the powers decides to make a discrete series of STRATEGIC ADVANCES in the direction of THEIR OWN BORDERS, quietly leaving the locals to SLAUGHTER each other until they can pull themselves into a settlement.
This being the Iraq conflict, quite naturally NO ONE is thinking of coming up with an actual PLAN; they are all FAR too busy doing the important PR work of covering their shiny military asses, as they say in America-land.
If the BRITISH have anything to say about it, though, then it will no doubt result in PARTITION – see also Israel and Palestine; India and Pakistan; and Northern Ireland. The Kurds will get their Kurdistan (to the HUGE annoyance of the Turks); the Sunnis will get the westerly province of Anbar (though that looks a lot more difficult today) and the Shiites will get the rump of Iraq, but, hey, they will get most of the OIL! This will, as usual, result in many decades of hostility, feuding and open warfare before eventually… actually, we don't KNOW what will happen eventually as we've NEVER got past the hostility, feuding and open warfare – see also Israel and Palestine; India and Pakistan; and Northern Ireland (oh, all right, the last one seems to be working out now that after 9/11 the Americans have stopped funding the terrorists 'cos they don't see the funny side any more).
The factions continue to prepare for the day after the Americans go, while the ordinary Iraqi-in-the-street (or more likely NOT in the street, but hiding at home) is just exhausted by it all. 70% of Iraqis think their security is WORSE… and that's in the area where the surge actually IS! And a similar number think their government is rubbish too, and only being held up by the US army.
Things are NEVER going to get better while we are still there making things WORSE.
Isn't it time we all came home?
Meanwhile, while the Democrats go on the offensive, and the Monkey-in-Chief continues to be REALLY offensive, all the US army can hope for is some COVERING FIRE from their top brass.
Oooh, and look what an EXCITING collection of MERIT BADGES Mr General Patraeus has got!
Day 2443: Vicki Pollard versus God
Monday:
We might call this theft of intellectual property but the church calls it breaking the Seventh Commandment!
A no-doubt very RIGHTEOUS religious organisation "Christian Publishing and Outreach" have decided to prove how DOWN WITH THE KIDS the LORD is these days by using popular catchphrases from today's top comedy stars, including DOCTOR WHO STAR Catherine Tate's "Am I bovvered" and "How Very Dare You", and other quotes from Matt Lucas and David Walliams of "Little Brittain".
TRAGICALLY, though, they appear to havenot bovvered forgotten to ask the stars' permission before commercially exploiting their material at £25 a poster for a comic quip with matching Biblical passage.
Probably something like this…
"Yeah but no but yeah but…" is the original work of Vicki Pollard aka Matt Lucas from "Little Britain".
"God" is a character in the Bible.
These fictional characters remain copyright © their original creators.
We might call this theft of intellectual property but the church calls it breaking the Seventh Commandment!
A no-doubt very RIGHTEOUS religious organisation "Christian Publishing and Outreach" have decided to prove how DOWN WITH THE KIDS the LORD is these days by using popular catchphrases from today's top comedy stars, including DOCTOR WHO STAR Catherine Tate's "Am I bovvered" and "How Very Dare You", and other quotes from Matt Lucas and David Walliams of "Little Brittain".
TRAGICALLY, though, they appear to have
Probably something like this…
And Lot did cry unto HEAVEN: "Oh LORD! Didst thou SMITE the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah?"…or maybe NOT!
And the LORD did spake unto him saying
"Yeah but no but yeah but… anyway why should I have to answer to you when you was so trying to get your daughters pushed on the gathered menfolk when everyone KNOWS they was only interested in doing my angels and I've seen you licking at that pillar of salt so SHUT UP!"
"Yeah but no but yeah but…" is the original work of Vicki Pollard aka Matt Lucas from "Little Britain".
"God" is a character in the Bible.
These fictional characters remain copyright © their original creators.
Thursday, September 13, 2007
Day 2442: Back to Babylon
Sunday:
The Americans are a funny lot. One bunch might see ancient Babylon as no more than a place to park their tanks, while another lot take it as their inspiration to create probably the most groundbreaking television series of the Nineties.
I am talking, of course, about Joe Michael Straczynski's "BABYLON 5", the five-year project to create a "novel for television", and show that careful budgeting, a dedicated cast and at-the-time cutting edge computer imagery could produce a cinematic feel on the small screen.
Well, Babylon is back and the news is it's BRILLIANT!
"Babylon 5" is like the works of Mr Dickens or Mr Conan Doyle, a single story that develops over a series of "issues" or episodes. By inventing characters who DEVELOP over the story it brings the soap opera into the space opera – in later days people will use the term "soap opera" to deride it and indeed to deride "Doctor Who" for the same reason, as though somehow drama isn't ESSENTIALLY always ABOUT character, and that that is the thing, if anything, that soap operas do most RIGHT!
Above all, it pretty much created the idea of the STORY ARC – the linking theme that ties separate stand-alone episodes together into a whole.
Daddy Alex gives me a funny look and mutters: "Isn’t there a story arc from 1978-9 coming out in a fortnight?" Well yes, "Doctor Who" has been doing this sort of thing for a BIT of a WHILE (possibly even more so in the ORIGINAL series with Miss Barbara and Mr Chesterfield) and you can look to "Blake's Seven" (particularly in its second year) for another influence, too. But it wasn’t until "Babylon 5" that the ideas of an overarching plot, character development and a sense of theme all pulled together.
Series like "Murder One" and "24" picked up this idea and REALLY RAN with it. In some ways, though, the "Babylon 5" arc is too HEAVY. By the end of the second season, EVERY episode is an "Arc episode", so rather than rewarding the committed follower, it penalises the casual viewer. Unlike other similar series, you are less likely to just tune in if one happens to be on if you don't know what's going on already. Later series, like "The X-Files" and "Buffy" would use a lighter arc – one where the series was mostly one-off stories, where only some small number of incidents would connect to the main through thread. Ultimately, this leads to the modern day "Doctor Who", with its Bad Wolf, Torchwood and Saxon "arcs".
As a series, "Babylon 5" does not always succeed, even on its own terms. Fear of cancellation clearly tips the producers into telescoping the planned year five story into year four, making the penultimate year too crowded and rushed and leaving the finale empty of major plots and almost drifting. Mr Joe ended up writing almost every episode from the middle of the second season through to the end, and although this does ensure a unity of vision, it is also obvious that it left him exhausted and flagging for ideas by the time year five (or even four) came around.
It's been suggested that constant cast changes may have hurt the series too, but I think that it actually adds REALISM to a world where people can be reassigned, assassinated or turn into glowing angels all the time! Actors DID leave the series, under a variety of circumstances, and yet where this might have damaged the show it was often turned to advantage – losing Mr Michael O'Hare (Commander Jeffrey "Wooden" Sinclair) at the end of year one meant gaining the powerhouse that is Mr Bruce Boxleitner (Captain John "Nuke'em" Sheridan) who has invested so much personally over the years in a show he clearly loved and loves; it was certainly a blow when Ms Claudia Christian (Commander Susan "Boom Tomorrow" Ivanova) left after the fourth year, but even so the series makes another gain in Ms Tracey Scoggins (Captain Elizabeth "I've had the President" Lochley).
Since the end of "Babylon 5" in the episode "Sleeping in Light" there have been several attempts to return to that universe: several movie-length episodes set around the series' main story; a spin-off series "Crusade" which was sunk by trouble between Joe and the TNT network who were then carrying the show; and a really rather dreadful pilot for a second spin-ff series "The Legend of the Rangers" which went down with all hands, despite including the last performance of the toweringly awesome Mr Andreas Katsulas as G'Kar.
So it was with a mixture of hope, anticipation and vague DREAD that my Daddies received the news that Mr Joe was going to try yet again, this time with a series of "Babylon 5" based stories called "The Lost Tales". The DREADED words "straight to video DVD" did not help much either!
I can only say we were BOWLED OVER with delight!
"Voices in the Night" is the first (hopefully of many) "Lost Tales" and is basically an anthology of two short (roughly half-hour) stories linked for the most part by no more than being set on the same day in 2271.
Mr Bruce and Ms Tracey both return, one taking each side of the story: now promoted to Colonel Lochley is having one HELL of a time on the Babylon station, while Mr now-President-of-the-Galaxy Sheridan is given a glimpse of the end of the world and a KILLER of an opportunity to prevent it.
The opening story (subtitled "Over Here") is barely even a "Babylon 5" story at all. In fact, it almost goes out of its way to ignore most of the B5 back-story and mythos. What it is, though, is an absolutely CRACKING piece of science fiction, mixing a good old dose of THEOLOGY with an old-fashioned horns of a DILEMMA – and it's up to Ms Lochley to find the apocryphal third way out.
The plot revolves around: a priest whose religion is fading away as man travels into heaven and finds no gods; a man who appears to be genuinely possessed; and what the implications of this vision of perdition would mean for believers and for one man's soul. Now, if you KNOW that in the Babylon 5 universe there are TELEPATHS who could mess with your head like this, or if you happen to remember the (rather wonderful) episode in the first season where Mr Commander Sinclair introduces a whole long line of religious types, then this set-up seems, well, a bit not quite right. BUT that isn't the point: take it as a story in its own right and you will REALLY enjoy it.
Barely more than a three-hander, it hangs on some really terrific performances from the actors and one or two stand-out effects moments that knock you back on your heels.
In the second half-hour (now called "Over There", obviously) Mr President Sheridan is travelling to the Babylon station when his trip and his dreams are interrupted by the TECHNOMAGE Mr Galen (played by Mr Peter Woodwoodwood the son of Mr Edwardwood Woodwoodwood) who was probably the most intriguing character from poor old failed "Crusade". Mr Galen is VERY MYSTERIOUS, often quite a bit SCARY and SERIOUSLY bald. But also funny and probably a goodie – so long as you work out how his twisted mind is working! Nice cape, also.
Mr President Sheridan faces a DILEMMA too – and he too finds a third option, when he realises that that is what Mr Galen has been hinting at. This story relies much more upon knowing the B5 history, understanding that the Centauri fell in with a bad lot (called the Shadows), started a great big war and ended up losing almost everything. So, the possibility that in thirty years they might be back for revenge means something. Equally, it helps to know what it means that Prince Vintari's father was killed by someone called Vir. (What it means is that his dad was mad bad Emperor Cartagia – think Caligula with pointy hair!)
These are, without doubt, the best "Babylon 5" since "Sleeping in Light" and with one or two notable exceptions ("Sleeping in Light" among them) probably the best since the glory days of the third season. The CGI effects are, once again, cutting edge with absolutely stunning new shots of the Babylon Station, and much improved use of the ol' green screen studio (pioneered in B5's last season – or possibly in the Barry Letts era of "Doctor Who"!). The cast is very small, even-for-B5 small: three leads, four guests and a few extras, and the actually built sets (as opposed to the computer realised ones) are small, and kept to a minimum. And golly, those Minbari viewing room designers were clever – two chairs and black drapes! If you think this makes it sound CHEAP then think again, though, because – and I think this is OFTEN the case with science fiction – the limitations put upon them actually bring out a better, more focused story. The money is spent EXACTLY where it needs to be, on top quality artistes. (And you should think of the team designing the CGI as artistes as well as artists – their contribution is as important and they are correctly included in the producers' balancing act.)
Even the THEME TUNE, developing on the Fifth Season theme, is HUMMABLE for the first time in ages!
And, perhaps most importantly, the rather long gap since he last had to try and write and "Babylon 5" has given Mr Joe's creative batteries time to RECHARGE. The writing is back as good as it used to be, as good as it ought to be.
Can I urge anyone who is even SLIGHTLY inclined to buy it to see what it might be like to give it a go (ESPECIALLY anyone who saw the Rangers pilot: "To Live and Die in Starlight" and swore NEVER AGAIN!). The prospect of another story even half as good as this is certainly worth the price of admission.
Oh, and the Sock Puppet version on the extra features is a KILLER!
The Americans are a funny lot. One bunch might see ancient Babylon as no more than a place to park their tanks, while another lot take it as their inspiration to create probably the most groundbreaking television series of the Nineties.
I am talking, of course, about Joe Michael Straczynski's "BABYLON 5", the five-year project to create a "novel for television", and show that careful budgeting, a dedicated cast and at-the-time cutting edge computer imagery could produce a cinematic feel on the small screen.
Well, Babylon is back and the news is it's BRILLIANT!
"Babylon 5" is like the works of Mr Dickens or Mr Conan Doyle, a single story that develops over a series of "issues" or episodes. By inventing characters who DEVELOP over the story it brings the soap opera into the space opera – in later days people will use the term "soap opera" to deride it and indeed to deride "Doctor Who" for the same reason, as though somehow drama isn't ESSENTIALLY always ABOUT character, and that that is the thing, if anything, that soap operas do most RIGHT!
Above all, it pretty much created the idea of the STORY ARC – the linking theme that ties separate stand-alone episodes together into a whole.
Daddy Alex gives me a funny look and mutters: "Isn’t there a story arc from 1978-9 coming out in a fortnight?" Well yes, "Doctor Who" has been doing this sort of thing for a BIT of a WHILE (possibly even more so in the ORIGINAL series with Miss Barbara and Mr Chesterfield) and you can look to "Blake's Seven" (particularly in its second year) for another influence, too. But it wasn’t until "Babylon 5" that the ideas of an overarching plot, character development and a sense of theme all pulled together.
Series like "Murder One" and "24" picked up this idea and REALLY RAN with it. In some ways, though, the "Babylon 5" arc is too HEAVY. By the end of the second season, EVERY episode is an "Arc episode", so rather than rewarding the committed follower, it penalises the casual viewer. Unlike other similar series, you are less likely to just tune in if one happens to be on if you don't know what's going on already. Later series, like "The X-Files" and "Buffy" would use a lighter arc – one where the series was mostly one-off stories, where only some small number of incidents would connect to the main through thread. Ultimately, this leads to the modern day "Doctor Who", with its Bad Wolf, Torchwood and Saxon "arcs".
As a series, "Babylon 5" does not always succeed, even on its own terms. Fear of cancellation clearly tips the producers into telescoping the planned year five story into year four, making the penultimate year too crowded and rushed and leaving the finale empty of major plots and almost drifting. Mr Joe ended up writing almost every episode from the middle of the second season through to the end, and although this does ensure a unity of vision, it is also obvious that it left him exhausted and flagging for ideas by the time year five (or even four) came around.
It's been suggested that constant cast changes may have hurt the series too, but I think that it actually adds REALISM to a world where people can be reassigned, assassinated or turn into glowing angels all the time! Actors DID leave the series, under a variety of circumstances, and yet where this might have damaged the show it was often turned to advantage – losing Mr Michael O'Hare (Commander Jeffrey "Wooden" Sinclair) at the end of year one meant gaining the powerhouse that is Mr Bruce Boxleitner (Captain John "Nuke'em" Sheridan) who has invested so much personally over the years in a show he clearly loved and loves; it was certainly a blow when Ms Claudia Christian (Commander Susan "Boom Tomorrow" Ivanova) left after the fourth year, but even so the series makes another gain in Ms Tracey Scoggins (Captain Elizabeth "I've had the President" Lochley).
Since the end of "Babylon 5" in the episode "Sleeping in Light" there have been several attempts to return to that universe: several movie-length episodes set around the series' main story; a spin-off series "Crusade" which was sunk by trouble between Joe and the TNT network who were then carrying the show; and a really rather dreadful pilot for a second spin-ff series "The Legend of the Rangers" which went down with all hands, despite including the last performance of the toweringly awesome Mr Andreas Katsulas as G'Kar.
So it was with a mixture of hope, anticipation and vague DREAD that my Daddies received the news that Mr Joe was going to try yet again, this time with a series of "Babylon 5" based stories called "The Lost Tales". The DREADED words "straight to video DVD" did not help much either!
I can only say we were BOWLED OVER with delight!
"Voices in the Night" is the first (hopefully of many) "Lost Tales" and is basically an anthology of two short (roughly half-hour) stories linked for the most part by no more than being set on the same day in 2271.
Mr Bruce and Ms Tracey both return, one taking each side of the story: now promoted to Colonel Lochley is having one HELL of a time on the Babylon station, while Mr now-President-of-the-Galaxy Sheridan is given a glimpse of the end of the world and a KILLER of an opportunity to prevent it.
The opening story (subtitled "Over Here") is barely even a "Babylon 5" story at all. In fact, it almost goes out of its way to ignore most of the B5 back-story and mythos. What it is, though, is an absolutely CRACKING piece of science fiction, mixing a good old dose of THEOLOGY with an old-fashioned horns of a DILEMMA – and it's up to Ms Lochley to find the apocryphal third way out.
The plot revolves around: a priest whose religion is fading away as man travels into heaven and finds no gods; a man who appears to be genuinely possessed; and what the implications of this vision of perdition would mean for believers and for one man's soul. Now, if you KNOW that in the Babylon 5 universe there are TELEPATHS who could mess with your head like this, or if you happen to remember the (rather wonderful) episode in the first season where Mr Commander Sinclair introduces a whole long line of religious types, then this set-up seems, well, a bit not quite right. BUT that isn't the point: take it as a story in its own right and you will REALLY enjoy it.
Barely more than a three-hander, it hangs on some really terrific performances from the actors and one or two stand-out effects moments that knock you back on your heels.
In the second half-hour (now called "Over There", obviously) Mr President Sheridan is travelling to the Babylon station when his trip and his dreams are interrupted by the TECHNOMAGE Mr Galen (played by Mr Peter Woodwoodwood the son of Mr Edwardwood Woodwoodwood) who was probably the most intriguing character from poor old failed "Crusade". Mr Galen is VERY MYSTERIOUS, often quite a bit SCARY and SERIOUSLY bald. But also funny and probably a goodie – so long as you work out how his twisted mind is working! Nice cape, also.
Mr President Sheridan faces a DILEMMA too – and he too finds a third option, when he realises that that is what Mr Galen has been hinting at. This story relies much more upon knowing the B5 history, understanding that the Centauri fell in with a bad lot (called the Shadows), started a great big war and ended up losing almost everything. So, the possibility that in thirty years they might be back for revenge means something. Equally, it helps to know what it means that Prince Vintari's father was killed by someone called Vir. (What it means is that his dad was mad bad Emperor Cartagia – think Caligula with pointy hair!)
These are, without doubt, the best "Babylon 5" since "Sleeping in Light" and with one or two notable exceptions ("Sleeping in Light" among them) probably the best since the glory days of the third season. The CGI effects are, once again, cutting edge with absolutely stunning new shots of the Babylon Station, and much improved use of the ol' green screen studio (pioneered in B5's last season – or possibly in the Barry Letts era of "Doctor Who"!). The cast is very small, even-for-B5 small: three leads, four guests and a few extras, and the actually built sets (as opposed to the computer realised ones) are small, and kept to a minimum. And golly, those Minbari viewing room designers were clever – two chairs and black drapes! If you think this makes it sound CHEAP then think again, though, because – and I think this is OFTEN the case with science fiction – the limitations put upon them actually bring out a better, more focused story. The money is spent EXACTLY where it needs to be, on top quality artistes. (And you should think of the team designing the CGI as artistes as well as artists – their contribution is as important and they are correctly included in the producers' balancing act.)
Even the THEME TUNE, developing on the Fifth Season theme, is HUMMABLE for the first time in ages!
And, perhaps most importantly, the rather long gap since he last had to try and write and "Babylon 5" has given Mr Joe's creative batteries time to RECHARGE. The writing is back as good as it used to be, as good as it ought to be.
Can I urge anyone who is even SLIGHTLY inclined to buy it to see what it might be like to give it a go (ESPECIALLY anyone who saw the Rangers pilot: "To Live and Die in Starlight" and swore NEVER AGAIN!). The prospect of another story even half as good as this is certainly worth the price of admission.
Oh, and the Sock Puppet version on the extra features is a KILLER!
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
Day 2441: Sir Mr the Merciless and the Mean Green Mother
Saturday:
Before anyone gets CONFUSED that is actually TWO stories!
Listening to the "TalkingBoll Politics", the summertime replacement for "The Weak(est link) in Westminster", we heard the Thinking Man's Crumpet™ Ms Joan Bakewell (NOT a TART!) praising Sir Mr the Merciless:
Later, though, we went out to see an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT man-eating lady: Audrey II, the star of the "Little Shop of Horrors".
This was a TREAT laid on for us by Uncle Alan, but it is TOO LATE for you to share, as unfortunately it has come to the end of its run.
Here is what you MISSED!
This was the musical of the film of the musical of the film… you have probably already seen the famous version with Mr Rick Moranis as the anti-heroic horticulturalist Seymour. If you haven't, then you can always get the DVD – although the version which includes the footage of the original (proper) ending is harder to find than gold dust at a Cybermen reunion.
That version was based on the off-Broadway musical hit that was inspired by the original Mr Roger Corman movie (with guest cameo from future star Mr Jack Nicholson, believe it or not). Apparently, the original was made in just two days using time left over on the sets of another movie – it was so cheap that they couldn't afford to re-shoot when props fell over!
The setting is the Skid Row florist of Mr Mushnik, cleverly realised on the London stage with a set that opens on the alley but then has the front wall of the shop and indeed the entire interior swing out to reveal what's going on inside.
Initially, the shop is very down at heel, and for a florist has only a few forlorn flowers. But then Seymour brings in his new discovery – the rare and unusual plant that he calls Audrey II. Immediately business perks up. But Audrey II has a SINISTER SECRET – the plant has the power to make dreams come true but at a price… a price paid in HUMAN BLOOD!
Initially, Seymour feeds the Faustian Flora from his own fingers – sporting ever more alarming numbers of sticking plasters. But as the ever more demanding plant grows to titanic proportions, taking over the florist set, it achieves the power of speech… and indeed SONG! And proposes a much more DIABOLICAL deal to poor Seymour. Fame and fortune in exchange for food… it's just a question of finding the right human to, er, donate the blood! Do Seymour's morals hold him back? Well, no, as he soon finds himself able to justify that "that guy sure looks like plant food to me!"
Not that Seymour ever ACTUALLY kills anyone… he just lets nature take its red-in-tooth-and-claw course. With maybe a little encouragement.
As Yoda would no doubt have warned, though, once you start down the GARDEN PATH, forever will it dominate your destiny, and so it is for Seymour as Audrey II goes on the rampage, devouring its way though the florist fauna (i.e the staff) and then, thanks to a greedy garden centre agent persuading Seymour to let him take cuttings, the rest of America and probably the World as well, restoring the ending of the original musical (which goes a bit further than the original flick, but is completely different from the musical movie – it appears that the American test audience did not favour the black humour of the ending necessitating a hasty re-shoot and a happy electrocution conclusion).
I think that the NASTY ending, with the poor old cast singing "Don't Feed the Plants" from inside of Audrey II, is MUCH MORE SATISFYING.
In fact, overall, I would say that this was a theatrical treat which was better than the film.
The only thing missing – we realised as we left the theatre we had ALL been expecting it – was the song "Mean Green Mother (From Outer Space)" which was nonimated for an OSCAR (the first song containing a PROFANITY to be so). But of course, we should have realised that to BE nonimated it had to have been an ORIGINAL song in the movie.
Many of the musical numbers – including the iconic opening song – hang on the talents of Ronette (Jenny Fitzpatrick) Chiffon (Katie Kerr) and Crystal (Melitsa Nicola), a Greek Chorus of city girls who fill the stage with fun, particularly as they mime the full on "Horrors" in that title song. They were really good!
But even more praise is due to Ms Sheridan Smith playing Audrey, unfortunate inspiration for Seymour's botanical Beelzebub. She had great stage chemistry (as well as biology!) with Mr Paul Keating who was engaging and energetic as Seymour. My daddies were quite miffed that the programme did not mention her season on BBC7 as companion to Dr Who, but you probably know her from wall to wall repeats on BBC3 (squeezed in between wall to wall repeats of "Doctor Who") of "Two Pint of Crisps and a Packet of Lager" and "Grown Ups". Well, do not be misled, as she is also great in comedy, as we discovered this evening. Charming, ditzy and in excellent voice, we thought she was marvellous.
Also making a "big impression" [R: groan] was TV's Alistair McGowan, credited as mental dental doctor Orin Scrivello (DDS!) "and everyone else". The theatre certainly got better value for money out of him than that film did out of Mr Steve Martin – though as Daddy Alex pointed out, you can get away with the same actor appearing in multiple roles more when you are in the theatre. And there is something fairly apposite about Seymour being kind of HAUNTED by his first victim.
Here, after a frankly DISTURBING amount of fluffy-tummy flashing as oversexed Orin overdosing on his Nitrous Oxide, Mr McG returns repeatedly in the second half. Thanks to an impressive series of quick-changes, he manages to be three characters in the space of a single song!
But it has to be said that the undisputed STAR of the show is the evil Audrey II, realised by the huge voice of the hugely talented Mr Mike McShane (as seen, in days of YORE, on "Whose Line is it Anyway?") and by a series of marvellous arboreal animatronics, ranging from the six-inch handheld to the ten-foot-tall full body puppet (and more kudos to Mr Andy Heath whose is the full body in question). It sings, it dances, it eats the rest of the cast!
We will NEVER look at one of those dancing sunflowers is QUITE the same way again!
Before anyone gets CONFUSED that is actually TWO stories!
Listening to the "Talking
"He is the most vigorous, most astute, most opinionated politician around."And she bridled at all the insults heaped on Sir Ming just because of how old he is!
Later, though, we went out to see an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT man-eating lady: Audrey II, the star of the "Little Shop of Horrors".
This was a TREAT laid on for us by Uncle Alan, but it is TOO LATE for you to share, as unfortunately it has come to the end of its run.
Here is what you MISSED!
This was the musical of the film of the musical of the film… you have probably already seen the famous version with Mr Rick Moranis as the anti-heroic horticulturalist Seymour. If you haven't, then you can always get the DVD – although the version which includes the footage of the original (proper) ending is harder to find than gold dust at a Cybermen reunion.
That version was based on the off-Broadway musical hit that was inspired by the original Mr Roger Corman movie (with guest cameo from future star Mr Jack Nicholson, believe it or not). Apparently, the original was made in just two days using time left over on the sets of another movie – it was so cheap that they couldn't afford to re-shoot when props fell over!
The setting is the Skid Row florist of Mr Mushnik, cleverly realised on the London stage with a set that opens on the alley but then has the front wall of the shop and indeed the entire interior swing out to reveal what's going on inside.
Initially, the shop is very down at heel, and for a florist has only a few forlorn flowers. But then Seymour brings in his new discovery – the rare and unusual plant that he calls Audrey II. Immediately business perks up. But Audrey II has a SINISTER SECRET – the plant has the power to make dreams come true but at a price… a price paid in HUMAN BLOOD!
Initially, Seymour feeds the Faustian Flora from his own fingers – sporting ever more alarming numbers of sticking plasters. But as the ever more demanding plant grows to titanic proportions, taking over the florist set, it achieves the power of speech… and indeed SONG! And proposes a much more DIABOLICAL deal to poor Seymour. Fame and fortune in exchange for food… it's just a question of finding the right human to, er, donate the blood! Do Seymour's morals hold him back? Well, no, as he soon finds himself able to justify that "that guy sure looks like plant food to me!"
Not that Seymour ever ACTUALLY kills anyone… he just lets nature take its red-in-tooth-and-claw course. With maybe a little encouragement.
As Yoda would no doubt have warned, though, once you start down the GARDEN PATH, forever will it dominate your destiny, and so it is for Seymour as Audrey II goes on the rampage, devouring its way though the florist fauna (i.e the staff) and then, thanks to a greedy garden centre agent persuading Seymour to let him take cuttings, the rest of America and probably the World as well, restoring the ending of the original musical (which goes a bit further than the original flick, but is completely different from the musical movie – it appears that the American test audience did not favour the black humour of the ending necessitating a hasty re-shoot and a happy electrocution conclusion).
I think that the NASTY ending, with the poor old cast singing "Don't Feed the Plants" from inside of Audrey II, is MUCH MORE SATISFYING.
In fact, overall, I would say that this was a theatrical treat which was better than the film.
The only thing missing – we realised as we left the theatre we had ALL been expecting it – was the song "Mean Green Mother (From Outer Space)" which was nonimated for an OSCAR (the first song containing a PROFANITY to be so). But of course, we should have realised that to BE nonimated it had to have been an ORIGINAL song in the movie.
Many of the musical numbers – including the iconic opening song – hang on the talents of Ronette (Jenny Fitzpatrick) Chiffon (Katie Kerr) and Crystal (Melitsa Nicola), a Greek Chorus of city girls who fill the stage with fun, particularly as they mime the full on "Horrors" in that title song. They were really good!
But even more praise is due to Ms Sheridan Smith playing Audrey, unfortunate inspiration for Seymour's botanical Beelzebub. She had great stage chemistry (as well as biology!) with Mr Paul Keating who was engaging and energetic as Seymour. My daddies were quite miffed that the programme did not mention her season on BBC7 as companion to Dr Who, but you probably know her from wall to wall repeats on BBC3 (squeezed in between wall to wall repeats of "Doctor Who") of "Two Pint of Crisps and a Packet of Lager" and "Grown Ups". Well, do not be misled, as she is also great in comedy, as we discovered this evening. Charming, ditzy and in excellent voice, we thought she was marvellous.
Also making a "big impression" [R: groan] was TV's Alistair McGowan, credited as mental dental doctor Orin Scrivello (DDS!) "and everyone else". The theatre certainly got better value for money out of him than that film did out of Mr Steve Martin – though as Daddy Alex pointed out, you can get away with the same actor appearing in multiple roles more when you are in the theatre. And there is something fairly apposite about Seymour being kind of HAUNTED by his first victim.
Here, after a frankly DISTURBING amount of fluffy-tummy flashing as oversexed Orin overdosing on his Nitrous Oxide, Mr McG returns repeatedly in the second half. Thanks to an impressive series of quick-changes, he manages to be three characters in the space of a single song!
But it has to be said that the undisputed STAR of the show is the evil Audrey II, realised by the huge voice of the hugely talented Mr Mike McShane (as seen, in days of YORE, on "Whose Line is it Anyway?") and by a series of marvellous arboreal animatronics, ranging from the six-inch handheld to the ten-foot-tall full body puppet (and more kudos to Mr Andy Heath whose is the full body in question). It sings, it dances, it eats the rest of the cast!
We will NEVER look at one of those dancing sunflowers is QUITE the same way again!
Saturday, September 08, 2007
Day 2440: Liberal Democrats Are Not Losers
Friday:
Let's start with BIG HUGS for Mr Tom Papworth who is now Mr Councillor Tom!
After almost a hundred years of coming third in a race with no bronze medals, you can rest assured that Liberals and Liberal Democrats are well used to not making it to the podium, and doing it with DIGNITY.
Conservatories may throw their toys out of the pram when they lose; the Labour may go off in protracted sulks. But TRUE LIBERALS know that if we haven't won then it is the voters' way of saying we need to try harder. And that is why we DO try harder.
Take the Liberal Democrat Diary of the Year competition.
Last year I was NOT VERY GROWN UP AT ALL and got VERY cross-patchy when I lost out to Mr Deputy Lord Stephen, Mayor of A Liberal Goes to Washington. Er, or something. That was BAD of me!
My only excuse is that I WAS only six [R: or even five] AND I was up very late for a small elephant. But Daddy made me go and shake Mr Stephen's hand with my fluffy foot and we became PROPER FRIENDS again.
This year, Mr Deputy Lord Stephen is OUT OF THE RUNNING! Ho ho ho! All of his pictures of KITTENS will not help him to win again, oh no! This means that I have a VERY GOOD CHANCE of coming second to SOMEBODY ELSE this year! Hooray!
So let me say a VERY BIG thank you to all of the people who have Hey Nonny Nonimated my VERY FLUFFY DIARY as Liberal Democrat Diary of the Year for the SECOND YEAR RUNNING. I am IMPOSSIBLY grateful for your support and it makes my fluffy insides swell up with pride. Thank you!
It is a GREAT PRIVILEGE even to be read and liked by Liberal Democrats. I know that, unlike a lot of people, I did not manage to get ANY posts into the top one-hundred most-read diary entries on the Lib Dem Blogregator [mumbles: even if someone DID get to no. 49 for just saying they had READ my fluffy diary!], but I am always encouraged when I see those numbers-in-boxes that say that SOMEONE is reading what I have to say. "50th most popular outgoing link" is STILL a badge of HONOUR!
Here are the people who have been nonimated:
MY DADDY ALEX
Some other folk
[R: you're supposed to be being nice]
Oh yes… okay:
Mr James
Mr Paul
And Mr Lord Jonathan of Bonkers
(There is a FUNNY STORY about that, actually – strangely, many of last year's finalists have MYSTERIOUSLY DISAPPEARED: Mr Lord Deputy Stephen has been elevated; the Apollo Project was lost on the dark side of the moon; and Mr Andy Mayer was last seen in a balloon floating away over BERKELEY SQUARE. Fortunately for Mr Lord Bonkers, he happened to be herding a small troupe of Mr Balloon's National Service Corps of Volunteer Orphans home to the Bonkers Sanatorium for Wayward Children when the poor mites tumbled into an enormouselephant unidentified-large-animal trap that someone had dug on his Rutland estate! WHO could have dug such a large hole? Without the timely warning of their pitiful cries, Lord B himself might have taken a tumble! Anyway, nobody found out about the orphans and the unidentified-large-animal trap because it was all covered up. Using a bulldozer.)
Anyway…
Is it not a TRIBUTE to the VARIETY of voices that you hear in the Liberal Democrats, that there is such a wide range to choose from? Mr James with his big bold anti-establishment rants; Mr Paul with his quickfire coverage of everything; Mr Lord Bonkers with his pithy asides and Daddy who is just REASSURINGLY EXTENSIVE™.
There are no limits to how much or little, long or short you can contribute to make a difference to the Liberal Democrats. And quite right too.
They have even had to introduce several more categories this year, because it's just TOO HARD to decide it all for one award.
The other categories this year are: Best New Diary, Best Designed Diary, Best Diary by an Elected Liberal Democrat, Best Single Diary Entry and Best GIGGLE!
(Sadly, the contest for "Best Diary for Kissing Up to Mr Dale Winton" has been CANCELLED for lack of time. I am sure we would ALL have been very interested in the nonimations for that one.)
I have therefore decided to start a NEW diary on the first of October to be called: "The Brand New Hilarious Guide to Designing a Better Dale Winton by Millennium Elephant, elected Mayor of My Sofa."
I think I might stand a chance of getting into the Best Single Diary Entry category with that, don't you?
Meanwhile, I have heard that Mr Rob – who is up for Best Design – says that he does not want to win because he did not design his "Posh Sounding Northumbrian" diary. But I remember that he DID design the Liberal Democrat Voice. And that is worthy of a PRIZE all by itself!
And I think that it is a BIG SHAME that Mr Mark Pax was not nonimated for his VERY EXCELLENT detective work during the Ealing Southall by-election. He WOULD have been on the shortlist, but his nonimations were being kept by a Mr Grant Mishapps… who has FORGOTTEN the password for his Internet account. Apparently.
But really, we are ALL winners. We are winners because there are so many different and excellent Liberal voices to hear, on all subjects and from all angles.
As Sir Mr the Merciless would no doubt say if this was Are You Being Served (by your elected Councillors): "You've All Done VERY Well!"
Let's start with BIG HUGS for Mr Tom Papworth who is now Mr Councillor Tom!
After almost a hundred years of coming third in a race with no bronze medals, you can rest assured that Liberals and Liberal Democrats are well used to not making it to the podium, and doing it with DIGNITY.
Conservatories may throw their toys out of the pram when they lose; the Labour may go off in protracted sulks. But TRUE LIBERALS know that if we haven't won then it is the voters' way of saying we need to try harder. And that is why we DO try harder.
Take the Liberal Democrat Diary of the Year competition.
Last year I was NOT VERY GROWN UP AT ALL and got VERY cross-patchy when I lost out to Mr Deputy Lord Stephen, Mayor of A Liberal Goes to Washington. Er, or something. That was BAD of me!
My only excuse is that I WAS only six [R: or even five] AND I was up very late for a small elephant. But Daddy made me go and shake Mr Stephen's hand with my fluffy foot and we became PROPER FRIENDS again.
This year, Mr Deputy Lord Stephen is OUT OF THE RUNNING! Ho ho ho! All of his pictures of KITTENS will not help him to win again, oh no! This means that I have a VERY GOOD CHANCE of coming second to SOMEBODY ELSE this year! Hooray!
So let me say a VERY BIG thank you to all of the people who have Hey Nonny Nonimated my VERY FLUFFY DIARY as Liberal Democrat Diary of the Year for the SECOND YEAR RUNNING. I am IMPOSSIBLY grateful for your support and it makes my fluffy insides swell up with pride. Thank you!
It is a GREAT PRIVILEGE even to be read and liked by Liberal Democrats. I know that, unlike a lot of people, I did not manage to get ANY posts into the top one-hundred most-read diary entries on the Lib Dem Blogregator [mumbles: even if someone DID get to no. 49 for just saying they had READ my fluffy diary!], but I am always encouraged when I see those numbers-in-boxes that say that SOMEONE is reading what I have to say. "50th most popular outgoing link" is STILL a badge of HONOUR!
Here are the people who have been nonimated:
MY DADDY ALEX
Some other folk
[R: you're supposed to be being nice]
Oh yes… okay:
Mr James
Mr Paul
And Mr Lord Jonathan of Bonkers
(There is a FUNNY STORY about that, actually – strangely, many of last year's finalists have MYSTERIOUSLY DISAPPEARED: Mr Lord Deputy Stephen has been elevated; the Apollo Project was lost on the dark side of the moon; and Mr Andy Mayer was last seen in a balloon floating away over BERKELEY SQUARE. Fortunately for Mr Lord Bonkers, he happened to be herding a small troupe of Mr Balloon's National Service Corps of Volunteer Orphans home to the Bonkers Sanatorium for Wayward Children when the poor mites tumbled into an enormous
Anyway…
Is it not a TRIBUTE to the VARIETY of voices that you hear in the Liberal Democrats, that there is such a wide range to choose from? Mr James with his big bold anti-establishment rants; Mr Paul with his quickfire coverage of everything; Mr Lord Bonkers with his pithy asides and Daddy who is just REASSURINGLY EXTENSIVE™.
There are no limits to how much or little, long or short you can contribute to make a difference to the Liberal Democrats. And quite right too.
They have even had to introduce several more categories this year, because it's just TOO HARD to decide it all for one award.
The other categories this year are: Best New Diary, Best Designed Diary, Best Diary by an Elected Liberal Democrat, Best Single Diary Entry and Best GIGGLE!
(Sadly, the contest for "Best Diary for Kissing Up to Mr Dale Winton" has been CANCELLED for lack of time. I am sure we would ALL have been very interested in the nonimations for that one.)
I have therefore decided to start a NEW diary on the first of October to be called: "The Brand New Hilarious Guide to Designing a Better Dale Winton by Millennium Elephant, elected Mayor of My Sofa."
I think I might stand a chance of getting into the Best Single Diary Entry category with that, don't you?
Meanwhile, I have heard that Mr Rob – who is up for Best Design – says that he does not want to win because he did not design his "Posh Sounding Northumbrian" diary. But I remember that he DID design the Liberal Democrat Voice. And that is worthy of a PRIZE all by itself!
And I think that it is a BIG SHAME that Mr Mark Pax was not nonimated for his VERY EXCELLENT detective work during the Ealing Southall by-election. He WOULD have been on the shortlist, but his nonimations were being kept by a Mr Grant Mishapps… who has FORGOTTEN the password for his Internet account. Apparently.
But really, we are ALL winners. We are winners because there are so many different and excellent Liberal voices to hear, on all subjects and from all angles.
As Sir Mr the Merciless would no doubt say if this was Are You Being Served (by your elected Councillors): "You've All Done VERY Well!"
PS:
Never say this in REAL LIFE, Sir Mr the Merciless. I think we both know why!Day 2439: Oh Blast, it's the Past!
Thursday:
There is no one QUITE like the Conservatories for picking a fight with their own party. Only they can manage that special combination of SOUR GRAPES and SELF-IMPORTANCE.
This week it was the Thirteenth (unlucky for some) Marquis of Lothian, the Very Right Honourable Earl of Ancram who kicked off, managing to rain all over Mr Steven Dolly's pamphlet launch.
"Save our Soul!" Ancram slaps Balloon.
"Urgh! You're Bizarre!" Dolly slaps Ancram.
"Ooo, You're such a Blast from the Past!" Balloon slaps Ancram too!
Playtime over, it was time to get back to the serious business of Mr Balloon making an idiot of himself.
"Conservatories should think carefully before opening their mouths," said Mr Balloon, opening his own gob wide to stick both feet in… and then shooting himself in the foot!
If "blasts from the past" are BAD NEWS then this week, the main culprit was… Mr Balloon.
As you know, "policy" in the Conservatory Party these days means less a firm commitment to action that will improve British people's lives, and more a dalliance with a committee here, a report there that may or may not make it to the manifesto depending on how it plays in the media and/or whether Mr Frown nicks it first. Nevertheless, "policies" were being wafted under our noses again this week to see if we would bite. And I'm sorry to say that there was more than a WHIFF of the TIME MACHINE.
By which I mean they were original in the 1890s!
To be FAIR, Mr Dolly was merely time-travelling back to the Conservatories' favourite haunt of the Eighties (PICK A CENTURY), with his cut-and-shut version of the old "Right to Buy".
His scheme is supposed to break up ghetto estates by giving the residents the exciting opportunity to take out a SUB-PRIME mortgage just at the point when the market has decided to collapse.
Presumably the plan is that instant negative equity will be some kind of incentive to residents to clean up the graffiti and clean out the drug gangs. Perhaps there will also be government grants for setting up their own VIGILANTE GANGS.
Mr Balloon, though, was going the whole hog and heading back to the future in the Fifties. This week's whim is to stage the reintroduction of National Service.
Being Mr Balloon, of course, the Conservatory-pleasing soundbite was immediately undermined by the details. This would be a VOLUNTARY national service. For six weeks only. With physical training including boot camp for the poor boys and mountain climbing for the nice chaps and chapesses.
Congratulations, Mr Balloon, you've just invented… the Duck of Edinburgh Awards.
No, wait! Apparently, you will have the "girly swottishness" beaten out of you. I am quite as nauseated as the very excellent Master Chris K says in this highly recommended piece on HIS diary.
It is hardly what "Yes, Prime Monster" used to call "a comprehensive education to make up for their Comprehensive Education." Still, at least you're not planning to train them all to kill!
Best of all, the poor saps, sorry, bright young hopes for the future who sign up to this malarkey all get to spend the first week on a course learning their "responsibilities".
Now, personally, I think that the RESPONSIBLE sixteen-year-olds will just have flogged themselves half to death doing their GCSEs and be expecting a well deserved HOLIDAY and not six weeks of Mr Balloon giving them the "you're all horrible little anarchists, you lot!" lecture.
And the IRRESPONSIBLE ones seem somehow a little unlikely to turn up anyway!
The rest of the course is dedicated to "community service" – basically, they will be sent to clean up graffiti and clean out drug gangs from the ghettos that Mr Dolly has just flogged off no questions asked.
Mr Balloon then went on to show just how RESPONSIBLE he can be… by laying into BOTH wings of his feuding party!
There is no one QUITE like the Conservatories for picking a fight with their own party. Only they can manage that special combination of SOUR GRAPES and SELF-IMPORTANCE.
This week it was the Thirteenth (unlucky for some) Marquis of Lothian, the Very Right Honourable Earl of Ancram who kicked off, managing to rain all over Mr Steven Dolly's pamphlet launch.
"Save our Soul!" Ancram slaps Balloon.
"Urgh! You're Bizarre!" Dolly slaps Ancram.
"Ooo, You're such a Blast from the Past!" Balloon slaps Ancram too!
Playtime over, it was time to get back to the serious business of Mr Balloon making an idiot of himself.
"Conservatories should think carefully before opening their mouths," said Mr Balloon, opening his own gob wide to stick both feet in… and then shooting himself in the foot!
If "blasts from the past" are BAD NEWS then this week, the main culprit was… Mr Balloon.
As you know, "policy" in the Conservatory Party these days means less a firm commitment to action that will improve British people's lives, and more a dalliance with a committee here, a report there that may or may not make it to the manifesto depending on how it plays in the media and/or whether Mr Frown nicks it first. Nevertheless, "policies" were being wafted under our noses again this week to see if we would bite. And I'm sorry to say that there was more than a WHIFF of the TIME MACHINE.
By which I mean they were original in the 1890s!
To be FAIR, Mr Dolly was merely time-travelling back to the Conservatories' favourite haunt of the Eighties (PICK A CENTURY), with his cut-and-shut version of the old "Right to Buy".
His scheme is supposed to break up ghetto estates by giving the residents the exciting opportunity to take out a SUB-PRIME mortgage just at the point when the market has decided to collapse.
Presumably the plan is that instant negative equity will be some kind of incentive to residents to clean up the graffiti and clean out the drug gangs. Perhaps there will also be government grants for setting up their own VIGILANTE GANGS.
Mr Balloon, though, was going the whole hog and heading back to the future in the Fifties. This week's whim is to stage the reintroduction of National Service.
Being Mr Balloon, of course, the Conservatory-pleasing soundbite was immediately undermined by the details. This would be a VOLUNTARY national service. For six weeks only. With physical training including boot camp for the poor boys and mountain climbing for the nice chaps and chapesses.
Congratulations, Mr Balloon, you've just invented… the Duck of Edinburgh Awards.
No, wait! Apparently, you will have the "girly swottishness" beaten out of you. I am quite as nauseated as the very excellent Master Chris K says in this highly recommended piece on HIS diary.
It is hardly what "Yes, Prime Monster" used to call "a comprehensive education to make up for their Comprehensive Education." Still, at least you're not planning to train them all to kill!
Best of all, the poor saps, sorry, bright young hopes for the future who sign up to this malarkey all get to spend the first week on a course learning their "responsibilities".
Now, personally, I think that the RESPONSIBLE sixteen-year-olds will just have flogged themselves half to death doing their GCSEs and be expecting a well deserved HOLIDAY and not six weeks of Mr Balloon giving them the "you're all horrible little anarchists, you lot!" lecture.
And the IRRESPONSIBLE ones seem somehow a little unlikely to turn up anyway!
The rest of the course is dedicated to "community service" – basically, they will be sent to clean up graffiti and clean out drug gangs from the ghettos that Mr Dolly has just flogged off no questions asked.
Mr Balloon then went on to show just how RESPONSIBLE he can be… by laying into BOTH wings of his feuding party!
"Forget about those on the left who say I shouldn't talk about Europe, crime or lower taxes or those on the right who say I shouldn't talk about the NHS, the environment or well-being. That is a false choice,"said Mr Balloon.
"I'm not going make that choice – I'm not talking to ANY of you!"he added.
Thursday, September 06, 2007
Day 2438: DNA? Do Not Ask!
Wednesday:
YOU ARE NOT GETTING A SAMPLE OF MY STUFFING FOR YOUR DATABASE!
Oh dear, one of our very senior appeal court judges has GONE OFF HIS CHUMP and suggested that the entire nation should be DNA fingerprinted.
Apparently Lord Justice Sedley's idea is that there are LOTS of INNOCENT people who have nevertheless been arrested and their DNA taken… and it is STILL BEING KEPT. Treating innocent people like criminals is NOT FAIR. So, the solution is obvious: ALL OTHER innocent people should be treated like criminals too! Er, hang on…
This, however, is not even an ORIGINAL form of LUNACY. The Inventor of DNA fingerprinting, Mad Professor Sir Alec Jeffreys was saying almost exactly the same thing five years ago.
Sometimes I despair of you people, you know. Listening to the The Today Programme in the morning, as they discuss blithely handing over the VERY STUFF OF YOUR LIVES to the Government does the nation RISE IN ANGER? No, the listeners are too busy complaining about the professor who said that walking dogs though conservation areas is disturbing the birds. I mean never mind the evidence, they LIKE walking their dogs wherever they want.
Well here is the NEWS: with the new DNA database, the government will be able to take a couple of swabs and find out EXACTLY who has been letting Fido off the leash near the Great Crested Frog-stranger's nest!
This database would be an absolute GIFT to the spooks of MI5: one quick trip round any meeting place with a vacuum cleaner and BINGO a whole new list of SUBVERSIVES. Or church-goers. Or Conservatory activists. Whoever the Labour decide they want to track this week. For your own good, of course.
And after all, the Government would never ever do anything BAAAAAD with your personal private data, would they. Like selling motorists' DVLA data to businesses including people who have been sent to gaol for intimidating motorist. Oh, wait. They DID!
But even if you are not SUSPICIOUS of the SINISTER uses to which your DNA could be put, the database would still be worth its weight in GOLD to businesses with an interest in your information. The insurance companies alone would pay through the nose for it, and just imagine the banks deciding your mortgage repayments based on your genetic profile: "I'm Sorry Mr Dome, but we have to charge you double the interest because your DNA says you might pack your trunk and run away to the circus!"
Still, at least it would help the police to issue FIXED PENALTY FINES – they could track you down by scraping your DNA out of the paintwork when you dent their panda car, should they ever mount the pavement, RUN YOU DOWN and want to CHARGE YOU for the privilege!
No, seriously.
DNA fingerprinting is not the MAGICAL way to solve all known crime.
Remember, just because your DNA is found at a crime scene that does not mean that you were the one there at the time the crime occurred. And that's without taking into account the possibility of accidental – or even deliberate – contamination of the scene with your DNA.
And then there is the possibility of you being identified wrongly as the owner of some DNA found by the police, a so-called FALSE POSITIVE.
Even ORDINARY fingerprinting is MUCH HARDER that most people recognise, relying on much hard work to match what are often smudged and partial prints. Collecting fragments of DNA from a crime scene is even harder, particularly if you want to use the more reliable tests which need longer strings of DNA.
And the tests do not produce an "image" of your entire genetic blueprint in the way that your fingerprint is your whole fingerprint. Instead they look at TEN SPECIAL SECTIONS of your DNA (they used to use six; in America they use thirteen) where you have one of an apparently randomly assigned bundle of base pairs. In these sections the DNA comes in short strings of the same sequence repeated several times.
To analyse it they put it in a special jelly and run electricity through it. The bundles with fewer repeated sequences are lighter so they get carried further up the jelly. The ones with more are heavier and do not go so far. That is how you get those stripy DNA pictures.
Because each of the bundles is relatively common (between 5% and 20% of people will share one for any given one of the DNA fragments used in the test) then they produce easily identified results. But because they are random, and (more importantly) because each fragment has a random bundle independently of all the others, then PROBABILITY tells us that the chances of having two people with the same stripy pattern in the jelly gets MULTIPLIED the more different fragments you include in the test.
In THEORY using as many test fragments as we do, there ought to be many billions of possible combinations, eliminating the chances of duplication.
But even so, the more people you add to the database, the greater the chances of getting a match by random bad luck.
You know, although I am sure that that has been thought of, isn’t the way that DNA is SUPPOSED TO WORK – you know, copying itself – going to make that MORE likely? There must be something to stop identical twins having the same DNA… even though I thought that was the POINT of being identical twins.
And once your name pops out of the police's DNA machine you are into the realm of proving that you WEREN'T there when the DNA evidence says that you were. And remember: denying it going to make you look even more suspicious!
Listening to the government's defence of its ever-growing DOSSIER of our DNA, we were told that we "Cannot put the Genie Back in the Bottle"; there was no going back – we must go forward.
Hmmm, catchy.
We could not go around taking INNOCENT people OFF the database… after all, what if they then committed a crime? We would not be able to catch them!
As Daddy Alex pointed out: "Innocent Until Proven Guilty" does NOT mean that the innocent are bound to be proved guilty EVENTUALLY.
So overall… why wasn't everyone on the telephone to Liberal Democrat Mr Clogg telling him to GET ON THE RADIO and DENOUNCE THIS MADNESS!
YOU ARE NOT GETTING A SAMPLE OF MY STUFFING FOR YOUR DATABASE!
Oh dear, one of our very senior appeal court judges has GONE OFF HIS CHUMP and suggested that the entire nation should be DNA fingerprinted.
Apparently Lord Justice Sedley's idea is that there are LOTS of INNOCENT people who have nevertheless been arrested and their DNA taken… and it is STILL BEING KEPT. Treating innocent people like criminals is NOT FAIR. So, the solution is obvious: ALL OTHER innocent people should be treated like criminals too! Er, hang on…
This, however, is not even an ORIGINAL form of LUNACY. The Inventor of DNA fingerprinting, Mad Professor Sir Alec Jeffreys was saying almost exactly the same thing five years ago.
Sometimes I despair of you people, you know. Listening to the The Today Programme in the morning, as they discuss blithely handing over the VERY STUFF OF YOUR LIVES to the Government does the nation RISE IN ANGER? No, the listeners are too busy complaining about the professor who said that walking dogs though conservation areas is disturbing the birds. I mean never mind the evidence, they LIKE walking their dogs wherever they want.
Well here is the NEWS: with the new DNA database, the government will be able to take a couple of swabs and find out EXACTLY who has been letting Fido off the leash near the Great Crested Frog-stranger's nest!
This database would be an absolute GIFT to the spooks of MI5: one quick trip round any meeting place with a vacuum cleaner and BINGO a whole new list of SUBVERSIVES. Or church-goers. Or Conservatory activists. Whoever the Labour decide they want to track this week. For your own good, of course.
And after all, the Government would never ever do anything BAAAAAD with your personal private data, would they. Like selling motorists' DVLA data to businesses including people who have been sent to gaol for intimidating motorist. Oh, wait. They DID!
But even if you are not SUSPICIOUS of the SINISTER uses to which your DNA could be put, the database would still be worth its weight in GOLD to businesses with an interest in your information. The insurance companies alone would pay through the nose for it, and just imagine the banks deciding your mortgage repayments based on your genetic profile: "I'm Sorry Mr Dome, but we have to charge you double the interest because your DNA says you might pack your trunk and run away to the circus!"
Still, at least it would help the police to issue FIXED PENALTY FINES – they could track you down by scraping your DNA out of the paintwork when you dent their panda car, should they ever mount the pavement, RUN YOU DOWN and want to CHARGE YOU for the privilege!
No, seriously.
DNA fingerprinting is not the MAGICAL way to solve all known crime.
Remember, just because your DNA is found at a crime scene that does not mean that you were the one there at the time the crime occurred. And that's without taking into account the possibility of accidental – or even deliberate – contamination of the scene with your DNA.
And then there is the possibility of you being identified wrongly as the owner of some DNA found by the police, a so-called FALSE POSITIVE.
Even ORDINARY fingerprinting is MUCH HARDER that most people recognise, relying on much hard work to match what are often smudged and partial prints. Collecting fragments of DNA from a crime scene is even harder, particularly if you want to use the more reliable tests which need longer strings of DNA.
And the tests do not produce an "image" of your entire genetic blueprint in the way that your fingerprint is your whole fingerprint. Instead they look at TEN SPECIAL SECTIONS of your DNA (they used to use six; in America they use thirteen) where you have one of an apparently randomly assigned bundle of base pairs. In these sections the DNA comes in short strings of the same sequence repeated several times.
To analyse it they put it in a special jelly and run electricity through it. The bundles with fewer repeated sequences are lighter so they get carried further up the jelly. The ones with more are heavier and do not go so far. That is how you get those stripy DNA pictures.
Because each of the bundles is relatively common (between 5% and 20% of people will share one for any given one of the DNA fragments used in the test) then they produce easily identified results. But because they are random, and (more importantly) because each fragment has a random bundle independently of all the others, then PROBABILITY tells us that the chances of having two people with the same stripy pattern in the jelly gets MULTIPLIED the more different fragments you include in the test.
In THEORY using as many test fragments as we do, there ought to be many billions of possible combinations, eliminating the chances of duplication.
But even so, the more people you add to the database, the greater the chances of getting a match by random bad luck.
You know, although I am sure that that has been thought of, isn’t the way that DNA is SUPPOSED TO WORK – you know, copying itself – going to make that MORE likely? There must be something to stop identical twins having the same DNA… even though I thought that was the POINT of being identical twins.
And once your name pops out of the police's DNA machine you are into the realm of proving that you WEREN'T there when the DNA evidence says that you were. And remember: denying it going to make you look even more suspicious!
Listening to the government's defence of its ever-growing DOSSIER of our DNA, we were told that we "Cannot put the Genie Back in the Bottle"; there was no going back – we must go forward.
Hmmm, catchy.
We could not go around taking INNOCENT people OFF the database… after all, what if they then committed a crime? We would not be able to catch them!
As Daddy Alex pointed out: "Innocent Until Proven Guilty" does NOT mean that the innocent are bound to be proved guilty EVENTUALLY.
So overall… why wasn't everyone on the telephone to Liberal Democrat Mr Clogg telling him to GET ON THE RADIO and DENOUNCE THIS MADNESS!
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
Day 2437: Dinosaur Stops Tube
Tuesday:
No, this is not about Dr Who and the Invasion of the Wobbly Rubber Monsters.
Large, Placid & Stupid
This is the Tube strike by the RMT or Really Mean Transport Union.
The fault – unsurprisingly – can be traced back to the Prime Monster. Yes, it was Mr Frown who insisted on flogging off the Tube to one of his CRAZY off-balance-sheet PPP schemes, against the wishes of Londoners who had elected Mr Mayor Ken to OPPOSE the government (yes, look how well THAT worked out).
Back in 2003, nine of the twelve London Underground tube lines were handed over to a company called "Metronet" who promised to spend seventeen billion pounds improving them. (The other three tube lines – the Northern Line, the Pick-a-dilly Line and the Julie Bee Line that goes to the BIG TENT in Greenwich – were given to a different company called "Tube Lines" who are going to be sending four-and-a-half billion on similar upgrades).
Earlier this year, though, Metronet suddenly announced that they had OVERSPENT rather a bit. To the tune of one BILLION pounds, it turned out. And could they have the money back, please.
Well, the reaction of most people was: "TOUGH!" After all, wasn't the whole POINT of these "Public Private Partnership" schemes SUPPOSED to be that the private company would get the REWARD in return for accepting the RISKS? The government would agree to pay over the odds prices making profits for the companies involved… so long as those companies controlled the costs. If they started overspending, then the extra would come out of their profit NOT out of the government's pockets. Which are – of course – YOUR pockets.
So Metronet were told: "you're NOT getting any more money! Oh, all right, have a-hundred-and-twenty-one-MILLION-pounds… but that REALLY is it!"
"Okay," said Metronet. "In that case… we're BUST!"
This, of course, is the point where the whole PPP idea is shown to be not worth the paper that Mr Frown scribbled it down on. When it comes down to it, companies like Metronet do NOT have to take the risks: they just go BUST and dump the problem back in the government's lap.
It is not like the government can REFUSE to RESCUE the London Tube: the entire economy is supported by the profits of the City, and most of the rest of the business in the UK gets done in the Capital too. (Yes, that IS a really dumb idea and we should encourage people to move businesses to the north and the west where life is cheaper and happier, but unfortunately that is the opposite of what has actually happened under the Labour and Conservatory governments.) So the country RELIES on the infrastructure that gets most of its businesses to work in the morning… and that means the Tube.
On the other fluffy foot, that very reliance means that ACTUALLY the jobs of the Metronet workers ought to be a lot SAFER than other people's – these jobs are VITAL!
(Whereas jobs in RETAIL disappear all the time, especially with the rise of home shopping on the Wibbly Wobbly Web and DOUBLE especially when some MANIAC shuts down the Underground for a day and costs all the shops millions in lost sales!)
But even so, the RMT wanted a copper-bottomed assurance that their jobs would be guaranteed COME WHAT MAY.
Now, in order to avoid ACTUAL bankruptcy – in which case the Union Workers would have NO JOBS AT ALL – Metronet had gone into what is called ADMINISTRATION, which is like the LIFE SUPPORT WING for companies. This means that the company gets a bit of a reprieve from the people it owes money while it tries to EITHER arrange new finance from the bank or shareholders OR it finds a "white knight" who will buy it up, pay off its debts and start again OR, in the worst case, comes to some kind of arrangement with the creditors to pay some part of their bills and try to limp on. If none of those work, then it's time for the old pearl-handled revolver in the board room.
Judging from their press release, there were TWO main sticking points for the union.
The first was about the pension scheme, and whether all their members would get the pensions that they had been paying for. Now, under the law brought in after Cap'n Bob took the Mirror Group Pension Fund swimming with him in the Med that really ought not to be a problem because the scheme ought to be completely separate from the company anyway. But the union wanted a promise that that was so.
And the other issue is that it looks like Metronet were thinking of making savings by cutting the workforce BEFORE they went bust, and the union was not happy that the administrator was only promising their jobs were safe so long as the company actually was in administration. They wanted the administrators to promise that their jobs were guaranteed even when the administrators were no longer in charge.
So, after hours of negotiations, they were finally promised that even in the event of the ACTUAL END OF THE EARTH there will still be jobs for them the following morning. With this sworn in blood by the Mayor and the administrators, the RMT finally agreed to call off what was left of their strike.
As a promise it is obviously WORTHLESS. If the union makes it IMPOSSIBLE for the administrator to find a buyer or a new loan from the banks then ALL their jobs will cease to exist. Certainly, the government will have to set up a new Tube maintenance company – but they will start hiring from scratch and will employ as many or as few of the RMT workers as they think they need. Or maybe they will hire some Polish plumbers instead.
Maintaining the London Underground is dirty and difficult and dangerous work, and the people who do it would have a lot of sympathy if it were not for the fact that they make millions of other people's jobs just impossible by going on strike for completely ridiculous promises.
Actually, as a service industry, Metronet basically IS its workforce: they do not OWN the tubes, they do not MAKE things, all they have is the people who do the work. As the largest stakeholder – if not shareholder – perhaps the RMT should think more about RUNNING the company, instead of just RUNNING IT DOWN.
No, this is not about Dr Who and the Invasion of the Wobbly Rubber Monsters.
Large, Placid & Stupid
This is the Tube strike by the RMT or Really Mean Transport Union.
The fault – unsurprisingly – can be traced back to the Prime Monster. Yes, it was Mr Frown who insisted on flogging off the Tube to one of his CRAZY off-balance-sheet PPP schemes, against the wishes of Londoners who had elected Mr Mayor Ken to OPPOSE the government (yes, look how well THAT worked out).
Back in 2003, nine of the twelve London Underground tube lines were handed over to a company called "Metronet" who promised to spend seventeen billion pounds improving them. (The other three tube lines – the Northern Line, the Pick-a-dilly Line and the Julie Bee Line that goes to the BIG TENT in Greenwich – were given to a different company called "Tube Lines" who are going to be sending four-and-a-half billion on similar upgrades).
Earlier this year, though, Metronet suddenly announced that they had OVERSPENT rather a bit. To the tune of one BILLION pounds, it turned out. And could they have the money back, please.
Well, the reaction of most people was: "TOUGH!" After all, wasn't the whole POINT of these "Public Private Partnership" schemes SUPPOSED to be that the private company would get the REWARD in return for accepting the RISKS? The government would agree to pay over the odds prices making profits for the companies involved… so long as those companies controlled the costs. If they started overspending, then the extra would come out of their profit NOT out of the government's pockets. Which are – of course – YOUR pockets.
So Metronet were told: "you're NOT getting any more money! Oh, all right, have a-hundred-and-twenty-one-MILLION-pounds… but that REALLY is it!"
"Okay," said Metronet. "In that case… we're BUST!"
This, of course, is the point where the whole PPP idea is shown to be not worth the paper that Mr Frown scribbled it down on. When it comes down to it, companies like Metronet do NOT have to take the risks: they just go BUST and dump the problem back in the government's lap.
It is not like the government can REFUSE to RESCUE the London Tube: the entire economy is supported by the profits of the City, and most of the rest of the business in the UK gets done in the Capital too. (Yes, that IS a really dumb idea and we should encourage people to move businesses to the north and the west where life is cheaper and happier, but unfortunately that is the opposite of what has actually happened under the Labour and Conservatory governments.) So the country RELIES on the infrastructure that gets most of its businesses to work in the morning… and that means the Tube.
On the other fluffy foot, that very reliance means that ACTUALLY the jobs of the Metronet workers ought to be a lot SAFER than other people's – these jobs are VITAL!
(Whereas jobs in RETAIL disappear all the time, especially with the rise of home shopping on the Wibbly Wobbly Web and DOUBLE especially when some MANIAC shuts down the Underground for a day and costs all the shops millions in lost sales!)
But even so, the RMT wanted a copper-bottomed assurance that their jobs would be guaranteed COME WHAT MAY.
Now, in order to avoid ACTUAL bankruptcy – in which case the Union Workers would have NO JOBS AT ALL – Metronet had gone into what is called ADMINISTRATION, which is like the LIFE SUPPORT WING for companies. This means that the company gets a bit of a reprieve from the people it owes money while it tries to EITHER arrange new finance from the bank or shareholders OR it finds a "white knight" who will buy it up, pay off its debts and start again OR, in the worst case, comes to some kind of arrangement with the creditors to pay some part of their bills and try to limp on. If none of those work, then it's time for the old pearl-handled revolver in the board room.
Judging from their press release, there were TWO main sticking points for the union.
The first was about the pension scheme, and whether all their members would get the pensions that they had been paying for. Now, under the law brought in after Cap'n Bob took the Mirror Group Pension Fund swimming with him in the Med that really ought not to be a problem because the scheme ought to be completely separate from the company anyway. But the union wanted a promise that that was so.
And the other issue is that it looks like Metronet were thinking of making savings by cutting the workforce BEFORE they went bust, and the union was not happy that the administrator was only promising their jobs were safe so long as the company actually was in administration. They wanted the administrators to promise that their jobs were guaranteed even when the administrators were no longer in charge.
So, after hours of negotiations, they were finally promised that even in the event of the ACTUAL END OF THE EARTH there will still be jobs for them the following morning. With this sworn in blood by the Mayor and the administrators, the RMT finally agreed to call off what was left of their strike.
As a promise it is obviously WORTHLESS. If the union makes it IMPOSSIBLE for the administrator to find a buyer or a new loan from the banks then ALL their jobs will cease to exist. Certainly, the government will have to set up a new Tube maintenance company – but they will start hiring from scratch and will employ as many or as few of the RMT workers as they think they need. Or maybe they will hire some Polish plumbers instead.
Maintaining the London Underground is dirty and difficult and dangerous work, and the people who do it would have a lot of sympathy if it were not for the fact that they make millions of other people's jobs just impossible by going on strike for completely ridiculous promises.
Actually, as a service industry, Metronet basically IS its workforce: they do not OWN the tubes, they do not MAKE things, all they have is the people who do the work. As the largest stakeholder – if not shareholder – perhaps the RMT should think more about RUNNING the company, instead of just RUNNING IT DOWN.
Tuesday, September 04, 2007
Day 2436: They Think It's All Overwatch… It is now!
Monday:
Acting under the aegis of OPERATION: "SNAP GENERAL ELECTION", British Troops are falling back from Basra palace to the relative safety of the airport.
This withdrawal comes just a week after Mr Frown rejected Sir Mr the Merciless' call to draw up plans for a withdrawal.
Perhaps Mr Frown thinks it is better to retreat WITHOUT drawing up a plan first. Maybe his reputation for doing well in a crisis is GOING TO HIS HEAD!
The Prime Monster does insist that this is NOT A DEFEAT. Perhaps he could remind us what the conditions for VICTORY were, in that case.
Still, I think we can all say that this is A GOOD THING. We would all like to see our troops come home – ideally leaving a SAFE and DEMOCRATIC Middle East behind them… but since that's NEVER going to happen, we should be grateful for as many of them being in one piece as we can manage.
Sadly, we cannot say that this is the end of our overseas commitments, and any troops being withdrawn from Iraq may face the prospect of immediately being shipped out to Helmund Province in Afghanistan. But at least in Afghanistan there is (a) a sort of coherent government that (b) actually wants us there and (c) in accordance with a properly orchestrated United Nations mandate.
(Unlike the Iraqi sticking plaster that the US and UK managed to get the Security Council to stick over the mess they had made by illegally invading in the first place. The occupying armies were "authorised" to take charge of Iraq under Security Council Resolution 1511(paragraph 13) on the grounds that if there was to BE an Iraqi state then the occupying forces would jolly well have to put it back together.)
The "in-no-way-a-retreat" from central Basra can only have been helped by the recent and highly astonishing SURPRISE announcement from leading firebrand Mr Moqtada al-Sadr that his militia forces will be taking a temporary break from terrorising all and sundry.
In fact, this announcement was SUCH a VERY astonishing surprise that a VERY CYNICAL person might wonder if this wasn't some sort of QUID before the British PRO QUO.
Coincidentally, those horrid Taliban in Afghanistan released their South Korean hostages when South Korea promised that they would be withdrawing their forces.
Meanwhile, recriminations over the total Horlicks of the Iraq campaign continue to be hurled back and forth across the Atlantic.
After retired generals from the United States had a go at bad-mouthing the UK, and Pentagon envoy retired General Keane spoke of the US "frustration" with the British, now Britain has deployed her own retired generals in a counter-offensive – or at least an attempt to be offensive in return – with retired General Mike "who's bad!" Jackson calling the US post-invasion policy "intellectually bankrupt" while Major General Tim "quite" Cross called US policy "fatally flawed".
I do not think that this SNIPING at each other is going to HELP very much.
It was WRONG to invade in the first place – we had not got the evidence, we would not wait for the UN Inspectors, we did not gain the support of the international community and most of all, for all Mr Saddam’s BLUSTER, Iraq was not a threat to us.
It is NO GOOD to say that it was all America’s fault – we went along with them. Would we go jump in a lake if they said they were going to do it too?
Accepting our fault – not trying to PASS the BUCK to Uncle Sam – is the only way to start HEALING our battered reputation.
Acting under the aegis of OPERATION: "SNAP GENERAL ELECTION", British Troops are falling back from Basra palace to the relative safety of the airport.
This withdrawal comes just a week after Mr Frown rejected Sir Mr the Merciless' call to draw up plans for a withdrawal.
Perhaps Mr Frown thinks it is better to retreat WITHOUT drawing up a plan first. Maybe his reputation for doing well in a crisis is GOING TO HIS HEAD!
The Prime Monster does insist that this is NOT A DEFEAT. Perhaps he could remind us what the conditions for VICTORY were, in that case.
Still, I think we can all say that this is A GOOD THING. We would all like to see our troops come home – ideally leaving a SAFE and DEMOCRATIC Middle East behind them… but since that's NEVER going to happen, we should be grateful for as many of them being in one piece as we can manage.
Sadly, we cannot say that this is the end of our overseas commitments, and any troops being withdrawn from Iraq may face the prospect of immediately being shipped out to Helmund Province in Afghanistan. But at least in Afghanistan there is (a) a sort of coherent government that (b) actually wants us there and (c) in accordance with a properly orchestrated United Nations mandate.
(Unlike the Iraqi sticking plaster that the US and UK managed to get the Security Council to stick over the mess they had made by illegally invading in the first place. The occupying armies were "authorised" to take charge of Iraq under Security Council Resolution 1511(paragraph 13) on the grounds that if there was to BE an Iraqi state then the occupying forces would jolly well have to put it back together.)
The "in-no-way-a-retreat" from central Basra can only have been helped by the recent and highly astonishing SURPRISE announcement from leading firebrand Mr Moqtada al-Sadr that his militia forces will be taking a temporary break from terrorising all and sundry.
In fact, this announcement was SUCH a VERY astonishing surprise that a VERY CYNICAL person might wonder if this wasn't some sort of QUID before the British PRO QUO.
Coincidentally, those horrid Taliban in Afghanistan released their South Korean hostages when South Korea promised that they would be withdrawing their forces.
Meanwhile, recriminations over the total Horlicks of the Iraq campaign continue to be hurled back and forth across the Atlantic.
After retired generals from the United States had a go at bad-mouthing the UK, and Pentagon envoy retired General Keane spoke of the US "frustration" with the British, now Britain has deployed her own retired generals in a counter-offensive – or at least an attempt to be offensive in return – with retired General Mike "who's bad!" Jackson calling the US post-invasion policy "intellectually bankrupt" while Major General Tim "quite" Cross called US policy "fatally flawed".
I do not think that this SNIPING at each other is going to HELP very much.
It was WRONG to invade in the first place – we had not got the evidence, we would not wait for the UN Inspectors, we did not gain the support of the international community and most of all, for all Mr Saddam’s BLUSTER, Iraq was not a threat to us.
It is NO GOOD to say that it was all America’s fault – we went along with them. Would we go jump in a lake if they said they were going to do it too?
Accepting our fault – not trying to PASS the BUCK to Uncle Sam – is the only way to start HEALING our battered reputation.
Sunday, September 02, 2007
Day 2435: Wing and a Prayer
Sunday:
News reaches us that the Vatican airline launches pilgrimage flights from Rome to Lourdes…
…only to be banned from letting passengers on board with Holy Water. For "security reasons".
It is not ALL bad news, though. Passengers are to receive a free miniature – of Holy Water! – in the shape of the BLESSED VIRGIN once they are safely airborne.
"Lovely," says Daddy.
News reaches us that the Vatican airline launches pilgrimage flights from Rome to Lourdes…
…only to be banned from letting passengers on board with Holy Water. For "security reasons".
It is not ALL bad news, though. Passengers are to receive a free miniature – of Holy Water! – in the shape of the BLESSED VIRGIN once they are safely airborne.
"Lovely," says Daddy.
Saturday, September 01, 2007
Day 2434: Mysteries of Doctor Who #11: So DOES Paul McGann Count?
Saturday:
Well, in SPITE of the current Whopremo being Mr Russell Television Davis, the SAME Mr Russell Television Davis who included THE LINE in his RISQUÉ drama series "Queer as Folk", the OBVIOUS answer is YES.
Mr Dr Paul has appeared (or will appear) in over forty adventures playing the role of Dr Who, twelve of which have been broadcast by the BBC.
Oh yes they have: "Time Waits for No Man" aka "The Sensational TV Movie Staring Paul McGann" (obviously) back in 1996; then "Storm Warning", "Sword of Orion", "The Stones of Venice", "Invaders from Mars" and "The Chimes at Midnight" were all broadcast on digital radio station BBC7 in 2005; and then BBC7 commissioned eight NEW episodes for the stories "Blood of the Daleks", "Horror of Glam Rock", "Immortal Beloved", "Phobos", "No More Lies" and "Human Resources" and broadcast them at the start of this year.
That's two more stories than Mr Dr Christopher got broadcast. (And unlike Mr Dr Paul, that was his own silly fault!)
Mr Dr Paul's likeness was used for the lead character in the longest-running comic strip in the world's longest-running TV tie-in magazine, the quite remarkable Doctor Who Magazine where the eighth Doctor was the comic lead in a-hundred-and-ten monthly (ish) issues from issue 244 to issue 353. That's NINE years – even if one of them WAS "The Inglorious Dead". [A: which felt like nine years on its own.]
And a character bearing some or no passing resemblance to him appeared in original (and unoriginal) novels in one jolly "New Adventure" from Virgin publishing and a seemingly interminable seventy-three "Eighth Doctor Adventures" from the BBC, many or even some of which are actually readable. Daddy Alex says he can name AT LEAST TWO [A: Considers… THREE]!
The REAL question ought to be, not DOES he count, but WHICH ONE counts?
As I have previously discussed the books and audios go off and flatly contradict one another. However, with a BIT (okay a LOT) of fluffy foot-waving, you CAN just about make them fit together again. That is the GREAT THING about Doctor Who continuity – if you leave it long enough for the DETAILS to become BLURRED then it can LOOK like it really does fit together. Here's how.
The eighth Doctor books basically fall into two distinct halves: for the first thirty-six stories ("The Eight Doctors" to "The Ancestor Cell") the Doctor is based entirely on Mr Dr Paul's most Sunny Delighted performance in the television movie; he travels with the equally insanely perky Sam Jones, a wannabe Greenpeace poster girl and all-round goody two-shoes; his enemies are often people or creatures that he has met in his earlier incarnations, but also a time-travelling voodoo cut called Faction Paradox who come from a War, something like a hundred and fifty years into his future, between the Time Lords and COUGH, COUGH, COUGH not the Daleks.
Then in "The Ancestor Cell", the Daleks, COUGH, COUGH, COUGH not the Daleks, the "enemy" attack the Doctor's home planet of Gallifrey and Faction Paradox use this as cover for their own takeover of the planet and indeed all of history. To stop them all, the Doctor blows up his homeworld.
For the remaining thirty-seven books, ("The Burning" to "The Gallifrey Chronicles") the Doctor is a sulky, grumpy, moody so-and-so who has lost his memories of everything before the big FOOM; he travels with the equally gloomy, moody Fitz Kreiner, a wannabe failed rockstar and lurve god (plus either uber-annoying whiny careerist Anji Kapour, or uber-annoying con-woman-without-a-character Trix); his enemies are all ones you've never heard of before, though with a habit of resembling known Earth animals (wasps, rhinos, poodles, baboons, cat-monster-tigers etc) and/or famous Dr Who monsters with the serial numbers filed off ("Silverati" my big fluffy behind!), but also time-travelling Victorian scientist/magician-with-an-agenda, a time-spanning organisation or just a collection of crystal bosses depending on who's writing for him this month, Sabbath.
Then, in Mr Justin Richard's Time-themed trilogy "Plot Zero", "Plotless" and "Someplot Never", Sabbath and everything to do with him is wiped comprehensively from history leaving the Doctor free to enjoy his last few adventures before "The Gallifrey Chronicles" not so much wrap things up as leave him to ride off into an heroic sunset…
The universe is just completely utterly different after Gallifrey is blown up. Nothing is familiar and many of the old "rules" of the TV series don't seem to apply any more. Even the writers' grasp on physics seems looser. Ahem. Lots of people – well, not LOTS as such, but many of the range's remaining dwindling readership would ask: "is it all different because Gallifrey has gone, or has Gallifrey ceased ever to have existed and how does that work anyway?"
Well, the much more OBVIOUS answer is that the universe is so different because it is a DIFFERENT UNIVERSE. The explosion that destroys Gallifrey at the climax of "The Ancestor Cell" – known for traditional reasons as the "FOOM" – tears a great big hole in space and time and blasts the Doctor into another continuum entirely, probably some collapsing bubble universe filled with strange shadows and echoes of the real one.
The otherwise completely impenetrable "Blue Angel" might be considered a foreshadowing of this. Or if you prefer, then Dr Who ends up inside one of those "Universe in a Bottle"s that appeared all over the Doctor Who books at the time.
Ironically, there are certain things that with hindsight and a bit of a squint you can now fit together to make a sort of sense. The Daleks were NEVER meant to be "the enemy" of the early novels. In fact, quite the contrary, as editor of the range Mr Justin wanted them to be Sabbath's secret bosses, and there are all sorts of hints at this in the second half of the range. EXCEPT… at the last minute, they couldn't get the copyright clearance. Which means that actually you CAN say that the Daleks were the enemy all along. Those hints become – like the bits of left-over Time Lord stuff – just flotsam from the end of the Time War. Thanks to the new series, even if they weren't at the time, the Daleks now have always been the enemy. I think Faction Paradox would approve!
Moreover, there was a big hint that the enemy actually came from Earth… but also didn't. Well, the Big Fish story "Terror Firma" has Davros take over the Earth and build a new race of Daleks there before they force him to become their Emperor. Dr Who forces them to flee the Earth. So in the future, the Daleks will come from Earth but also not. Handy, huh?
With its "Once Upon A Time" opening and iconic image of Dr Who stepping out of the TARDIS and back into the comic-strip Universe, "Endgame", the start of Mr Dr Paul's adventures in DWM, makes a perfect he’s back and it's about time. And, so long as you IGNORE the connection to continuity-busting "Ground Zero", the eighth Doctor comic strip does not in itself clash with the other continuities. Too much. And with that open-ended opening and a matching "they walk off into the sunset" closing it forms a single continuous unit that can be safely placed into his life as a block, before we arrive at the still-ongoing continuing adventures on audio.
So THAT's the solution.
The timeline of the eighth Doctor goes:
"Time Waits for No Man": Ms Dr Grace kills Dr Who when he is Mr Dr Sylv, and gives him amnesia…
Travelling with Samantha "Sam" Jones, he returns to San Francisco to fight Vampires, fights Zygons in Victorian London, and meets Faction in "Alien Bodies". He loses Sam, foolishly finds Sam again, and returns to San Francisco AGAIN, before the shadow of the Time War falls over him in "Interference". Time Lords from the future come after his new companion, former Faction acolyte Laura "Compassion" Tobin in "The Shadows of Avalon" because she is evolving into a TARDIS! He goes on the run with her but events come to a head in…
"The Ancestor Cell": Dr Who intervenes in his own future, ending the Time War and falling into an alternative universe. And giving himself amnesia…
But then it turns out that his masters are going to explode the Earth to make themselves all-powerful, so Sabbath sacrifices himself to stop them, and Dr Who fools them into destroying themselves. In fact, they destroy themselves so much that they never existed in the first place, leaving Dr Who to have a few more adventures in the bubble universe, before escaping sometime after "The Gallifrey Chronicles".
For some time after this Dr Who travels with redeemed reptile-girl Destrii. After she leave he meets Samson and Gemma Griffen and has more (unrecorded) adventures with them before Davros captures him. And gives him amnesia!
…which leads directly into "Storm Warning".
But rescuing Charley causes a PARADOX, one that results in Dr Who being infected with ANTI-TIME turning him – fortunately temporarily – into the eponymous "Zagreus". To save the real universe, he accepts banishment into yet another alternative universe FOREVER… or at least until that gets dull. Or possibly quite some way AFTER that gets dull. Now he is back in our universe and will soon be bidding farewell to Charley because – in another twist of time – we've seen into his future and he'll be reconciled with the Time Lords again and meeting up with spunky Lucie Miller for more adventures.
And you've got a fifty-year gap before the Doctor catches up with the Time War again…
Well, in SPITE of the current Whopremo being Mr Russell Television Davis, the SAME Mr Russell Television Davis who included THE LINE in his RISQUÉ drama series "Queer as Folk", the OBVIOUS answer is YES.
Mr Dr Paul has appeared (or will appear) in over forty adventures playing the role of Dr Who, twelve of which have been broadcast by the BBC.
Oh yes they have: "Time Waits for No Man" aka "The Sensational TV Movie Staring Paul McGann" (obviously) back in 1996; then "Storm Warning", "Sword of Orion", "The Stones of Venice", "Invaders from Mars" and "The Chimes at Midnight" were all broadcast on digital radio station BBC7 in 2005; and then BBC7 commissioned eight NEW episodes for the stories "Blood of the Daleks", "Horror of Glam Rock", "Immortal Beloved", "Phobos", "No More Lies" and "Human Resources" and broadcast them at the start of this year.
That's two more stories than Mr Dr Christopher got broadcast. (And unlike Mr Dr Paul, that was his own silly fault!)
Mr Dr Paul's likeness was used for the lead character in the longest-running comic strip in the world's longest-running TV tie-in magazine, the quite remarkable Doctor Who Magazine where the eighth Doctor was the comic lead in a-hundred-and-ten monthly (ish) issues from issue 244 to issue 353. That's NINE years – even if one of them WAS "The Inglorious Dead". [A: which felt like nine years on its own.]
And a character bearing some or no passing resemblance to him appeared in original (and unoriginal) novels in one jolly "New Adventure" from Virgin publishing and a seemingly interminable seventy-three "Eighth Doctor Adventures" from the BBC, many or even some of which are actually readable. Daddy Alex says he can name AT LEAST TWO [A: Considers… THREE]!
The REAL question ought to be, not DOES he count, but WHICH ONE counts?
As I have previously discussed the books and audios go off and flatly contradict one another. However, with a BIT (okay a LOT) of fluffy foot-waving, you CAN just about make them fit together again. That is the GREAT THING about Doctor Who continuity – if you leave it long enough for the DETAILS to become BLURRED then it can LOOK like it really does fit together. Here's how.
The eighth Doctor books basically fall into two distinct halves: for the first thirty-six stories ("The Eight Doctors" to "The Ancestor Cell") the Doctor is based entirely on Mr Dr Paul's most Sunny Delighted performance in the television movie; he travels with the equally insanely perky Sam Jones, a wannabe Greenpeace poster girl and all-round goody two-shoes; his enemies are often people or creatures that he has met in his earlier incarnations, but also a time-travelling voodoo cut called Faction Paradox who come from a War, something like a hundred and fifty years into his future, between the Time Lords and COUGH, COUGH, COUGH not the Daleks.
Then in "The Ancestor Cell", the Daleks, COUGH, COUGH, COUGH not the Daleks, the "enemy" attack the Doctor's home planet of Gallifrey and Faction Paradox use this as cover for their own takeover of the planet and indeed all of history. To stop them all, the Doctor blows up his homeworld.
For the remaining thirty-seven books, ("The Burning" to "The Gallifrey Chronicles") the Doctor is a sulky, grumpy, moody so-and-so who has lost his memories of everything before the big FOOM; he travels with the equally gloomy, moody Fitz Kreiner, a wannabe failed rockstar and lurve god (plus either uber-annoying whiny careerist Anji Kapour, or uber-annoying con-woman-without-a-character Trix); his enemies are all ones you've never heard of before, though with a habit of resembling known Earth animals (wasps, rhinos, poodles, baboons, cat-monster-tigers etc) and/or famous Dr Who monsters with the serial numbers filed off ("Silverati" my big fluffy behind!), but also time-travelling Victorian scientist/magician-with-an-agenda, a time-spanning organisation or just a collection of crystal bosses depending on who's writing for him this month, Sabbath.
Then, in Mr Justin Richard's Time-themed trilogy "Plot Zero", "Plotless" and "Someplot Never", Sabbath and everything to do with him is wiped comprehensively from history leaving the Doctor free to enjoy his last few adventures before "The Gallifrey Chronicles" not so much wrap things up as leave him to ride off into an heroic sunset…
The universe is just completely utterly different after Gallifrey is blown up. Nothing is familiar and many of the old "rules" of the TV series don't seem to apply any more. Even the writers' grasp on physics seems looser. Ahem. Lots of people – well, not LOTS as such, but many of the range's remaining dwindling readership would ask: "is it all different because Gallifrey has gone, or has Gallifrey ceased ever to have existed and how does that work anyway?"
Well, the much more OBVIOUS answer is that the universe is so different because it is a DIFFERENT UNIVERSE. The explosion that destroys Gallifrey at the climax of "The Ancestor Cell" – known for traditional reasons as the "FOOM" – tears a great big hole in space and time and blasts the Doctor into another continuum entirely, probably some collapsing bubble universe filled with strange shadows and echoes of the real one.
The otherwise completely impenetrable "Blue Angel" might be considered a foreshadowing of this. Or if you prefer, then Dr Who ends up inside one of those "Universe in a Bottle"s that appeared all over the Doctor Who books at the time.
Ironically, there are certain things that with hindsight and a bit of a squint you can now fit together to make a sort of sense. The Daleks were NEVER meant to be "the enemy" of the early novels. In fact, quite the contrary, as editor of the range Mr Justin wanted them to be Sabbath's secret bosses, and there are all sorts of hints at this in the second half of the range. EXCEPT… at the last minute, they couldn't get the copyright clearance. Which means that actually you CAN say that the Daleks were the enemy all along. Those hints become – like the bits of left-over Time Lord stuff – just flotsam from the end of the Time War. Thanks to the new series, even if they weren't at the time, the Daleks now have always been the enemy. I think Faction Paradox would approve!
Moreover, there was a big hint that the enemy actually came from Earth… but also didn't. Well, the Big Fish story "Terror Firma" has Davros take over the Earth and build a new race of Daleks there before they force him to become their Emperor. Dr Who forces them to flee the Earth. So in the future, the Daleks will come from Earth but also not. Handy, huh?
With its "Once Upon A Time" opening and iconic image of Dr Who stepping out of the TARDIS and back into the comic-strip Universe, "Endgame", the start of Mr Dr Paul's adventures in DWM, makes a perfect he’s back and it's about time. And, so long as you IGNORE the connection to continuity-busting "Ground Zero", the eighth Doctor comic strip does not in itself clash with the other continuities. Too much. And with that open-ended opening and a matching "they walk off into the sunset" closing it forms a single continuous unit that can be safely placed into his life as a block, before we arrive at the still-ongoing continuing adventures on audio.
So THAT's the solution.
The timeline of the eighth Doctor goes:
"Time Waits for No Man": Ms Dr Grace kills Dr Who when he is Mr Dr Sylv, and gives him amnesia…
Part One: "Time's Wet Nosed Puppy" (The Eighth Doctor Adventures, one to thirty-six)
"The Eight Doctors": a booby-trap, left by the Master, gives Dr Who amnesia…Travelling with Samantha "Sam" Jones, he returns to San Francisco to fight Vampires, fights Zygons in Victorian London, and meets Faction in "Alien Bodies". He loses Sam, foolishly finds Sam again, and returns to San Francisco AGAIN, before the shadow of the Time War falls over him in "Interference". Time Lords from the future come after his new companion, former Faction acolyte Laura "Compassion" Tobin in "The Shadows of Avalon" because she is evolving into a TARDIS! He goes on the run with her but events come to a head in…
"The Ancestor Cell": Dr Who intervenes in his own future, ending the Time War and falling into an alternative universe. And giving himself amnesia…
Part Two: "Time's Grumpy Amnesiac" (The Eighth Doctor Adventures, thirty-seven to seventy-three)
Dr Who spends a hundred-odd years (in fact, a hundred-odd ODD years) in the bubble universe. While the TARDIS regenerates, he is trapped on Earth, dealing with a fire elemental, meeting Alan Turing and adopting a daughter. Afterwards he travels with Fitz and Anji through a universe where magic seems to work. In "The Adventuress of Henrietta Street" he meets Sabbath, with his Babwyn-powered, time-travelling submarine, who causes no end of trouble, tangling the time lines so that eventually this bubble universe shatters completely.But then it turns out that his masters are going to explode the Earth to make themselves all-powerful, so Sabbath sacrifices himself to stop them, and Dr Who fools them into destroying themselves. In fact, they destroy themselves so much that they never existed in the first place, leaving Dr Who to have a few more adventures in the bubble universe, before escaping sometime after "The Gallifrey Chronicles".
Part Three: "Time's Animated Adventurer" (Doctor Who Magazine comic strips)
Returning to the real universe, or at least two dimensions of it(!), Dr Who meets Izzy Sinclair in his old haunt of Stockbridge. After polishing off the Celestial Toymaker – and some Daleks – he fakes a regeneration to deal with comic-strip villains The Threshold in "Wormwood" before teaming up with a Cyberman-with-a-soul to thwart the Master – so he DID escape from falling into the Eye of Harmony! – and his latest plan for universal dominion and "The Inglorious Dead", and THEN having to deal with Izzy's body-swap trauma from "Ophidius" to "Oblivion". Finally, a face-off with a far-future form of famous foes the Cybermen (sorry, they don't begin with an "F") in "The Flood".For some time after this Dr Who travels with redeemed reptile-girl Destrii. After she leave he meets Samson and Gemma Griffen and has more (unrecorded) adventures with them before Davros captures him. And gives him amnesia!
…which leads directly into "Storm Warning".
Part Four: "The Big Finish"
On board the airship R101 is Edwardian Adventuress Charlotte "Charley" Pollard. She runs into Dr Who and together they go off on a series of THRILLING escapades. And also "A-hundred-and-forty-seven Minuets in Hell". In which he has amnesia.But rescuing Charley causes a PARADOX, one that results in Dr Who being infected with ANTI-TIME turning him – fortunately temporarily – into the eponymous "Zagreus". To save the real universe, he accepts banishment into yet another alternative universe FOREVER… or at least until that gets dull. Or possibly quite some way AFTER that gets dull. Now he is back in our universe and will soon be bidding farewell to Charley because – in another twist of time – we've seen into his future and he'll be reconciled with the Time Lords again and meeting up with spunky Lucie Miller for more adventures.
And you've got a fifty-year gap before the Doctor catches up with the Time War again…
Friday, August 31, 2007
Day 2433: Face to Facebook
Friday:
Access to the Wibby Wobbly Web at work, is it a problem? Or is it a Human Right?
The TUC says that employees SHOULD have access, in particular to networking sites like In-Your-Facebook and FloorSpace.
UNSURPRISINGLY, employers reply by saying "it's a flamin' liberty!"
Mr Peter Mooney said:
"Why should employers pay for the privilege of allowing their employees to access Facebook, MySpace or Bebo from work computers whether in an employee's lunch-time or not?"
This is OBVIOUSLY WRONG – anyone who has READ the books will know that it is REMUS who is MOONEY and PETER is actually WORMTAIL!
"The lunch break may not be a paid break but there is still a cost" Mr Wormtail continues. "As we all know, lunch-time spreads into work time, so where do you draw the line?"
Because work time NEVER spreads into lunch-time and NO ONE ever does a working lunch, do they!
The employer here seems to have the PROBLEM that they think that allowing their workers any second of personal time during the working day is an INTRINSIC WRONG. This is the sort of psychosis that leads to timing people's trips to the toilet.
But surely the question should not be are you getting every second of breathing time from your employees but are they doing the work you need of them?
As a LIBERAL, I should like to think that companies work BETTER when employers and employees are working TOGETHER. Treating your workforce as SERFS leads to disaffection and poor productivity.
Suppose Hermione DOES spend half the day on Facebook: if she exceeds her target by fifty percent in the other half of the day, are you REALLY being ripped off? Draco, on the other fluffy foot, never even TOUCHES the Internet, but he's so BORED that can only bring himself to make ninety percent of his target – is he REALLY the better employee?
And is glancing at a web page now and then REALLY any different to taking a five-minute fag break every hour?
Well, there IS a BIT of a cost attached – using the office Internet does mean that someone is paying for your pipeline.
The question is how badly does it clog up the business use of the connection to the Internet which, after all, is what the company is paying for?
It is like the man who was ARRESTED for hitching a free ride on somebody else's wireless Internet connection.
People argue that he's doing no more than reading a book from the light coming out of their window – he's only using their leftovers. But that is not entirely true. Unlike light from a lightbulb, your use of bandwidth is limited and if someone else uses a little then you can't. In small increments, it genuinely makes no difference to you – but if lots of people did it, you would see the difference. If EVERYONE went freeloading their Internet, then no one would pay for it and there would BE no connections.
(The moral philosopher Mr Kant – Immanuel not Brian – called this his "Formula of Universal Law" to judge if something was morrally wrong: basically, if EVERYONE did it, would you be BUGGERED?)
Still, arresting him was a BIT HARSH!
But then again, the employer needs to make a judgement about how much excess bandwidth they want to pay for, how much of it might be used "on the sly" by the workforce and whether the rewards of a happy, motivated staff are worth the cost.
So how NAUGHTY you think it is to use the company Internet depends on your attitude to taking biros from the office stationery cupboard, or making personal phone calls.
In fact, since the Internet access is probably un-metered and the phone use is charged by the second, you may be better off to let people chat by e-mail than go back to doing what they USED to do to waste your time: gossiping on the phone!
This is a story that affects my Daddy Richard personally, because recently the place where he works doing counting changed their Internet policy. Instead of letting people use it they have decided not to. Instead, when you try to look at a web page like MY DIARY a message pops up and says: "this URL is blocked because it is TOO MUCH FUN – contact the IT department with a VALID BUSINESS REASON and we might let you look at it".
This results in considerably less joy in the workplace.
Daddy is ACTUALLY luckier than most, since he was able to persuade his bosses that there were "VALID BUSINESS REASONS" to be able to read the BBC news and the Wikipedia. So at least he can still do the IMPORTANT work of researching my diary.
But after years of being able to read the Liberal Democrat news on the Blogregator and the Doctor Who news on Owlpost Gallifrey, the deafening silence is driving him a bit peculiar. Or "more peculiar", to be completely accurate.
Access to the Wibby Wobbly Web at work, is it a problem? Or is it a Human Right?
The TUC says that employees SHOULD have access, in particular to networking sites like In-Your-Facebook and FloorSpace.
UNSURPRISINGLY, employers reply by saying "it's a flamin' liberty!"
Mr Peter Mooney said:
"Why should employers pay for the privilege of allowing their employees to access Facebook, MySpace or Bebo from work computers whether in an employee's lunch-time or not?"
This is OBVIOUSLY WRONG – anyone who has READ the books will know that it is REMUS who is MOONEY and PETER is actually WORMTAIL!
"The lunch break may not be a paid break but there is still a cost" Mr Wormtail continues. "As we all know, lunch-time spreads into work time, so where do you draw the line?"
Because work time NEVER spreads into lunch-time and NO ONE ever does a working lunch, do they!
The employer here seems to have the PROBLEM that they think that allowing their workers any second of personal time during the working day is an INTRINSIC WRONG. This is the sort of psychosis that leads to timing people's trips to the toilet.
But surely the question should not be are you getting every second of breathing time from your employees but are they doing the work you need of them?
As a LIBERAL, I should like to think that companies work BETTER when employers and employees are working TOGETHER. Treating your workforce as SERFS leads to disaffection and poor productivity.
Suppose Hermione DOES spend half the day on Facebook: if she exceeds her target by fifty percent in the other half of the day, are you REALLY being ripped off? Draco, on the other fluffy foot, never even TOUCHES the Internet, but he's so BORED that can only bring himself to make ninety percent of his target – is he REALLY the better employee?
And is glancing at a web page now and then REALLY any different to taking a five-minute fag break every hour?
Well, there IS a BIT of a cost attached – using the office Internet does mean that someone is paying for your pipeline.
The question is how badly does it clog up the business use of the connection to the Internet which, after all, is what the company is paying for?
It is like the man who was ARRESTED for hitching a free ride on somebody else's wireless Internet connection.
People argue that he's doing no more than reading a book from the light coming out of their window – he's only using their leftovers. But that is not entirely true. Unlike light from a lightbulb, your use of bandwidth is limited and if someone else uses a little then you can't. In small increments, it genuinely makes no difference to you – but if lots of people did it, you would see the difference. If EVERYONE went freeloading their Internet, then no one would pay for it and there would BE no connections.
(The moral philosopher Mr Kant – Immanuel not Brian – called this his "Formula of Universal Law" to judge if something was morrally wrong: basically, if EVERYONE did it, would you be BUGGERED?)
Still, arresting him was a BIT HARSH!
But then again, the employer needs to make a judgement about how much excess bandwidth they want to pay for, how much of it might be used "on the sly" by the workforce and whether the rewards of a happy, motivated staff are worth the cost.
So how NAUGHTY you think it is to use the company Internet depends on your attitude to taking biros from the office stationery cupboard, or making personal phone calls.
In fact, since the Internet access is probably un-metered and the phone use is charged by the second, you may be better off to let people chat by e-mail than go back to doing what they USED to do to waste your time: gossiping on the phone!
This is a story that affects my Daddy Richard personally, because recently the place where he works doing counting changed their Internet policy. Instead of letting people use it they have decided not to. Instead, when you try to look at a web page like MY DIARY a message pops up and says: "this URL is blocked because it is TOO MUCH FUN – contact the IT department with a VALID BUSINESS REASON and we might let you look at it".
This results in considerably less joy in the workplace.
Daddy is ACTUALLY luckier than most, since he was able to persuade his bosses that there were "VALID BUSINESS REASONS" to be able to read the BBC news and the Wikipedia. So at least he can still do the IMPORTANT work of researching my diary.
But after years of being able to read the Liberal Democrat news on the Blogregator and the Doctor Who news on Owlpost Gallifrey, the deafening silence is driving him a bit peculiar. Or "more peculiar", to be completely accurate.
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Day 2432: Mr Balloon faces The Tribe
Wednesday:
Ooh, Mr Balloon is on the telly. Whatever can HE be doing there? What’s that you say, Mr Stripy? ANOTHER relaunch? Isn’t that two in two weeks? WHAT a ridiculous repeat offender he is!
This was like that new BBC Two show where Mr Balloon goes into the wilderness and faces a week of trials from a TRIBE of PYGMIES from the Newsnight Show. He tries to bribe them with SHINY BEADS and they stick him with pins coated in POISON FROG JUICE.
I just have enough time to tell you about his six IMPOSSIBLE POLICY POSITIONS before breakfast…
1
Immigration: too many people coming to Britain at the start of the Labour’s decade in office (Mr Balloon blames asylum seekers); too many people at the end of the Labour’s decade in office (Mr Balloon blames economic migrants). Would he send those people back? Er, no.
2
Iraq: he voted with the government on the invasion, was that right? Well, we have to learn the lessons of the mistakes that were made. Would he pull the troops out now? Setting a date would be quite wrong and just encourage them! So… still supporting the government’s exact position then. What lessons HAVE you learned from Iraq, Mr Balloon? (As no one asked.)
3
Human Rights: he wants to abolish the Human Rights Act because it means we “cannot deport people” (he means Mr Lawrence’s murderer) and we cannot control prisoners (or is that because the Prison Officers Association is on strike because they get too little money to guard too MANY prisoners?). So… WHICH Human Rights in the European Declaration of Human Rights do you want to drop, Mr Balloon? ? (As no one asked.)
ALSO, the snag is: derogating from the ECHR disqualifies us from membership of the European Union (as none of the interviewers pointed out). You DID know that didn’t you, Mr Balloon?
4
Europe: he wants to stay in (though see above). BUT he wants to be able to vary domestic social policy in order to gain short-term economic advantage. So… you don’t believe in the free market, then, Mr Balloon? (As no one asked.)
5
Tax: abolition of Inheritance Tax will only benefit the richest six percent of the population. How is this “sharing the proceeds of growth”? Are you only going to share them with those who are rich already? “Er”
ALSO: doesn’t this flatly contradict your paean to the American Dream, that the very poorest can make it to the top? Not if the Balloon’s of this world start with an inherited leg up, they can’t – a legacy up, you might say. No?
6
Green Taxes: Mr Michael Crick had him at this point, if he’d but had the wit to spot it. Two “yes/no” questions. Question One: will you raise taxes on flying? “YES.” Question Two: will you stop airports expanding? “NO… air travel has got to grow… and blah and blah and very much more blah.”
So… if you are NOT trying to cut flying (with its high carbon emissions) then what ARE your green taxes for, Mr Balloon? (As no one asked.)
Overall, though, the format played to Mr Balloon’s STRENGTHS: having four “nasty” BBC journalists GANGING UP on him allow him to play “Poor Brave Bullied Dave”. But actually the advantage is with him, as with each of them GAGGING to take over the questioning from the others they ruined each other’s chances of follow up. Instead of meshing into a concerted inquiry, with them all following their own pre-prepared agenda they took none of the opportunities to pick his answers apart, letting him hopscotch all over the place.
He is a PAST MASTER of the non-answer answer. For example, he was asked: “Mr Vague, Auntie Maude, Mr Oily Letwin, all your front bench are MOONLIGHTING in lucrative second (and third and fourth) jobs… why have you appointed this bunch of DILETTANTES?” His response: “I’ve appointed these people because THESE are the people I’ve appointed!” And THAT told them!
Having said that, as Daddy Alex first noticed, Mr Balloon REALLY cannot cope with female ladies of the opposite gender. Faced with a very senior economist and self-confessed single mother, he leans forward ready to pat her knee and you can all but see the words “don’t you worry your pretty little head about that, my dear,” forming in the atrium of his Etonian brain. At the last POSSIBLE second he recognises the glint in her eye of “patronise me and I’ll shove your silver spoon so far up that you’ll think you’re being born again!” Which leaves him dribbling something about the government bunging people two tenners as a bribe to stay married not because it would work but because it “sends a message”.
The Newsnight Show’s Tribe of interviewers allowed Mr Balloon to pull the wool over their eyes – or rather, given the quality of his answers – to pull the THIN FLANNEL over their eyes. But he could not disguise the fact that his bold new policy direction is… EXACTLY the same as Mr Something of the Night’s “new policy direction” Mr Iain Drunken Swerve’s “new policy direction” and Mr Vague’s “new policy direction”.
Construct a popular phrase or saying out of the following words, not necessarily in this order: “Strategy” “Vote” “Core”.
Personally, I think we’d have been better informed if they’d allowed Sir Mr the Merciless to cross-examine him. I do not think Sir M would have let him off the FROG JUICE POISONED hook so easily!
Ooh, Mr Balloon is on the telly. Whatever can HE be doing there? What’s that you say, Mr Stripy? ANOTHER relaunch? Isn’t that two in two weeks? WHAT a ridiculous repeat offender he is!
This was like that new BBC Two show where Mr Balloon goes into the wilderness and faces a week of trials from a TRIBE of PYGMIES from the Newsnight Show. He tries to bribe them with SHINY BEADS and they stick him with pins coated in POISON FROG JUICE.
I just have enough time to tell you about his six IMPOSSIBLE POLICY POSITIONS before breakfast…
1
Immigration: too many people coming to Britain at the start of the Labour’s decade in office (Mr Balloon blames asylum seekers); too many people at the end of the Labour’s decade in office (Mr Balloon blames economic migrants). Would he send those people back? Er, no.
2
Iraq: he voted with the government on the invasion, was that right? Well, we have to learn the lessons of the mistakes that were made. Would he pull the troops out now? Setting a date would be quite wrong and just encourage them! So… still supporting the government’s exact position then. What lessons HAVE you learned from Iraq, Mr Balloon? (As no one asked.)
3
Human Rights: he wants to abolish the Human Rights Act because it means we “cannot deport people” (he means Mr Lawrence’s murderer) and we cannot control prisoners (or is that because the Prison Officers Association is on strike because they get too little money to guard too MANY prisoners?). So… WHICH Human Rights in the European Declaration of Human Rights do you want to drop, Mr Balloon? ? (As no one asked.)
ALSO, the snag is: derogating from the ECHR disqualifies us from membership of the European Union (as none of the interviewers pointed out). You DID know that didn’t you, Mr Balloon?
4
Europe: he wants to stay in (though see above). BUT he wants to be able to vary domestic social policy in order to gain short-term economic advantage. So… you don’t believe in the free market, then, Mr Balloon? (As no one asked.)
5
Tax: abolition of Inheritance Tax will only benefit the richest six percent of the population. How is this “sharing the proceeds of growth”? Are you only going to share them with those who are rich already? “Er”
ALSO: doesn’t this flatly contradict your paean to the American Dream, that the very poorest can make it to the top? Not if the Balloon’s of this world start with an inherited leg up, they can’t – a legacy up, you might say. No?
6
Green Taxes: Mr Michael Crick had him at this point, if he’d but had the wit to spot it. Two “yes/no” questions. Question One: will you raise taxes on flying? “YES.” Question Two: will you stop airports expanding? “NO… air travel has got to grow… and blah and blah and very much more blah.”
So… if you are NOT trying to cut flying (with its high carbon emissions) then what ARE your green taxes for, Mr Balloon? (As no one asked.)
Overall, though, the format played to Mr Balloon’s STRENGTHS: having four “nasty” BBC journalists GANGING UP on him allow him to play “Poor Brave Bullied Dave”. But actually the advantage is with him, as with each of them GAGGING to take over the questioning from the others they ruined each other’s chances of follow up. Instead of meshing into a concerted inquiry, with them all following their own pre-prepared agenda they took none of the opportunities to pick his answers apart, letting him hopscotch all over the place.
He is a PAST MASTER of the non-answer answer. For example, he was asked: “Mr Vague, Auntie Maude, Mr Oily Letwin, all your front bench are MOONLIGHTING in lucrative second (and third and fourth) jobs… why have you appointed this bunch of DILETTANTES?” His response: “I’ve appointed these people because THESE are the people I’ve appointed!” And THAT told them!
Having said that, as Daddy Alex first noticed, Mr Balloon REALLY cannot cope with female ladies of the opposite gender. Faced with a very senior economist and self-confessed single mother, he leans forward ready to pat her knee and you can all but see the words “don’t you worry your pretty little head about that, my dear,” forming in the atrium of his Etonian brain. At the last POSSIBLE second he recognises the glint in her eye of “patronise me and I’ll shove your silver spoon so far up that you’ll think you’re being born again!” Which leaves him dribbling something about the government bunging people two tenners as a bribe to stay married not because it would work but because it “sends a message”.
The Newsnight Show’s Tribe of interviewers allowed Mr Balloon to pull the wool over their eyes – or rather, given the quality of his answers – to pull the THIN FLANNEL over their eyes. But he could not disguise the fact that his bold new policy direction is… EXACTLY the same as Mr Something of the Night’s “new policy direction” Mr Iain Drunken Swerve’s “new policy direction” and Mr Vague’s “new policy direction”.
Construct a popular phrase or saying out of the following words, not necessarily in this order: “Strategy” “Vote” “Core”.
Personally, I think we’d have been better informed if they’d allowed Sir Mr the Merciless to cross-examine him. I do not think Sir M would have let him off the FROG JUICE POISONED hook so easily!
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Day 2431: Two bans or NOT two bans?
Tuesday:
The Grauniad newspaper, if I may call it that, reports two bans today: a Conservatory Ban and a Liberal Democrat Ban.
Of course, what the Grauniad calls a "ban" may not be the same as what you or I might call a ban. Your mileage, as they say, may vary.
This is ironic because their headline "Lib Dem plan to ban petrol-driven cars" appears over a story that ACTUALLY says the Liberal Democrats want all cars to run on non-carbon-emitting technology by the year 2040, giving people a mere THIRD-OF-A-CENTURY to phase out the use of petrol and diesel engines and replace them with hydrogen fuel cells or efficient electric engines.
In fact, the Liberal Democrat target is to persuade Europe to go for zero carbon emissions that would only apply to NEW CARS from 2040.
This plan is "banning" petrol cars is THE SAME WAY that diesel cars were "banned" in 2006 – oh, you didn't notice that? That is because diesel cars were NOT "banned", but from 2006 all new diesel engines had to comply with the European Union's EuroIV emissions standard.
And this is only ONE SMALL PART of a much larger set of proposals that would see the whole of Great Britain move towards becoming Carbon Neutral by 2050!
The Liberal Democrat plan is one of SUPPORTING people though the necessary changes, NOT IMPOSING change upon them.
Introducing proper carbon pricing schemes; nurturing innovation and technological solutions; and encouraging changes in behaviour like improving energy efficiency and local green power generation – the Liberal Democrats want to show people the way forwards, bring them along with us, and demonstrate that we can get through this together.
The United Kingdom may only make a small contribution to global warming though our emissions, but we can lead by example and offer help to other countries, especially in the developing world.
Banning things is usually a BAD IDEA; the Liberal Democrats have a BETTER ANSWER.
Bearing this in mind, you cannot NECESSARILY believe it when the Grauniad is also saying: "Balloon hints at ban on violent video games".
Banning "violent computer games" (merely the latest incarnation of "banning video nasties", "banning loud music" and "banning those disgusting pamphlets from France") is an OLD FASHIONED Conservatory "Dog Whistle". It says to the CORE VOTE: "Ugh, how horrid!"
This line has been trotted out time and again, claimed as the solution to all the ills of the world and every analysis shows that it makes not one jot of difference.
If anything, there may be a case for saying that video gaming actually REDUCES people's aggression – if the evidence of increased levels of happiness hormone SEROTONIN in gamers is true. And if people are so addicted to EverQuest that they cannot even remember to EAT then they are hardly likely to be out on the streets shooting holes in each other!
But is this ALL that there is to Mr Balloon's announcement today?
Let's see what he SAYS:
Condemning "knee-jerk" responses, Mr Balloon said:
But seriously, this IS part of something bigger.
Following on from several particularly nasty crimes with guns, people are – as usual – crying out that "something must be done" and Mr Balloon is trying to provide them with an answer.
He does actually say that the problem is broader than just ONE-DIMENSIONAL solutions offered by the government, and claims to be offering a "mini-manifesto" on crime.
This OUGHT to be deserving of some serious analysis and NOT just be reduced to a headline that makes the Conservatories look like they are heading back to the authoritarian Eighties.
Except that this IS Mr Balloon and he's only looking for an excuse to bang on about his "Broken Britain" soundbite again. He's not offering real answers, only looking for an excuse to get on a bandwagon. Which is not terribly tasteful, under the circumstances.
The Government DOES make far too much of just passing yet ANOTHER law as though this will solve things, but in making suggestions of gun amnesties and community schemes, the Home Secretary Ms Jacqui Spliff is being far from one-dimensional.
The "solutions" that Mr Balloon wants to offer – stronger "traditional families", stricter licensing laws, longer prison sentences – are both impractical and nostalgic. You cannot bribe people to stay married (certainly not with a tenner a week) and nor can you cut the early release scheme without the prisons bursting at the seams. But you CAN hearken back to the ILLUSORY golden age of Conservatory Patrician politics when the Old Etonians knew what was best for the rest of us hoi polloi.
Ultimately, what is WRONG with Mr Balloon is that he is offering solutions to the WRONG PROBLEM.
When he says:
Crime is at the BOTTOM of a FIFTEEN-YEAR-LONG DECLINE. The people with the attitude that "rising crime is inevitable" are – ironically – Mr Balloon and his Conservatory chums.
There are a LOT of stories of gun crime in the news at the moment – but how much of that is BECAUSE gun crime is in the news at the moment? Certainly, horrible shootings of innocent eleven-year-olds would ALWAYS make the headlines, but would ALL the reported incidents of shots being fired be given this prominence if it wasn't a HOT TOPIC?
FEAR of crime vastly eclipses actual incidence of crime. And Mr Balloon is only FUELLING that FEAR – and for entirely selfish reasons too!
A headline that reduces this backwards, right-wing, inward looking failure of policy and imagination to "Conservatories want to ban computer games" is as SILLY as one that describes forward looking Liberal Democrat policies on climate change as "Let's Ban Cars".
Banning things is what the Labour does.
Perhaps the Grauniad has forgotten that, right or wrong, the opposition parties do things differently.
The Grauniad newspaper, if I may call it that, reports two bans today: a Conservatory Ban and a Liberal Democrat Ban.
Of course, what the Grauniad calls a "ban" may not be the same as what you or I might call a ban. Your mileage, as they say, may vary.
This is ironic because their headline "Lib Dem plan to ban petrol-driven cars" appears over a story that ACTUALLY says the Liberal Democrats want all cars to run on non-carbon-emitting technology by the year 2040, giving people a mere THIRD-OF-A-CENTURY to phase out the use of petrol and diesel engines and replace them with hydrogen fuel cells or efficient electric engines.
In fact, the Liberal Democrat target is to persuade Europe to go for zero carbon emissions that would only apply to NEW CARS from 2040.
This plan is "banning" petrol cars is THE SAME WAY that diesel cars were "banned" in 2006 – oh, you didn't notice that? That is because diesel cars were NOT "banned", but from 2006 all new diesel engines had to comply with the European Union's EuroIV emissions standard.
And this is only ONE SMALL PART of a much larger set of proposals that would see the whole of Great Britain move towards becoming Carbon Neutral by 2050!
The Liberal Democrat plan is one of SUPPORTING people though the necessary changes, NOT IMPOSING change upon them.
Introducing proper carbon pricing schemes; nurturing innovation and technological solutions; and encouraging changes in behaviour like improving energy efficiency and local green power generation – the Liberal Democrats want to show people the way forwards, bring them along with us, and demonstrate that we can get through this together.
The United Kingdom may only make a small contribution to global warming though our emissions, but we can lead by example and offer help to other countries, especially in the developing world.
Banning things is usually a BAD IDEA; the Liberal Democrats have a BETTER ANSWER.
Bearing this in mind, you cannot NECESSARILY believe it when the Grauniad is also saying: "Balloon hints at ban on violent video games".
Banning "violent computer games" (merely the latest incarnation of "banning video nasties", "banning loud music" and "banning those disgusting pamphlets from France") is an OLD FASHIONED Conservatory "Dog Whistle". It says to the CORE VOTE: "Ugh, how horrid!"
This line has been trotted out time and again, claimed as the solution to all the ills of the world and every analysis shows that it makes not one jot of difference.
If anything, there may be a case for saying that video gaming actually REDUCES people's aggression – if the evidence of increased levels of happiness hormone SEROTONIN in gamers is true. And if people are so addicted to EverQuest that they cannot even remember to EAT then they are hardly likely to be out on the streets shooting holes in each other!
But is this ALL that there is to Mr Balloon's announcement today?
Let's see what he SAYS:
Condemning "knee-jerk" responses, Mr Balloon said:
"Yes, tough laws, strong action on the police, but also action to strengthen our society. And that includes, I think, video games and things like that where we do need to think of the context in which people are growing up."No, nothing "knee-jerk" at all about blaming computer games, there.
But seriously, this IS part of something bigger.
Following on from several particularly nasty crimes with guns, people are – as usual – crying out that "something must be done" and Mr Balloon is trying to provide them with an answer.
He does actually say that the problem is broader than just ONE-DIMENSIONAL solutions offered by the government, and claims to be offering a "mini-manifesto" on crime.
This OUGHT to be deserving of some serious analysis and NOT just be reduced to a headline that makes the Conservatories look like they are heading back to the authoritarian Eighties.
Except that this IS Mr Balloon and he's only looking for an excuse to bang on about his "Broken Britain" soundbite again. He's not offering real answers, only looking for an excuse to get on a bandwagon. Which is not terribly tasteful, under the circumstances.
The Government DOES make far too much of just passing yet ANOTHER law as though this will solve things, but in making suggestions of gun amnesties and community schemes, the Home Secretary Ms Jacqui Spliff is being far from one-dimensional.
The "solutions" that Mr Balloon wants to offer – stronger "traditional families", stricter licensing laws, longer prison sentences – are both impractical and nostalgic. You cannot bribe people to stay married (certainly not with a tenner a week) and nor can you cut the early release scheme without the prisons bursting at the seams. But you CAN hearken back to the ILLUSORY golden age of Conservatory Patrician politics when the Old Etonians knew what was best for the rest of us hoi polloi.
Ultimately, what is WRONG with Mr Balloon is that he is offering solutions to the WRONG PROBLEM.
When he says:
"Above all we must fight back against the attitude that treats rising crime as inevitable,"…he is verging on the HILARIOUS.
Crime is at the BOTTOM of a FIFTEEN-YEAR-LONG DECLINE. The people with the attitude that "rising crime is inevitable" are – ironically – Mr Balloon and his Conservatory chums.
There are a LOT of stories of gun crime in the news at the moment – but how much of that is BECAUSE gun crime is in the news at the moment? Certainly, horrible shootings of innocent eleven-year-olds would ALWAYS make the headlines, but would ALL the reported incidents of shots being fired be given this prominence if it wasn't a HOT TOPIC?
FEAR of crime vastly eclipses actual incidence of crime. And Mr Balloon is only FUELLING that FEAR – and for entirely selfish reasons too!
A headline that reduces this backwards, right-wing, inward looking failure of policy and imagination to "Conservatories want to ban computer games" is as SILLY as one that describes forward looking Liberal Democrat policies on climate change as "Let's Ban Cars".
Banning things is what the Labour does.
Perhaps the Grauniad has forgotten that, right or wrong, the opposition parties do things differently.
Day 2430: All Time High
Monday:
When the BBC news headlines promised a "RECORD HIGH" from Afghan opium production, my Daddies fell about laughing. I do not understand why!
When the BBC news headlines promised a "RECORD HIGH" from Afghan opium production, my Daddies fell about laughing. I do not understand why!
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Day 2329: A Time for Prayer
Sunday:
Dearly beloved, let usprey on the children, er, I mean pray for the children…
Mr Black Peter, the Prince of Wales, has opened a right old can of worms with his suggestion that the compulsory hum-a-long hour of "collective worship" in schools – usually interpreted as mandatory Church of England waffles for breakfast – should be updated to something more multi-cultural and multi-faith.
As I am a MILITANT ATHEIST BABY ELEPHANT you can hardly be surprised that my immediate sympathies lie with the secularists who say: "why should we have a compulsory act of faith AT ALL?"
Given that the whole point of schools is to crack open young people's brains and pour knowledge in, this makes them especially impressionable and open to receiving ideas as "TRUE" because they are told so by an authority figure. Ideas that we are told when we are young are often very difficult to unlearn. It is not for nothing that the JESUITS used to say "give us the child until he is six and we will give you the man". But if religion is TRULY about faith and commitment, then it should not need to BRAINWASH people from a young age – it should be open to letting people make their own minds up.
But then again, being forced to attend a STULTIFYINGLY DULL religious practice every morning in school is surely one of the surest ways of ensuring that a generation of children have grown up disdainful of organised religion. Getting your education from your religion is often a short route to ignorance and a closed mind, but getting a religious education from religious education LESSONS is DEFINITELY the best way to proof your mind against any interest in, well, a religious education.
In the same way, schools should be barred from teaching the Bard and concentrate on classes in "Casualty" and "Coronation Street". This should soon ensure that this television mush is soon as loathed as Shakespeare is now, and we should get the most literate and erudite children in the world.
Dearly beloved, let us
Mr Black Peter, the Prince of Wales, has opened a right old can of worms with his suggestion that the compulsory hum-a-long hour of "collective worship" in schools – usually interpreted as mandatory Church of England waffles for breakfast – should be updated to something more multi-cultural and multi-faith.
As I am a MILITANT ATHEIST BABY ELEPHANT you can hardly be surprised that my immediate sympathies lie with the secularists who say: "why should we have a compulsory act of faith AT ALL?"
Given that the whole point of schools is to crack open young people's brains and pour knowledge in, this makes them especially impressionable and open to receiving ideas as "TRUE" because they are told so by an authority figure. Ideas that we are told when we are young are often very difficult to unlearn. It is not for nothing that the JESUITS used to say "give us the child until he is six and we will give you the man". But if religion is TRULY about faith and commitment, then it should not need to BRAINWASH people from a young age – it should be open to letting people make their own minds up.
But then again, being forced to attend a STULTIFYINGLY DULL religious practice every morning in school is surely one of the surest ways of ensuring that a generation of children have grown up disdainful of organised religion. Getting your education from your religion is often a short route to ignorance and a closed mind, but getting a religious education from religious education LESSONS is DEFINITELY the best way to proof your mind against any interest in, well, a religious education.
In the same way, schools should be barred from teaching the Bard and concentrate on classes in "Casualty" and "Coronation Street". This should soon ensure that this television mush is soon as loathed as Shakespeare is now, and we should get the most literate and erudite children in the world.
Day 2428: A Timely Reminder
Saturday:
I am only A MONTH LATE with this story of SWIFT (calls for) ACTION from Mr Frown!
What with all of the SCANDALS about TELEVISION this year (from phoney phone-ins to bogus Blue Peter viewers) you would think that no one had ever distrusted a TV Quiz before.
Time then, for my Daddies to dust off their DVD of the 1994 movie "Quiz Show", which tells the story of all of the SCANDALS about TELEVISION in the year 1957. A mere half a century ago.
Concentrating on the most famous Quiz, the show "Twenty-One", and how it was rigged by its producer giving the questions and answers to popular contestants in advance. Popular contestants meant high ratings meant good publicity for the show's sponsors – in the case of "Twenty-One", the energy drink makers Geritol. When they were found out, the contestants were ruined, the producer spent a decade in the wilderness (literally – he had to go to Canada to find work), and the Quiz Shows were cancelled. The network and the sponsor were NEVER IMPLICATED. Directed and produced by Mr Robert Redford, it is basically "All the President's Men" except that this time Nixon GETS AWAY WITH IT.
IRONICALLY, the movie itself was questioned because although it CLAIMED to be a TRUE STORY it altered some of the facts in order to make a more DRAMATIC presentation of the story. So in the REAL WORLD, Mrs the Queen NEVER stormed off the set of "Twenty-One".
I am only A MONTH LATE with this story of SWIFT (calls for) ACTION from Mr Frown!
What with all of the SCANDALS about TELEVISION this year (from phoney phone-ins to bogus Blue Peter viewers) you would think that no one had ever distrusted a TV Quiz before.
Time then, for my Daddies to dust off their DVD of the 1994 movie "Quiz Show", which tells the story of all of the SCANDALS about TELEVISION in the year 1957. A mere half a century ago.
Concentrating on the most famous Quiz, the show "Twenty-One", and how it was rigged by its producer giving the questions and answers to popular contestants in advance. Popular contestants meant high ratings meant good publicity for the show's sponsors – in the case of "Twenty-One", the energy drink makers Geritol. When they were found out, the contestants were ruined, the producer spent a decade in the wilderness (literally – he had to go to Canada to find work), and the Quiz Shows were cancelled. The network and the sponsor were NEVER IMPLICATED. Directed and produced by Mr Robert Redford, it is basically "All the President's Men" except that this time Nixon GETS AWAY WITH IT.
IRONICALLY, the movie itself was questioned because although it CLAIMED to be a TRUE STORY it altered some of the facts in order to make a more DRAMATIC presentation of the story. So in the REAL WORLD, Mrs the Queen NEVER stormed off the set of "Twenty-One".
Monday, August 27, 2007
Day 2427: And the Sky Full of Stars
Friday:
I have been using the new GOOGLE SKY (just like the ordinary sky, except your BRAIN-WAVES are automatically recorded for Google’s marketing department) to try and spot the Starship Voyager 2!
Here is the view of SPACE above my flat!
Watch the Skies!
(Strictly speaking, it is the view at six o’clock in the evening.)
If you look up there you can see the bright blue star of VEGA in the constellation of LYRA. Well somewhere between there and the constellation of HERCULES, that is where you will find Voyager 2, hurtling ahead of us into the galactic night.
This week marks the thirtieth anniversary of the launch of Voyager 2 on the 20th August 1977, shortly followed by the slightly backwards launch of Voyager 1 (on the 5th September). In spit of this numerical inexactitude, these two plucky little robots have been the most marvellous success, with their grand tour of the outer plants of the Solar System.
After all this time, AMAZINGLY, they are still working, and have been given a NEW MISSION: to seek out the limits of the Solar System.
Voyager 1, despite her late start, has overtaken her sister ship and is now, at about fifteen BILLION kilometres away (about 0.16% of a LIGHT YEAR), is the most distant human-made object EVER.
As you probably know, the galaxy is filled with very thin DUST of hydrogen and helium and other little bits of debris. Our Solar System sits in a sort of BUBBLE in this dust cloud, created by the pressure of the SOLAR WINDS: charged particles and magnetic fields that come blasting off the sun at millions of miles an hour.
Somewhere out there, between eighty and a hundred times as far from the Sun as the Earth, there is a boundary called the “Termination Shock” where the mixing of the solar winds with the galactic dust slows the winds down to below the speed of sound (even though there ISN’T any sound because you are in SPACE where only Star Destroyers are loud enough to be heard!) Beyond this is a TURBULENT region where the galactic dust mixes with the faltering particles from the Sun, before finally – maybe as far away again – you reach the HELIOPAUSE, the limit of the Sun’s influence, beyond which is truly INTERSTELLAR SPACE.
Final Frontier
Voyager 1 has already crossed the Termination Shock and Voyager 2 is coming up on it fast. And soon, even if it may be another thirty years, Voyager will cross the Heliopause and become (assuming those German Physicists don’t get a working faster-than-light machine going in the meantime) the Earth’s first INTERSTELLAR SPACE CRAFT.
Hooray!
Except that that will make us FAIR GAME for the DALEKS!
I have been using the new GOOGLE SKY (just like the ordinary sky, except your BRAIN-WAVES are automatically recorded for Google’s marketing department) to try and spot the Starship Voyager 2!
Here is the view of SPACE above my flat!
Watch the Skies!
(Strictly speaking, it is the view at six o’clock in the evening.)
If you look up there you can see the bright blue star of VEGA in the constellation of LYRA. Well somewhere between there and the constellation of HERCULES, that is where you will find Voyager 2, hurtling ahead of us into the galactic night.
This week marks the thirtieth anniversary of the launch of Voyager 2 on the 20th August 1977, shortly followed by the slightly backwards launch of Voyager 1 (on the 5th September). In spit of this numerical inexactitude, these two plucky little robots have been the most marvellous success, with their grand tour of the outer plants of the Solar System.
After all this time, AMAZINGLY, they are still working, and have been given a NEW MISSION: to seek out the limits of the Solar System.
Voyager 1, despite her late start, has overtaken her sister ship and is now, at about fifteen BILLION kilometres away (about 0.16% of a LIGHT YEAR), is the most distant human-made object EVER.
As you probably know, the galaxy is filled with very thin DUST of hydrogen and helium and other little bits of debris. Our Solar System sits in a sort of BUBBLE in this dust cloud, created by the pressure of the SOLAR WINDS: charged particles and magnetic fields that come blasting off the sun at millions of miles an hour.
Somewhere out there, between eighty and a hundred times as far from the Sun as the Earth, there is a boundary called the “Termination Shock” where the mixing of the solar winds with the galactic dust slows the winds down to below the speed of sound (even though there ISN’T any sound because you are in SPACE where only Star Destroyers are loud enough to be heard!) Beyond this is a TURBULENT region where the galactic dust mixes with the faltering particles from the Sun, before finally – maybe as far away again – you reach the HELIOPAUSE, the limit of the Sun’s influence, beyond which is truly INTERSTELLAR SPACE.
Final Frontier
Voyager 1 has already crossed the Termination Shock and Voyager 2 is coming up on it fast. And soon, even if it may be another thirty years, Voyager will cross the Heliopause and become (assuming those German Physicists don’t get a working faster-than-light machine going in the meantime) the Earth’s first INTERSTELLAR SPACE CRAFT.
Hooray!
Except that that will make us FAIR GAME for the DALEKS!
Day 2426: American President Rouses Veterans: “Let’s finish what we started… in Vietnam!”
Thursday:
Is anyone else getting just a bit BORED with gung-ho right-wingers from America bad-mouthing our British Troops in Basra? Accusing our forces of having “failed” and of “running away”… it not very POLITE to the one country that was DUMB enough to stick with as you got yourselves into this mess, now is it? And it is DOUBLE IMPOLITE when we are only doing, in handing control back to the Iraqi people, what you said the plan was SUPPOSED to be!
If you do not WANT us as your allies, just say so! I am sure that our troops will be happy to come home the moment that you do.
Meanwhile, the Monkey-in-Chief has, for the first time, acknowledged that Iraq is HIS Vietnam. He is making arrangements to be the first Commander-in-Chief to serve out his term AWOL as I type.
In fact, the American Monkey’s position is that the US pulled out of Vietnam TOO SOON. Like the movie version, “Apocalypse Now”, isn’t ten years long ALREADY! This presumably comes from the same Pentagon school of analysis that used GAME THEORY to “prove” that they had WON the Vietnam War in 1965… so the Viet Minh were just CHEATING to carry on like that!
Actually, I suspect that by “too soon” what the Monkey-in-Chief means is that the US Army was stupid not to wait until there was a DEMOCRAT in the White House. Because OBVIOUSLY this is just the Monkey’s latest excuse for not facing the FACTS and pulling out right away. HE wants to leave that particular HUMILIATION to Ms Hillary-Billary. (Other US Presidents are available… just not from the Replutocrats.)
And likewise, all those American Generals blaming the British are ALSO – in the TASTEFUL American Jargon – covering their ASSES. They know that the SURGE has not really succeeded, or rather it has only succeeded in DISPLACING the violence in Iraq, not ending it.
So, a HUGE part of the US Army has decamped to Baghdad: do the militias and insurrectionists and jihadis throw themselves at this army? Or do they slink off to the north and the south and step up new campaigns of terror there? Or do they quietly bide their time waiting to give the occupiers a REALLY spectacular send off?
The answer is OBVIOUS: they do ALL THREE!
But America’s generals, like their Monkey-in-Chief, now seem more interested in saving FACE than saving LIVES. So they look to pass the buck to the British and refuse to admit that this is their FAILURE and their FAULT.
We were WRONG to invade the Middle East, wrong to do it on a FALSE prospectus, wrong to do it without the support of the United Nations and a clear mandate and a clear plan. And as if that wasn’t bad enough, we have made – in Mr Jack Man O’Straw’s phrase – a TOTAL Jack Man O’Straw of the aftermath!
Oh, and a small historical/geographical note for the Monkey-in-Chief: the Killing Fields, the horrible murderous campaign of Mr Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge, took place in CAMBODIA not in VIETNAM. This is what we who support the United Nations call “A DIFFERENT COUNTRY”!
(I know it would be SIMPLISTIC to suggest that there is no connection AT ALL between the communist regimes in two neighbouring countries, but you cannot overlook the fact that it was the Vietnamese invasion in 1979 that actually put an END to the Khmer Rouge reign of terror.)
Is anyone else getting just a bit BORED with gung-ho right-wingers from America bad-mouthing our British Troops in Basra? Accusing our forces of having “failed” and of “running away”… it not very POLITE to the one country that was DUMB enough to stick with as you got yourselves into this mess, now is it? And it is DOUBLE IMPOLITE when we are only doing, in handing control back to the Iraqi people, what you said the plan was SUPPOSED to be!
If you do not WANT us as your allies, just say so! I am sure that our troops will be happy to come home the moment that you do.
Meanwhile, the Monkey-in-Chief has, for the first time, acknowledged that Iraq is HIS Vietnam. He is making arrangements to be the first Commander-in-Chief to serve out his term AWOL as I type.
In fact, the American Monkey’s position is that the US pulled out of Vietnam TOO SOON. Like the movie version, “Apocalypse Now”, isn’t ten years long ALREADY! This presumably comes from the same Pentagon school of analysis that used GAME THEORY to “prove” that they had WON the Vietnam War in 1965… so the Viet Minh were just CHEATING to carry on like that!
Actually, I suspect that by “too soon” what the Monkey-in-Chief means is that the US Army was stupid not to wait until there was a DEMOCRAT in the White House. Because OBVIOUSLY this is just the Monkey’s latest excuse for not facing the FACTS and pulling out right away. HE wants to leave that particular HUMILIATION to Ms Hillary-Billary. (Other US Presidents are available… just not from the Replutocrats.)
And likewise, all those American Generals blaming the British are ALSO – in the TASTEFUL American Jargon – covering their ASSES. They know that the SURGE has not really succeeded, or rather it has only succeeded in DISPLACING the violence in Iraq, not ending it.
So, a HUGE part of the US Army has decamped to Baghdad: do the militias and insurrectionists and jihadis throw themselves at this army? Or do they slink off to the north and the south and step up new campaigns of terror there? Or do they quietly bide their time waiting to give the occupiers a REALLY spectacular send off?
The answer is OBVIOUS: they do ALL THREE!
But America’s generals, like their Monkey-in-Chief, now seem more interested in saving FACE than saving LIVES. So they look to pass the buck to the British and refuse to admit that this is their FAILURE and their FAULT.
We were WRONG to invade the Middle East, wrong to do it on a FALSE prospectus, wrong to do it without the support of the United Nations and a clear mandate and a clear plan. And as if that wasn’t bad enough, we have made – in Mr Jack Man O’Straw’s phrase – a TOTAL Jack Man O’Straw of the aftermath!
Oh, and a small historical/geographical note for the Monkey-in-Chief: the Killing Fields, the horrible murderous campaign of Mr Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge, took place in CAMBODIA not in VIETNAM. This is what we who support the United Nations call “A DIFFERENT COUNTRY”!
(I know it would be SIMPLISTIC to suggest that there is no connection AT ALL between the communist regimes in two neighbouring countries, but you cannot overlook the fact that it was the Vietnamese invasion in 1979 that actually put an END to the Khmer Rouge reign of terror.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)