Penis Envy

Two pupils who drew a giant penis on a school lawn using weed killer two years ago can still admire their work from satellite photos now posted on the internet.

Despite the school re-seeding the area, the penis has turned up on satellite image search engines because a photo was taken before the new grass could conceal the appendage.

The unnamed pair of year 11 pupils from Bellemoor school for boys in Southampton, burned the 6 metre phallus into the grass as an end of term joke.

Staff, parents and pupils who log on can now see the image in all its glory.

A spokeswoman for the school said: "It was just one of those high school jinks. This was an act of vandalism that took place during the summer of 2005. Southampton city council re-seeded the area and the grass was re-grown by the beginning of the new school term."

Perhaps a monument needs to be erected to their ingenuity.

Silver Balls And Mirrors

George Bush has gone green! He now recognises that there are issues to be tackled and action to be taken to counter-act the effects of climate change.

The demand appears in a recent US memo to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. It describes "modifying solar radiance" as "important insurance" against the threat of climate change. A more accurate description might be important insurance against the need to cut emissions.

The idea is to either put large solar reflectors out into space or clouds of reflective small particles into the upper atmosphere. The technology for the first idea is, at least, 50 years into the future, and the second idea would have the side effect of killing off the ozone layer for good.

Other ideas include spraying sea-water into the air (ensuring that any country downwind is likely to suffer crop failure and drought). Another idea would be to inject sulphate particles into the atmosphere with the likelihood of disrupted rainfall patterns. All these fixes appear more expensive than cutting the amount of energy we consume. None reduces the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, which threatens to acidify the oceans, with grave consequences for the food chain.

The demand that money and research be diverted into these quixotic solutions is another indication that Bush's avowed conversion to the cause of cutting emissions is illusory. He is simply drumming up new business for his chums. In his State Of The Union, he called for raising the government's mandatory target for alternative transport fuels fivefold. This is wonderful news for the grain barons of the red states, who will grow the maize and rapeseed that will be turned into biofuel. It's a catastrophe for everyone else. With only 5% of Europe and the US's requirement for fuel comeing from biofuels, the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation reports that using land and crops to feed cars has, already, raised world food prices, with serious consequences for the poor. Biofuels fall into the same category as atmospheric smoke and mirrors - a means of avoiding difficult decisions.

However, credit (no matter how small) where it is due. At least president Bush has publicly acknowledged the problem unlike Wag TV in the UK who are completeing a 90 minute 'documentary' for Channel Four entitles "The Great Global Warming Swindle". Its basic thesis is summed up in a statement from the company that man-made climate change is "...a lie ... the biggest scam of modern times. The truth is that global warming is a multibillion-dollar worldwide industry: created by fanatically anti-industrial environmentalists; supported by scientists peddling scare stories to chase funding; and propped up by complicit politicians and the media ... The fact is that CO2 has no proven link to global temperatures ... solar activity is far more likely to be the culprit."

The director, Martin Durkin, had previously made a 'documentary' series for Channel Four in 1999, in which he peddled very similar arguments and therories. When the series was concluded, Channel Four was forced to make one of its more humiliating public apologies for the way scientists had been mis-represented in the series.

But with Bush's defection, the band of quacks making these claims is diminishing fast. Now the oil and coal companies that support such people have changed their target. Instead of trying to persuade us that man-made global warming is a myth, they are seeking to divert us into doing everything except the one thing that has to happen: reducing our consumption of fuel. It is another species of denial.

George Bush's purpose - to insulate these companies from the need to cut production - is unchanged. He has simply found a new way of framing the argument.

Happy New Year

Repaired Pipe, originally uploaded by markhsal.

A good start to the year - a blocked drain!

The blockage is now clear - finally, but the potential for more is still high as the drains have developed faulty joints (a bit like me), so we are waiting for our insurance company to agree to further repairs to add a lining to the pipe.

In the meantime, we have this hole on our front drive.

For the past week, we have been living with the sort of stuff that generally comes out of Blair and Bush's mouth! Not nice.

Well, That Went Down Well!

When asked about President Bush's plan to send even more American troops to be killed in the Iraqi civil war, Tony Blair said it "made sense"!

What an ever-present comfort our glorious Prime Minister has been to Bush! What a wazzock!

In a poll yesterday for the Washington Post and ABC, 61% opposed the plan, while just 36% backed it. In another poll by Associated Press and Ipsos, 70% of Americans said they were against sending more troops.

Interestingly and more significantly for the Middle East, there is now some real confusion and concern over Bush's intentions with the apparent threat to escalate the conflict to include Syria and Iran. Mr Bush, in his speech, warned that the US would "seek out and destroy networks" of insurgents moving into Iraq or based in these neighbouring countries. While US commanders insisted yesterday that this did not signal an intention to go into Iran or Syria, Ms Rice confirmed that all options were open.

Meanwhile, increased bi-partisanship in congress is increasingly making Bush appear more and more isolated. What a pity those Republicans had had the courage to denounce the White House idiot before now.

Barack Obama, the senator from Illinois and a long-term opponent of the war said: "We are not going to babysit a civil war."Even Hillary Clinton, the other Democrat frontrunner, who has been careful so far not to be too critical of the war, said Mr Bush "will continue to take us down the wrong road - only faster". Now there's someone who has been steadfast on her principles!

In my experience, military engagements only have a chance of succeeding if there is, at least, the perception of unanimity in the action and goal, but a fringe plan such as this stands very little chance with the present level of opposition.

Mr Bush, think (if that is at all possible) again, and this time listen to people who don't have a vested interest in perpetual war, but who offer seasoned and experienced advice such as those who made up the Iraq Study group and in particular, listen to those who have had direct experience of war.

Mr Blair - just shut up and leave. You are now becoming a major embarrassment to the UK.

Unhappy Birthday

Today, the Guantánamo detention centre will be five years old.

If You Are In A Hole....

STOP DIGGING!

President Bush has announced that 20,000 plus troops are to be sent to Iraq in an attempt to put down the insurgency and militias that have caused so many problems since the American led and British supported invasion.

The speech was a cleverly contrived show of humility for 'mistakes' in the past in an attempt to bring Americans on side again and committed to an engagement that will be longer, deeper and more costly in both dollars and people. This "new way forward" is designed to re-take the neighbourhoods from the gangs and militias, and then remain in those neighbourhoods to ensure the insurgents don't return. This will be done by joint operations alongside the fledgling Iraqi army and police.

Sounds good. Sounds reasonable. Who could argue with that scenario?

But this strategy is heavily dependent on the willingness and ability of the Iraqi government and armed forces to confront and disarm insurgents and militias. They will have to take on the militia of Moqtada Sadr - the largest, most powerful and the most murderous of the Shia groups, and one which controls much of eastern Baghdad, and with sectarian interests a prominent preoccupation in Iraq, how willingly will the predominantly Shia recruited security forces take on the predominantly Shia militias. I predict that it is going to get bloody!

Moreover, these troops are going to be fighting one of the worst forms of military action, - urban, house to house fighting. Dirty street fighting in some of Baghdad's poorest neighbourhoods, places where America's enormous technological advantage over its adversaries is severely lessened.

The neighbourhood bases for the soldiers are going to be very vulnerable to attack, and logistics re-supply hazardous.

Finally, there will be the problems of distraction. If it gets too hot for the insurgents in Baghdad, then they will up sticks and go somewhere else in Iraq. It will also be an opportunity for Iran to up the anti, knowing that America is now just about fully committed militarily. Nowhere was there any reference to the recommendations from the Iraq Study Group.

I am not impressed by the way he worded that bit of the speech where he said that the responsibility for past mistakes lie with him. The impression left is that it was not the policy that was wrong, but the implementation.

The mess is now so bad that what really needs to happen is for Bush to vacate the White House ASAP and someone with a bit of intelligence take over and can see a true way forward. What Bush fails to recognise is that more of the same that has caused this mess is not going to solve it. On the contary, things are going to get worse. People are going to die or be seriously injured because America is, unfortunately, in the hands of a President that can't take reasonable advice, and works off the basis of his own conviction - or should I say, - wishful thinking.

FOAD - American Government

The American government's path to totalitarianism and World domination continues apace. Not only does America feel it has the right to inspect my credit card transactions and any email I send, it has now decided that Britain is such a hotbed of global terrorism, that if I was stupid enough to want to visit this soviet clone I would have to agree to have all my fingerprints taken rather than the 2 presently demanded.

Why those of us who still live in the free world would want to visit America I don't know, but I'm sure there will be a lot less now. Shami Chakrabarti, head of rights group Liberty, said: "This must be the 'Keystone Cops' school of border control. Accumulating the fingerprints of millions of innocent passengers will not deter suicide bombers."

The right-wing mantra that "If you do nothing wrong, then you have nothing to fear," is a nonsense in this case, because the implication of a false match can be so serious. Goodbye Las Vegas, hello Guantanemo Bay! Knowing how far the American government has gone to destroy civil liberties in America, this development has to be seen as part of that sinister trend.

There are also fears that innocent holidaymakers could be wrongly arrested. Simon Davies, of Privacy International, which campaigns against intrusive surveillance, said: "This maniacal proposal will turn thousands of law-abiding travelers into terror suspects.
"The technology will be far less reliable - anyone could be the victim of a false match. Be warned. A San Francisco Bay family holiday may easily become a nightmare."

A recent report by the civil liberties group Statewatch highlighted a Japanese study that tested 15 biometric systems and found 11 of them failed to detect 'false' fingerprints were being used in the form of a latex strip covering a person's fingers.

Although it is now probably too late, and certainly the idiot Blair isn't going to do anything about it, I resent that such a country as America that view civil liberties, freedom and justice with such low regard has any information about me in their database.

I'm sorry America, but the government you 'elected' is now so far beyond the pail, that I wish it would FOAD!

Ashes to Ashes

"In affectionate remembrance of English cricket which died at The Oval, 29th August, 1882. Deeply lamented by a large circle of sorrowing friends and acquaintances, RIP. NB The body will be cremated and the Ashes taken to Australia."

Australia's first victory on English soil over the full strength of England, on August 29, 1882, inspired a young London journalist, Reginald Shirley Brooks, to write this mock 'obituary'.

It appeared in the Sporting Times.

It was long believed that the real Ashes, a small urn thought to contain the ashes of a bail used in the third match, were presented to Bligh by a group of Melbourne women. In 1998, Lord Darnley's 82-year-old daughter-in-law said they were the remains of her mother-in-law's veil, not a bail. Other evidence suggests a ball. The certain origin of the Ashes, therefore, is the subject of some dispute.

After Lord Darnley's death in 1927, the urn was given to MCC by Lord Darnley's Australianborn widow, Florence. It can be seen in the cricket museum at Lord's, together with a red and gold velvet bag, made specially for it, and the scorecard of the 1882 match.

The text on the urn is as follows:-

When Ivo goes back with the urn, the urn;
Studds, Steel, Read and Tylecote return, return;
The welkin will ring loud,
The great crowd will feel proud,
Seeing Barlow and Bates with the urn, the urn;
And the rest coming home with the urn.

Of course, I'm talking about cricket, and inparticular the bi-annual round of Test matches between England and Australia. These series of matches have come to be called the Ashes series, and are generally a hard fought battle between the twofor theries forthe honour of winning or retaining the Ashes.

Eighteen months ago, England gloriously regained the Ashes by narrowly beating Australia in the series, - the first time England had won the ashes since 1987 when the team, led by Mike Gatting and including players like Chris Broad and Ian Botham at the top of their form, returned the Ashes from Australian soil. England won the series 2:1.

Since then, and up to the summer of 2005, it has been perpetual England gloom where apart from 1997, when England actually won a couple of tests (though Australia still won the series) Australia have comprehensively beaten us. Then came 2005, and a tough and gritty encounter leading to a 2:1 series winning result and the Ashes were safely back in safe hands.

Safe, that is, until the present series which has resulted in the first whitewash since 1921!

England had lost the First Test in Brisbane looking totally unprepared and hardly putting up a fight, but the series was lost in 1 hour of torture in the Second Test in Adelaide. Up until the last day, it had been a great match, nip & tuck all the way with England slightly the better. Then, in the space of 1 hour, with a respectable draw very much on the cards, England contrived to lose 7 wickets for just 27 runs! The Geneva Conventions should have been evoked! This was cruel and unusual punishment beyond human imagination.

The test was lost, and with it, the series.

Confidence was shattered for England, and of course, confidence was unassailed for Australia - they had pulled the brands out of the fire. They were unconquerable, and everyone knew it.

What now for 2009? I don't know and I'm too depressed about it to think that far ahead, but think about it we must, and moreover plan for it leaving no detail overlooked. Never again will England be so humiliated!

Choices

Spotting a man dressed and acting about 20 years below his apparent age got me thinking about the choices we make, and inparticular the choice to leave behind the past and move forward to the future.

Since the swinging sixties, successive generations have convinced themselves that they can postpone growing up and moving on. That, if they defiantly strike enough infantile poses, fall for the latest preposterous fad, or express opinions the rest of us have dumped long ago, they will avoid ever having another birthday. US psychiatrists call these people "adultescents"; at their best, they are Peter Stringfellow. The irony is that the very things most of us loved about youth - lack of responsibility, the illusion of freedom - are the very things that the adultescent ultimately deprives himself of.

Those who do allow themselves to make that change discover that they are more likely to become masters of their own destiny. Once you stop hanging onto your past like a drowning man to a piece of driftwood, you suddenly discover you have a future. You also discover that, rather than having fewer choices, you actually have a multitude of possibilities. Perhaps the single most interesting choice you face is what parts of your past to leave behind and what to take with you.

There are rules. It's perfectly respectable for a 40-year-old lawyer to pogo around in his room to Never Mind The Bollocks. It's a lot harder for the same man to swagger around slapping high-fives with every young person he passes. The first looks like fun. The second looks like a way of life that's no sort of life at all.

Like the Katharine Hamnett T-shirts that used to say, "Choose Life," make the choices that give you even more choices - that make life more fun, more challenging, and, above all, one a hell of a lot easier to live.

Bill Kristol - Prophet Extraordinaire!

On March 17, 2003, on the eve of our invasion of Iraq, Bill Kristol wrote the following:

"We are tempted to comment, in these last days before the war, on the U.N., and the French, and the Democrats. But the war itself will clarify who was right and who was wrong about weapons of mass destruction. It will reveal the aspirations of the people of Iraq, and expose the truth about Saddam's regime. It will produce whatever effects it will produce on neighboring countries and on the broader war on terror. We would note now that even the threat of war against Saddam seems to be encouraging stirrings toward political reform in Iran and Saudi Arabia, and a measure of co-operation in the war against al Qaeda from other governments in the region. It turns out it really is better to be respected and feared than to be thought to share, with exquisite sensitivity, other people's pain. History and reality are about to weigh in, and we are inclined simply to let them render their verdicts."

A few more samples of the sort of intellectual analysis from Bill Kristol are as follows:

April 4, 2003:

"There's been a certain amount of pop sociology in America ... that the Shia can't get along with the Sunni and the Shia in Iraq just want to establish some kind of Islamic fundamentalist regime. There's almost no evidence of that at all. Iraq's always been very secular."

April 28, 2003:

"The United States committed itself to defeating terror around the world. We committed ourselves to reshaping the Middle East, so the region would no longer be a hotbed of terrorism, extremism, anti-Americanism, and weapons of mass destruction. The first two battles of this new era are now over. The battles of Afghanistan and Iraq have been won decisively and honorably. But these are only two battles. We are only at the end of the beginning in the war on terror and terrorist states."

March 22, 2004:

"[T]here are hopeful signs that Iraqis of differing religious, ethnic, and political persuasions can work together. This is a far cry from the predictions made before the war by many, both here and in Europe, that a liberated Iraq would fracture into feuding clans and unleash a bloodbath. The perpetually sour American media focus on the tensions between Shiites and Kurds that delayed the signing by three whole days. But the difficult negotiations leading up to the signing, and the continuing debates over the terms of a final constitution, have in fact demonstrated something remarkable in Iraq: a willingness on the part of the diverse ethnic and religious groups to disagree--peacefully--and then to compromise. This willingness is the product of what appears to be a broad Iraqi consensus favoring the idea of pluralism."

March 7, 2005:

"Just four weeks after the Iraqi election of January 30, 2005, it seems increasingly likely that that date will turn out to have been a genuine turning point. The fall of the Berlin Wall on November 9, 1989, ended an era. September 11, 2001, ended an interregnum. In the new era in which we now live, 1/30/05 could be a key moment--perhaps the key moment so far--in vindicating the Bush Doctrine as the right response to 9/11. And now there is the prospect of further and accelerating progress."

November 30, 2005 (column titled "Pelosi's Disastrous Miscalculation"):

"All this made me think the 2006 elections could result in a Speaker Pelosi. I now think that unlikely. Pelosi's endorsement today of the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq makes the House Democrats the party of defeat, the party of surrender. Bush's strong speech today means the GOP is likely to be--if Republican Congressmen just keep their nerve--the party of victory. Now it is possible that the situation in Iraq will worsen over the next year. If that happens, Bush and the GOP are in deep trouble. They would have been if Pelosi had said nothing. But it is much more likely that the situation in Iraq will stay more or less the same, or improve. In either case, Republicans will benefit from being the party of victory."

December 26, 2005 (column titled "Happy Days!"):

"If American and Iraqi troops continue to provide basic security, and if Iraq's different sects and political groups now begin to engage in serious, peaceful bargaining, then we may just have witnessed the beginning of Iraq's future."

It now turns out that this formidable and accurate analyst is to become a "star" columnist for Time magazine. Clearly, in right-wing America, the more you are wrong, the higher you climb.

Quotes are captured from Unclaimed Territory and Crooks & Liars.

Mark's Christmas Message

Kirkless Hall, Christmas 2005

It seems that it has been some time since my last post, and I notice that I have been given a swift kick up the bum by friend Junojen! In fact my last blog was almost a month ago, which in blogland, is quite a while.

However, I've not been idle over the past month, far from it. With the run up to Christmas, life has just got more and more hectic. A couple of weeks ago, I spent an enjoyable Saturday in Manchester with my eldest doing Christmas shopping (and spending a King's ransom). We had a lot of fun, and managed to escape back to Hindley before the crowds got too oppressive.

Last week, Christine and I joined some of my colleagues from work for our Christmas party. It was a great night out, and I drank so much even I ended up on the dance floor - I do believe there was a blue moon that night! We stayed overnight in a hotel overlooking Manchester United football ground - well I suppose you can't have everything!

With the girls in different schools, it has meant double the Carol services, so it was division of labour. Christine went with Jayne to her schools service and Christingle, while I went with Bethen to hers.

A couple of weeks ago I came down with the flu, which, as everyone knows, attacks men far harder than women. It was so bad, I needed to take some time off work, but I tried very hard not to show how much I was truely suffering.

Christmas is now almost upon us, and this weekend we will be putting up and dressing the tree. Christmas will have finally arrived at a certain house in Hindley. Christine is working this Christmas so I will be doing the cooking. Leg of Pork from a pig that grew up on a local free-range farm supplied by our favourite butcher on the market. The vegetables will also be local - we will be using as little supermarket produce as possible. Later in the week, when we will have been joined by our parents, it will be a fine joint of topside.

This is probably my last blog before Christmas, and so I wish all who find and read this post the best gift I can offer, the love of someone who loves you, and to know that no matter how alone we may feel we are, from time to time, we do not walk this world alone.

Have a peaceful and loving Christmas from Mark, Christine and the girls.

The End Of An Era

For the past few years, since the first time I discovered it, the Kirkless Hall Inn has been a regular finishing point for many a cycle ride. The first time I arrived, caked in mud, sweaty and decidedly thirsty I was made very welcome by Jill Jolly, the landlady and queen of the bar. That first day she served me a superb and refreshing pint of Summer Lightening and I was hooked.

Not only was the beer first class, but I later found out that their pub food was pretty good as well. For someone like me who is a relative stranger to the insides of pubs, this was a revelation.

The Kirkless Hall Inn has become the family's regular stopping off point, a place for us to relax in a beautiful spot. The half-timbered pub providing am eye-catching backdrop to the locks. A place where me and the girls have spent many a happy hour watching the bright and colourful canal boats as they made their way up from or down to Wigan. On hot summer days, the pub and the lockside would be buzzing with people also enjoying the environment. A truly wonderful place.

Jill & Bob Jolly, the landlord and lady were the people who worked tirelessly to ensure that welcome was always there. They got to know us very well, and were often interested in our exploits out on the bikes. Whatever condition we were in, and sometimes that was pretty mucky, we were always made to feel welcome. Mum had her 81st birthday lunch at the pub and it was a really jolly time helped by the kind attention of Jill & Bob.

Today was Jill and Bob's last Sunday running the pub. They retire this week and head off to pastures new. Jill wants to spend more time with her family and grandchildren. They will be sadly missed by us, and talking to others at the pub, they feel the same. They have left a very high standard for those who will follow to attain, and we all look forward to that with interest.

But to Bob & Jill, many thanks for your many kindnesses. For maintaining a good cellar and excellent food. Good luck for the future, you will be missed.

A Corner Turned

People of America have, I believe, taken their first steps to recover their country from the 6 year rule of the 'democratic tyranny' of the Bush administration. Brave America is still alive and is a cause for celebration.

When one considers all the damage that has been perpetrated by that small band of the priviledged few, the road back is going to be long and hard. But the first important step has been made.

The work towards the 2008 presidential election must start now, and Democrates have got to find an internationally acceptable and respected statesman to lead America back to the light. I don't care if he or she is a heathen and has a history of affairs on the side, - all that counts is that he or she is intelligent, wise and can command respect.

America, enjoy your moment of movement back to the free world, but don't rest too long on your laurels, there is an emmense amount of work yet to do.

Two Jays

Surely one Jay is enough! Looks a bit low in the water at the back end!

Thank Goodness For Guantanamo Bay

Thank you, America. George Bush, you are a saint. I take it all back.

John Negroponte, George Bush's Director of National Intelligence, has said that the 'High-Value Terrorist Detainee Program' has saved Britain from at least 2 major terrorist attacks since 2002.

What really amazes me was the forward planning of these terrorist groups. One thwarted plot was an attack in 2003 on Heathrow Airport and the other, in 2004, a series of co-ordinated urban attacks. The detail of all this was known to the terrorists from before their kidnapping(sorry, - capture) in 2002.

Of course, groups like Amnesty International reacted angrily to the claims, saying it ignored allegations that detainees had been placed in stress positions, subjected to sleep deprivation and submitted to 'water-boarding' - partial drowning. Who cares about a little bit of discomfort for a clearly 'bad' person, as long as I'm OK, the oil keeps flowing and lots of people are making a healthy profit out the 'war on terror'.

Of course, also, I believe everything that the White House says, and there is a tooth fairy!

Guns Don't Kill People

"Guns don't kill people, people kill people!" This is the oft quoted mantra of the gun lobby, and those who see guns as a good thing to have in society, that allows then to wring their hands in anguish over the deaths by shooting of children in a school, but still advocate that guns are a good thing.

I have spent some time, this week, thinking about this, and my conclusion is that I just can't agree.

To my mind, there is a major difference between killing sombady with a gun and any other method, and that difference is the degree and level of subjectivity in the killing.

Guns allow for a degree of distance between shooter and victim. The shooter only has to point a gun and pull a trigger. There is a degree of seperation between the method and the victim. The death, for the shooter, is less personal, easier and convenient. All that is required is to squeeze a trigger. Other forms of violent death, generally require the killer to get up close and personal with the victim. Requires a certain degree of physical activity, and the ever present danger that the victim could turn the tables on the killer. Stabbing, strangling and beating all provide dangers for the killer which means that the gun makes a much more tempting tool to use.

This is why, I believe, that countries that have strong levels of gun control and have less guns, legitimate or illegitimate, in circulation appear to have less gun crime and death per capita than America.

I am left with the thought that "Guns don't kill people, people kill people and those people are choosing guns because it is easier!"

Another Peaceful Day In School

Five girls are now dead with another 7 girls in hospital fighting for their lives. Yet again, another American community is struggling to come to terms with the consequences of America's love affair with the gun.

Some straight-forward facts courtesy of infoplease.com.

Since 1996 around the world, 84 children have been killed in school shootings - 53 of them in America.

At the same time, 38 others - including teachers, janitors and police have been killed - 12 of those in America.

Of the 120 wounded children, 106 were in America and 5 of the 7 other wounded - again mainly teachers, were in America.

The gun lobby is clearly correct - America is a much safer place to be with guns. Children can feel secure as they wander off to school today.

Who cares if they don't come back in the evening?

Please Read This

In follow up from my previous post, I implore all to read this post. Many of the comments are worthy of reading as well.

America's Blackest Day Yet

September 18th 2006. This is the day that America chose to leave the civilised world and become one with all the totalitarian and terrorist states.

The country that has at its 'front door' the Statue of Liberty have turned their backs on that ideal. It has decided that the rule of law is meaningless and that the whim of the president is all that matters.

The senate has cravenly voted with the support of some 'Democrats' to allow Bush and his cronies to kidnap, hide, torture and generally deny any human rights to anyone they deam to be a 'threat' to the country, - including US citizens! It will allow Bush to demonise anyone who argues the opposite as being soft on terrorism. He has already said that Americans have a choice between 2 parties with differing attitudes to the 'war on terror'; "Republicans," he said, "understand the nature of the enemy," he said. "We know the enemy wants to attack us again," whereas Democrats "offer nothing but criticism and obstruction and endless second-guessing."

One of the reasons Americans were so against torture was because of the way the British treated American prisoners during the war of Independence. Now they clearly want the freedom to do just that to others.

I am not American, and although I live presently in Blair's Britain (hopefully, for not much longer - we've managed to get rid of the poodle!), I thank God that I don't live in America - once, one of the most enlightened and moral of the free world countries. I feel sick, disgusted and afraid that intelligent men and women could come to the conclusion that being like terrorists will defeat terrorism. If allowed to remain, what else will these craven and cowardly people give to the world's latest dictator.

Terrorism Is Good!

When one looks at what Bush, with the support of weak leaders elsewhere in the world, has done, particularly in terms of foreign policy, one's immediate though is one of incompetence.

However, I am starting to revise that view. Having read Nat Parry's article in Consortiumnews.com my fear that all this actually being deliberately crafted and intentional has been shared.

But the downward spiral of the Iraq War and the worsening worldwide terrorism threat are negatives only if one assumes that creating a more peaceful and secure world was the original goal.

If the goal included changing the character of the United States as a free and open society and consolidating one-party Republican control over the federal budget, then the administration's policies would seem to be working like a charm.

[...]

If the U.S. does launch an attack, it seems clear that the terrorism threat faced by Americans at home and abroad will dramatically increase. For such reasons, many observers argue that an attack on Iran is unlikely.

But [retired Air Force Colonel Sam] Gardiner points out that not making sense won't limit what the Bush administration does. "The 'making sense' filter was not applied over the past four years for Iraq, and it is unlikely to be applied in evaluating whether to attack Iran," Gardiner writes.

It also could be that 'making sense' means something different for the Bush administration than it does for average Americans.

[...]

Those trends seem likely to continue, and even accelerate, as the "war on terror" remains a powerful excuse for transforming the United States from a historically free and open society to a frightened nation where citizens eagerly trade their constitutional rights for government promises of more security.

The worry is that those trends are gathering pace, with an elite GOP group benefiting from an increasingly compliant populace and opposition. It is fine that no more terrorist attacks take place in the USA, much better, surely, they are in places like London, Paris, Madrid, Rome, Melbourne, Johannasburg, etc.

With the dramatic increase in the number of terrorists as a direct result of American policy in Iraq, they are going to have to ply their murderous trade somewhere.

I don't see the activity that would have happened back in the fifties and sixties that brought about a lot of the freedoms and liberty that America is supposed to stand for. No mass rallies at the cenotaph. Where is the Democratic party? What are they doing about this? Maybe Americans enjoy the economic and political restrictions that are piling up on them, but as per usual, what America wants, the rest of us have to suffer!

Thanks America.