Monday, 26 July 2010

DORC Podcast Episode 3

There is a new episode of the DORC podcast here and it’s on Itunes, search for DORC in the podcasts bit. Hope you enjoy it. Oh and please tell your friends and stuff, if you enjoy it that is, thank you xx

Sunday, 25 July 2010

Diana Watch

Ref.#: LIUK/5020/0291/89
£1,500,000.00 British Pounds Liverwood award WINNER, held in July 2010.

For claims send form;
Complete Name..

Tel: 00447031802258 : Reply to:
Liverwood Promotion

Really, these phisers really aren’t trying that hard any more.

Ok so it turns out that you can get broadband access in Kent, who knew? Anyway as I am away this weekend I have only have time for a few awards,

The Award for A Joke That No One In Their Right Mind Would Ignore of the Week,

Former US Vice President (and Dark Lord of the Sith) Dick Cheney has had a pump fitted into his chest to assist his heart. Mr Cheney has spent most of his life battling with congestive heart failure and, some far, has had 5 heart attacks, the first of which occoured when he was only 37.
 One of the stranger side effects of this sort of pump is that Dick now has no pulse. Come on admit it, we are all think the same thing, I didn’t know he had a heart.

The Award for Oddest David Cameron Description of the Week,

The Daily Express describe David Cameron as Ironman Cameron, no it really did! Look there, under the headline, “Ironman Cameron Slams The Release of Evil Al Megrahi”


Oh come on that’s funny. Ironman! He is a Superhero to the Express it seems.

The Award for a Sentence That Will Cheer Most People Up of the Week,

Goldman Sachs profits fall by 82%. Whilst it is a shame that they are still in business it is heart warming to know that they are making less money.

The Award for Not Being a Great Surprise of the Week,

Earlier this year the Times newspapers online edition disappeared behind a paywall. It was seen as a bold experiment by News International as very few other media outlets were charging for their online newspapers. What would happen? Would revenue from adverts drop away as traffic numbers fell but be replaced by subscription charges so that the site broke even or maybe, possably turned a profit? Who knew? Well no one did and they still don’t as News International are not releasing any figures. What we do know is that traffic through the site is down by about 90%.

The Award for Having an End Clearly Written By Disney of the Week,

Muttiah Muralitharan, perhaps the world's greatest bowler has retired. Some will still claim that his bowling style is illegal within the rules of cricket, these people are idiots. Yes he has a funny looking arm but it is still a legal bowling action.
 Anyway, enough angry Wisden style rants, his last game finished on Thursday. When it began he had taken 792 test wickets, already way ahead of his nearest rival, but would he make the magic 800 wickets? During the game he had taken 7 wickets leaving him on 799.
  During the second Indian innings his bowling partner Lasith Malinga was ripping through the team, would there be one wicket left for Muralitharan?
 Of course there would. By it's very nature, when the last Indian batsman was out it was the end of their second innings whatever bowl of the over it was, so if Muralitharan was bowling you could legitimately claim that he got his 800th wicket with his last ever ball in professional cricket. Can you guess what happened? Of course you can.
   Muralitharan bowled, Pjagyan Ojha edged it and Mahela Jayawardene took the catch in the slips. 800 test wickets for Muttiah Muralitharan.
That he is the greatest bowler is not up for discussion but he still has not bowled the single greatest ball of all time. That honour goes to the mighty Shane Warne,

There's a song about that ball you know, it's by the Duckworth Lewis Method and it called Jiggery Pokery and it's fantastic,

The Award for Possibly Ironic Award of the Week,

The Council for Learning Outside the Classroom has given a “Quality Badge” to a zoo in Wraxall, near Bristol, in recognition of its educational programme. What is wrong with that you may ask, well the full name of the zoo is Noah’s Ark Zoo. Getting anything yet? Noah's Ark? Where is that from....umm... oh yes that is mentioned in Genesis isn't it, the first book of the bible. Oh indeed it is well educated reader of mine, for this is a creationist zoo, and yes, such places do exist.
 It looks like a very good zoo, the website is lovely, but there, on the end of the navigation bar is the problem. The bit marked Evolution and Creation.
 To be fair to the Council for Learning Outside of the Classroom (who need a snappier name by the way) the zoo may have a very well run and excellently organised education system, it;s just that they are teaching absolute bollocks.

I think that will do, I'm off to Whitstable Oyster Festival. Have a good week what ever you do. Oh and if you haven't listen to it yet, maybe you might like to give the podcast a brief moment of your time. Click here to listen

Friday, 23 July 2010


Episode 2 of the podcast is here and it is on Itunes.

Monday, 19 July 2010


I've tried something new, I have made a podcast, you might like it, you might not, see what you think.You can listen to it here.

Sunday, 18 July 2010

Diana Watch

Good Sunday to you all, how are we all today? Good I hope. I don't think that there will be a Diana Watch next week as I will be in Kent visiting Significant Other's mother. I might be able to do it but it seems unlikely, best you make the most of this one.

The French have become the first country in Europe to make it illegal to wander down the Street with your face covered. This is of course a problem for those who like to wear balaclavas or who tend to walk about with a full face motorcycle helmet on but they probably shouldn't worry, this legislation is not aimed at them.
 According to Radio 4's The Moral Maze there are 6 million Muslims in France, I think that it's safe to assume that about half of them will be woman, but only 1,900 wear the full burqa yet the French Government has seen fit to waste a lot of time debating and voting on a law that effects 1,900 who they don't like. This is not the smallest group ever to have specific laws passed that effect them alone, the British Government (under Labour) passed laws that were specifically aimed at moving the protester Brian Haw from Parliament Square. It failed.
 The arguments for a ban seem to run as follows, Woman should not be forced to wear a veil against their will, Ah, a good one, make it seem like you are on their side, on the side of choice and freedom and it is a good point but in order to do this you are forcing them NOT to wear a veil. There is no choice there.
 It's not good for community cohesion; it marks them out as different and stops communication. I bring you, again, to the point that only 1,900 woman are wearing them, I don't think that they have that big of an effect. The numbers are homoeopathically small. France is hardly a model of social integration as it is. The Islamic community already feel marginalised and disenfranchised so passing laws aimed directly at them won't help. Oh and whilst a covered face does make it harder to communicate with someone, it doesn't make it imposable. I don't communicate with the woman who lives next door to me, it's not because her face is covered (it isn't by the way), it's because she is an arse. Social Cohesion is a little more complex then the French Government would have you believe.
 As pointed out on the Moral Maze a woman can wonder around the park in a bikini and walk down the street wearing not much more and that is fine, try and have some modesty on the other hand. Now that is a little bit of a simplistic argument because to Western eyes the veil is a little more than modesty but I think that it is a point worth making because to Muslim eyes (if you can see them) it is about modesty.
 Well, this will stop men from forcing woman to wear the veil because the fine for a woman wearing it is small but the fine for a man forcing her is very big indeed. These things are true but how can you enforce it? Is an already subjugated woman going to say “My husband made me do it”, it seems unlikely. There is also the distinct possibility that if woman can't walk down the street veiled then the husband who would have forced her to wear it is instead going to force her to stay indoors. A much better solution.
 I ask you, why can't people wear what they like? I can wear a T-shirt that says “Godless Liberal” and you can wear a massive bit of jewellery that depicts a Jew nailed to a wooden cross dying in a horrific manner, that's fine with me.
 Of course some of our more right wing papers have used this ban as a jumping off point for their own campaigns against the veil, not because they feel that it suppresses women as they have no problem with that sort of thing, but because it is a Muslim thing and they don't like Muslims.
 We all seem to forget the Christianity covers it's most devout woman, they are called Nuns. In fact most religions and lots of cultures are keen on modest dress for woman so why pick on the Burqa? May it simply be because we in the West don't like Muslims very much? 

 If you want to rape a minor and then get away with it may I suggest that first you make some films that some people like and then move to Switzerland.
 First some background. In 1977 Roman Polanski was charged with rape by use of drugs, perversion, sodomy, lewd and lascivious act upon a child under fourteen, however under a plea bargain he pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of unlawful sexual intercourse. He was to be sentenced to some prison time and then deported as he holds dual citizenship in France and Poland but in February 1978 he fled to France and in Europe he has stayed.
 Fast forward to 2009 and Mr Polanski was trying to enter Switzerland to pick up lifetime achievement award from the Catholic Church Zurich Film Festival but was arrested at the border by some heavily armed but very friendly Swiss border guards citing an outstanding US arrest warrant from 1978.
 He was then placed under house arrest whilst the Swiss decided what to do with him as the Americans were very keen for him to return to their shores.
 This brings us up to date. This week, after 9 months of deliberation, a Swiss judge decided that convicted child abuser Roman Polanski should not be extradited back to America to serve his time. This has annoyed the Authorities in California some what. Los Angeles county district attorney Steve Cooley said that the Swiss decision a "disservice to justice and other victims as a whole". Polanski is now free and is thought to have returned to Paris. The French don't extradite anyone.

Right, let's get on with some awards,

The Award for Surprise of the Week,

You may have noticed that last Sunday saw the final game in the FIFA World Cup (which I was home in time for following the Christening. Oh and I have proved that there is no God. I stood in front of a Church full of people and said that I believed in God and rejected the Devil, (why would I do that? He has all the best tunes, I mean have the heard the Christian ones? Shine Jesus Shine, it’s no wonder he hasn’t returned to Earth in his shining gloriousness if that is the best they can do) which were lies, and I wasn’t struck down.) and I watched it, like all right thinking people, on the BBC. The coverage was better, there were no adverts to make you miss goal and, more importantly, no Adrian Chiles. I was one of about 18 million people. What is bafflingly though is that about 3.3 million watched ITV! What were they thinking? You people are weird.

The Award for Missed Opportunity of the Week,

The man with just about the funniest name in all of the army is leaving. Sir Jock Stirrup is to stand down as head of the British Army. This is sad news to all people who find his name extremely amusing.
 Whilst it is sad for me it is also an opportunity for the army to promote someone with an equally funny name and, to be honest, I think that it is their duty. Think of the soldier’s morale. You are about to go into battle for Queen and Country. You are scared. You don’t know if you are ever going to see your loved ones again. And then you think of those inspiring words so eloquently spoken, rousing, stirring words that moved you to your very soul. And then you think of his really funny name and you go into battle with a stupid grin. That is what these brave young men and women deserve and what do the army give them? Sir David Richards? What's funny about that?

The Award for Just Being A Bit Confusing of the Week,

I don’t like Prince Charles very much, from his views on Architecture to his love of “alternative” medicine (there is medicine or there isn’t, there is no alternative, well maybe death. To quote many people, “Do you know what we call alternative medicine that works? Medicine) I find him annoying.
 He has ruined a perfected pleasant couple of fields with the stupid vanity project that is Poundbury and he attempts to stop new developments that he doesn’t like. His Foundation for Integrated Health (recently closed down due to fraud) promotes pseudo-science, such as detox (you have a liver, that’s what it’s there for) and homeopathy. He is proud to be an enemy of the enlightenment. That and I don’t like his Duchy Original biscuits and they cost too much. I don’t like him any pretty much anything he says.
 All of these things I have stated before but this week he said something sensible. He did it in a way that showed he has a degree of self awareness but that doesn't take away from the fact that he usually speaks nonsense. He accused those who deny climate change of ‘peddling pseudo science'.
 Some would now retort, “It takes one to know one” but that would be childish. Fun (and possible accurate) but childish never the less. Whilst he did acknowledge that he has been accused of doing exactly the same himself and the irony of him accusing somebody else doing it wasn't wasted on him.

The Award for Surprising Country Being Cooler Than Here of the Week, 

Another Country has pasted us on the Socially Liberal Coolness Table (and yes, I am keeping a chart. If you are very good I might show it too you one day) and it's a surprising one. It seems that Argentina has voted that Gay marriage is ok.
Now correct me if I am wrong but aren't most South American countries Catholic? Well yes they are and Argentina is no exception. Oh dear, they won't be happy about that will they? Of course the Catholic Church (who this week managed to piss off a surprising large amount people by adding to the Churches list of serious crimes, Attempting To Ordinate Woman. Now also on this list is paedophilia but unlike that the raping of children for which you are protected, if you try to or are an ordinated woman they will excommunicate you, tossers) reacted in the only way it can. It blamed someone else.
 In this case Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio, the highest ranking Catholic prelate in the country, decided that the Argentine Governments pleasantness towards their fellow men and women was in fact the work of the devil. Oh it's always the devil.
 Dear The Catholic Church, please try harder on your blaming things. At least try and blame something that actually exists, Love Martyn.

Like I said at the beginning there will probably be no Diana Watch next Sunday, I'm sure you'll cope.
 Have a lovely week all, I'm off to weed my allotment as the rain has encouraged everything to grow including the weeds.

Sunday, 11 July 2010

Diana Watch

“So can I ask you why you are applying for asylum in this country Mr John?”
“Well, I am a Gay man and in my country that is illegal. If I am caught being gay then I will imprisoned or worse, I could be put to death in a series of excruciatingly painful ways.” 
“Well, that is very interesting. So if you are a caught being gay in your country the government of that country may kill you.”
“Yes, that is exactly what could happen. Your England is a reasonably tolerant place. For instance you give Graham Norton his own TV series and he's rubbish.”
“Oh right, ummm...ok..., this is slightly indelicate but can you prove that you are gay?”
“Prove it? How do you mean?”
“Well you could just be saying that you are gay in order to claim asylum here.”
“How exactly should I prove to you that I am gay? Whoa, wait a minute, is that a come-on? Are you coming on to me? Is that how you want me to “prove it” to you? I'm flattered obviously but you’re not my type.”
 No, god no, that's not what I meant at all. I meant, oh actually I don't know. Well, ummm, do you like Rufus Wainwright? How about show tunes? Kylie? How about funny coloured cocktails with little umbrellas in? Judy Garland perhaps?”
 “I'm sorry? Those seem to be very crudely drawn stereotypes. Do you work for a tabloid?”
 “Well, that is a good point but I have one question,”
“In your own country, have you tried not being gay? Have you considered not standing out so much and doing more, less gay things? Have you thought about not going out so much, staying indoors a little more? In short, have you tried not being gay?”

 Up until the middle of this week this was pretty much how interviews with the UK's Border Agency were like. It was actual policy to advice people to go home and try and be less gay. 98% of those who applied for asylum on the grounds of sexuality were turned down at he first attempt.
 The Supreme Court has ruled that 2 gay men, one from Cameroon and one from Iran, have the right to stay in the UK.
 Lord Hope, who read out the judgement, said: "To compel a homosexual person to pretend that his sexuality does not exist or suppress the behaviour by which to manifest itself is to deny his fundamental right to be who he is.
"Homosexuals are as much entitled to freedom of association with others who are of the same sexual orientation as people who are straight." That, my friends, is a beautiful judgement.
 The response to this case has shown again that the coalition Government seems to be considerably more liberal than it's predecessor.
 Home Secretary Theresa May said the judgement is in line with the Governments stance (although probably not hers as is not the most Gay friendly MP you have ever come across), adding “We have already promised to stop the removal of asylum seekers who have had to leave particular countries because their sexual orientation or gender identification puts them at proven risk of imprisonment, torture or execution.”
 Of course not everyone was happy with the decision, can you guess who they might be? Why yes, it was the Daily Express,


oh and the Mail and the Star and most of the other papers to be honest but to be honest I don't care. They are uncaring, unpleasant bastards, everyone. I understand that this subject is like a dog whistle for these idiots, it has the words Asylum and Gay in it thus combining two of their least favourite things, but never the less, their response was rabid and incredibly unpleasant. I assume that no one who works for these papers or knows anyone who works for these papers is Gay because if you did know someone and yet you still wrote that shit, what sort of bastard would you be?
 Why should the reason that your country wants to kill you make any difference to how we treat you? Politics, sexuality, hair colour, religion, ethnicity, what difference does it make?  They want to kill them, that is all that matters.

To be honest the reaction of the press to this story of equality has made me really very angry and upset so I think we should move on to the awards, that and we need to get on because there is a Grand Prix and some football match or other on and (depending on what time you read this) you may want to watch it, I however will be at a fucking Christening. I mean, how bad is their timing? Significant Other has posh friends who care not for such things as sport, bugger.
 Oh and as an Atheist can I be a God Parent? Well I am about to find out. If I am still on twitter at about 8 o'clock Sunday evening there is no God.  I will have stood up in a church and said that I will, should it's parents have died in a tragic Pimms based accident (they are very posh), look after the child and teach it about God. Teach it about how he's real and not made up by people. If I can do all that whilst being and atheist so obviously lying in a church about God and haven't been struck down then there is no God.

 The Award for Very Sensible Decision of the Week,

Some people have really, really bad hair. I believe that the law should be changed so that hairdressers have the right to say “No, that will make you look rubbish”.
 It seems, for the first time that I am aware of, that my ideas mesh completely with that of the Iranian Government. They have introduced government sanctioned hairstyles.


They seem to have taken against, what you may describe as, flamboyant “Western” hair cuts. I will be watching President Ahmadinejad locks very closely from now on to make sure he is sticking to the chart.

The Award for Back down of the Week,

To be honest I am going to try and mention President GoodLuck Jonathan every week simply because he has a cracking name.
 Last week we heard that he had banned his countries football team for international competition for 2 years after their poor performance in the World Cup but this week it seems he has changed his mind. This is basically because of threats from FIFA to remove funding for Nigeria’s football association and stop that countries referees working outside Nigeria.

The Award for Failing to Understand What a Word Means,

To be honest it happens quite a lot but this week it annoyed me. If you are a newspaper and you have a story that no one else has then, and only then, can you use the word “Exclusive”. If another paper has the story as well then you can’t use it and, obviously, nor can they.


 At least the Sun were good enough to admit that others had this story by not using that word,


The Award for Trying to Make Ends Meet (That is a bad pun by the way),

So you type in “large tits” and “nurse” into your favourite porn based search engine and find what looks like a satisfactory piece of film to watch (is critique the wrong word?) and you click on play. That is quite a good set you think to yourself, suddenly distracted from the stilted dialogue and hackneyed plot, they have spent some money on that. You mind is suddenly back on the action when the woman offers to do something that no one that you have ever met (or are likely to meet) has ever admitted to liking or confirm that it is physically possible.
 Those little touches on the set draw your eye into the background of the shot again, really they have worked hard on that, it almost looks like…… No wait, it can’t be, can it? There is no way it could be but it does look at little like that London hospital that I stayed in. I can’t imagine that they would rent out a closed ward to a production company not knowing fully what sort of film that they intended to make, could they?

The Award for Pot Calling the Kettle Black of the Week,

Eric Pickles has launched an irony free attack on “Non-Jobs” that some Britain's councils advertise. This man is Communities Secretary. 

The Award for Being A Bit of A Dufus,

You remember last week when it was pointed out that Health Secretary Andrew Lansley had not seen/ignored evidence that Jamie Oliver's healthy school lunch thing had actually done some good, well he also said that the number of pupils having the meals had gone down. He was wrong. Again.
 The School Food Trust carried out a survey that showed that the number of pupils having schools meals was up 2.1% in Primary Schools and 0.8% in Secondaries. Whilst that isn't a massive rise it is still a rise, the exact opposite of what Mr Lansley said.
 Whilst we are on about the lovely Government, what do you think is the best way to fund advertising for anti-obesity drives? The last Government thought it was a good idea to pay for them themselves with public money as it is a public health issue. This way you get no interference from fat food floggers. This is not the way that the new Government goes about things.
 Andrew Rapidly-becoming-a-twat Lansley has cut the Governments budget and hopes that the short fall will be made up by companies whose products make you fat. 
 If there was ever a doubt that the Tories weren't as right wing as they used to be I believe that this one thing has cleared that up. You make people fat and we'll clear up the mess but we won't try and damage your profits by telling people not to eat your products. We were wondering would you do that?
 The Government seem to expect Mars to advertise the Mars bar on one hand and then voluntarily pay for some adverts that say that Mars bars are bad for you. I'm sure that Cadbury want to pay for something that tells you not to eat Cadbury products because they are not good for you.
 Can I just make it clear that I don't like Andrew Lansley.

I'm sure you are wondering “Is there still oil pouring into the Gulf of Mexico somewhere between 35,000 to 60,000 barrels a day?”. Why yes, yes it is but BP, or British Petroleum as the Daily Mail and Express really hate hearing them called, are really, really trying to stop it now. As long as the weather holds. And the new top fits.

 I'm not saying that I am overly influenced by popular culture but every time I hear someone saying “Spy Swap” I have an image in my head very similar to this,


If it doesn't take place on a foggy bridge it doesn't count.

The sun is still out so let's make the most of it, take the week off week. If we are really honest with ourselves we will realise that most of us won't be missed, not really.
 Have a fun week.

Sunday, 4 July 2010

Diana Watch

“So, I hear your a racist, anti-Semitic, misogynist, homophobe now Mel.”

And so England lost to Germany last Sunday, not by putting up a decent fight but by rolling over and letting the Germans tickle their bellies. They were embarrassingly poor and after the game the National discussion turned to whom or what was to blame.
 We, as a nation, like to blame simple things, we don’t like complex or nuanced arguments, so we usually end up blaming the manager and firing him. It is a system that has worked well for us for the last 40 years (it has helped keep us from lifting anything shiny and cup shaped since 1966) and we are not going to start changing it now.
 Other countries deal with the national humiliation that is an early exit in different ways. The French for instance, who looked like a team made up of 17 year old boys who had been forced to go on one last family holiday to the seaside, have taken their very early exit extremely badly and the Government have decided that, whilst denying that they are interfering, they need to have an inquiry. The manager and the Ex-head of the French Football Federation (he resigned after their defeat) have already been called into see Nicolas Sarkozy, a man who is not in the greatest of moods anyway as  the annual Presidential hunt will be cancelled this year. More will follow.
 English scapegoating and French investigations and sulking are nothing compared to the reaction in Nigeria and it's brilliantly named President Goodluck Jonathan.  
 They, like the French, came home after the group stage much to the disgust of the Nigerian people. Their new President reacted in way that I think may have taken a few people by surprise, he banned the team from International competition for 2 years.
 The Presidents special advisor has said that this will “enable Nigeria to reorganise its football” and they have also dissolved the Nigerian Football Federation. An interim board will appointed.
 Now that is a punishment.

After a couple of weeks of silence (well they did Excommunicate a Nun who sat on the Ethics committee at a hospital that approved an abortion for a woman who had a real chance of dying if the pregnancy continued, nothing happened to the men though, curious) the Catholic Church strikes back.
 The offices of the Church in Leuven, central Belgium, were raided last week and Police Officers seized nearly 500 files and a computer. Prosecutors said that the raids concerned alleged "abuse of minors committed by a certain number of Church figures". They also searched the Church's headquarters.
 The raids happened whilst Bishops were having a meeting and the Police refused to let them leave and they were also not allowed to communicate with the outside world. This is all normal procedure according to Belgium's justice minister Stefaan De Clerck.
 This has not gone down well inside the Vatican who alleged that during the 9 hours that the Bishops were held they were not allowed any food or water, a charge that has been strongly denied by Belgian authorities.
 Now at this point you would think that the Vatican may had learnt from it's previous PR mistakes and it would just say that they were helping the Police with their inquiries. I mean that would be the sensible thing to do, just keep your head down and maybe no one will notice. Did they do this? Did they bollocks. It’s paint yourself as the victim time in the Vatican again.
 The Vatican Secretary of State, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, said that the raids were “serious and unbelievable" and that "There are no precedents, not even under the old communist regimes," ooh nice touch. It worse here than under the communist, stop picking on us, it’s not like we have systematically covered up years of sexual abuse is it? Why should we be investigated under the same laws and rules as other people? Our leader is infallible!
 Speaking of the Pope, do you think that he stayed out of it? Did he use this moment to distance himself from his loud-mouth Cardinal? No, no he didn’t. He described events as “deplorable". No, the deplorable thing here is the covering up and sexual abuse, I thought we’d been through this.
 He sent a message to the Bishops Conference of Belgium that said “I want to express, dear brother in the Episcopate, as well as to all the Bishops of Belgium, my closeness and solidarity in this moment of sadness, in which, with certain surprising and deplorable methods, searches were carried out." How dare they search us, don't they not know who we are?
 Mr De Clerck (Justice Minister) said the Vatican's reaction had been excessive and it was based on false information. Is he accusing the Vatican of lying? Oh please let him be doing that. It must make Belgians proud to be Belgian; it would if I was one of them. No deferential treatment of the arrogant, justice obstructing Church.

I’m a bit confused now. After a few weeks of 80’s style, and by that I mean things that would make Thatcher proud, Tory policy announcements, the Government seem to have gone a bit, well.. ummmmm…… liberal.
 Firstly they seem to have announced that there will be an inquiry into whether Britain played any part in torturing terror suspects, mostly in other countries.
 Now, they may just be doing this just so that they can discredit the last Government which would make it a little cynical but does the motivation behind the announcement undermine the significance and potential impact of it? I don’t think so. As long as the inquiry is independent who cares why it has been called.
 I’m sure that there are a lot a people in the country that think that it is ok to torture people “if it helps National Security” but it really doesn't. The information you receive from the torturee is rarely helpful (they have a tendency to tell you what they think you want to hear or just plain make things up) and it undermines your moral authority.
 And then Wednesday saw Ken Clarke (one of the few Tories I actually quite like. He likes Europe a bit, single malts and has done several series for Radio4 on jazz. He seems to understand that life is for enjoying but not at the expense of others. Yes he does/did sit on the board of British American tobacco but he has some redeeming features unlike most Tories) announced that there were too many people in prison and that short sentences don’t work. He said that we should focus more on rehabilitation.
 I’m scared now Mummy, what has happened to them?
 During the election campaign the Tory party criticised the Labour Government for early release scheme and the Liberal Democrats pointed out that both parties polices were mostly a who can lock the most people up dick-swinging contest, I’m paraphrasing there but the point stands. Now, however,  the new Government seems to have come round to the LibDem way of thinking.  Or have they?
 Have they become more liberal because it will probably be cheaper? Did this “Road to Damascus” moment strike the eyes of Ken Clarke before or after he was told that he had to make budget savings of 25%? But again, does it matter what the motivation behind the announcement is? Well maybe. If there is a lack of belief will enough effort be put in?
 Usually it is people in other parties or in the press that deliberately “misinterpret” what a politician says but this happened to Ken Clarke when he was attacked by the very scary Michael Howard.
 Mr Howard is a proper, lock 'em up and throw away the key, type of Tory who famously said to conference, whilst sounding like he had just spotted the neck of a very tasty virgin in the front row, “Prison Works”.
 After Mr Clarke's speech he announced that he wasn't convinced by it and that “Serious and persistent criminals need to be put in prison,". Yes, I think we all agree on that point but that was not what Ken was saying, did you not listen or was this just a prepared, trotted out, half thought through response?
 Or was it more cunning than that? Was the whole, rather underplayed by the press, statement aimed deliberately at the Tory base? Was it pre-approved by the Party? Was it allowed because it was all part of a plan, look a bit liberal by talking about rehabilitation and community sentences but then point out that serious offences will be punished?

There are spies amongst us people! Well there are in the US anyway. I have to admit that I was surprised by people who were surprised about this. We have MI6 and the US has the CIA, what do you think they are doing, crochet?
 Anyway, back to my point. The English press reacted in the only way that it knows, find out if one of the people involved was a woman and if a woman is implicated in anyway the next question is, is she hot? If so then plaster her on every front page and seem surprised that an attractive woman can do anything but appear in FHM with very little on (unless you are the Daily Mail where you offended that FHM exists but you print the pictures anyway saying how terrible they are. “Look at them! There are awful! See this woman with virtually nothing on, it’s dreadful!”). For another example of this there is also the murder of Meredith Kercher in which we were treated to pictures of Amanda Knox whose crime was somewhat diminished by the press nicknaming here “Foxy Knoxy”.

Right, let’s do the awards as there is some tennis on soon (unless you are reading this after Sunday afternoon) and I want to watch it,

The Award for A Great Film’s Anniversary of the Week,

Happy birthday to you, happy birthday to you, happy birthday dear Airplane! Happy birthday to you.
 I know it’s silly and I know it’s childish but Airplane! is one of my favourite films and it is 30 years old this weekend. It is film that is so gag heavy that I am still finding new sight gags in it now. It's always possible that I am still finding new gags in it because I haven’t really concentrated that hard enough on it the innumerable times I have watched it before but I like to think that it is because it is so well written. It isn’t, it’s because I haven’t really concentrated that hard on it when I’ve watched it before.

The Award for Just Being A Much Cooler Country Than Ours of the Week

Iceland may have had a bit of an effect on World finance but they are still are very, very cool country. I don’t think that in comparison to Iceland David Cameron government look even slightly progressive.
 Iceland have elected a woman Prime Minster, Johanna Sigurdardottir, ok we’ve done that, once. She is Gay; ok they are moving ahead of now. She was in a Civil Partnership, ok we have them (but we don’t have Gay marriage is beyond me.)
 Now if she had taken advantage of a recent change in Icelandic law and married her partner then that would be cooler than the soles of a bare footed Bjork standing on a glacier.
 What’s that you say? She has now married her partner, oooh, I think that is a level of progression and coolness that we will never ever get close too.

The Award for Scary Video of The Week,

I genuinely try not to get involved in the politics of other countries (no, honest I do) as it has very little to do with me but when the lovely @waccachica linked to this on twitter I couldn’t really ignore it now could I,

Now I assumed that it was some sort of well crafted joke as it hits all the Republican stereotypes that you can think of (If she had been yellow and had only 3 fingers on each hand I would have assumed that she was drawn by Matt Groening) but it seems it isn’t. This Pamela Gorman really is standing and this really is a campaign advert. Still don’t believe me? Well there is a website for her if you want to see, it’s here.
 Sort of makes me grateful to live in England really, I mean we my have our own problems but it really could be much worse.

 So Andrew Lansley, Health Secretary, told the BMA conference that lecturing people on their health and diets doesn't work (we don't lecture people, we tell them what is health as I can assure you that they really, really don't know) and has sighted Jamie Oliver's healthy school lunch thing because less people have school lunches then before.
 A number of things wrong with this, 1) So? If the children wanted Crack should the school provide that? If the children want really unhealthy food should the school provide that? I don't think so, they should be setting an example and 2) Jamie's little crusade has had a positive effect, you can read about it here on Tim Harford's blog (Yes he is the bloke who presents Radio4's More or Less but I'm not obsessed).
 It seems the a Government Minister is either ignoring or unaware of evidence that disproves their ideology.

 I think that that will do for now, have a super fun week, it seems that the sun will continue to shine.