16/06/08 - We despise most those who display weaknesses of character which we recognise as being our own.

10/05/08 - My new book "From Nuremberg to Nineveh - War, Peace and the making of modernity" is progressing nicely. Its in the editing phase at the moment and I anticipate it will be ready for publication in two or three months. If interested you can read a rough cut of the first few chapters here although its all changed since I put that page up, especially the introduction, but it will give you some idea of what its all about.

Anyway, last week, while taking a break from working on that project, I did something which I never thought I would do. Ugh... I almost feel dirty saying it, but I have succumbed, in some small form, to the zeitgeist of public navel-gazing and joined a social networking site. My 'Facebook' page can be viewed here. Not sure I've figured out the point of the whole thing yet, but it seems I can now be 'added' and 'poked' and 'hugged' in the virtual world of look-at-me-ism that is the internet. Hurrah! 

04/04/08 - I'm still getting one or two messages every day expressing concern regarding my 'Free Speech in Germany' petition, mostly from people who claim it to be anti-semitic. If anyone can demonstrate to me which part of the petition text is anti-semitic, I will publish their message on this page and reply to it publicly. Frankly I think such people are seeing ghosts. They read into things what they want to read. As I've mentioned before, (see below) there are anti-semitic comments written by some signators, but I have no control over that. 

Free speech means free speech - that means having to read or hear things that we might not like.

For anyone who is curious as to the spirit in which the petition is intended, please watch this short video. It encapsulates the situation perfectly. The audio is in German, but it has English subtitles.

03/04/08 - Pleasingly, my 'Free Speech in Germany' petition has been doing brisk business again of late and after getting 500 signatures in its first week, has now climbed over the thousand mark. If you have read the petiton and are considering getting in touch about it, please scroll down and read my random thoughts for 28/01/08 and 26/01/08 first. Thanks.

10/03/08 - I can't believe I'm writing this, but, I have to hand it to the BBC. The Enoch Powell documentary on Saturday night exceeded my expectations. It showed a highly prinicipled politician - a man who gambled his career on saying what he believed, who did not care about offending interest groups or being slandered with derogatory labels. He had something to say - something important - and he said it. Maybe I'm an idealist, but whether you agree with Powell or not, I think that's what democracy is supposed to be about.

The real thing that is borne out by Powell's legacy, besides the obvious prescience of his speech in the wake of inner-city riots, the rise of Islamic extremism and growing tensions throughout the country, is the fact that in the clamour to condemn him, the nation failed to see his most important point. Powell was saying, essentially, 'hang on a minute, this policy of importing hundreds of thousands of labourers from the Caribbean, Asia and other diverse lands, we haven't really thought this through, have we? These people will stay and raise families, form communities and bring cultural change. Where will that lead?'

Nobody was prepared to try to answer the questions that Powell so bravely raised. The government stuck its fingers in its ears and thought that if they called him enough names and pretended it was all a non-issue, that would work instead. Such short-sightedness has brought us to where we now stand - with home grown terror bombers and an uneasy feeling of experiencing the calm before the storm.

08/03/08 - Well, well, well... I've always thought that I'm a bit of a barometer for future popular opnion. Perhaps this will sound big-headed, but I tend to develop an interest in things a couple of years before they become fashionable.

As anyone who visits my site regularly will know, I have moved away from fiction and into certain historical and political fields of interest over the last couple of years. For a long time, I've been discussing the situation regarding political correctness and the way in which white working class and lower middle class culture has been denigrated in favour of a trendy obsession with all things 'ethnic'. A quick scroll down this page will throw up many such posts.

It seems, to my astonishment, that the BBC, the institution that has probably done more than any other to engineer this crisis of White Britishness recognises the problems it has caused. They are running a series of programmes simply entitled 'White' this week. Tonight's episode, well worth watching, focuses on Enoch Powell's 'Rivers of Blood' speech, an iconic moment in right-wing politics, which provided one of my favourite quotes of all time - "those whom the Gods wish to destroy, they first make mad." 

It will be fascinating to see what sort of treatment the Beeb will give it.

29/02/08 - OK, bit of humdrum site-type news today. Two things have happened. Firstly, the 'Taboo' page has now been restored to its former glory. Most of it, as previous visitors will know, was taken up with an article on 'Holocaust Denial'. I removed it initially because my continued investigations into the subject meant that the article no longer represented my thoughts on it fully. The truth is I have been working on a book, which is now fairly close to completion, which will outline all my present thoughts. I will set up another page containing pre-publication extracts.

However, I decided that there is nothing wrong with having the taboo page there, as a record of my development in the subject. It was mostly written in 2005, while I was a relative novice (still am in many ways) - despite that it does represent my general opinion, although I would now differ on some details. I've had quite a lot of contact from people regarding the article, saying that they liked it and would like to see its return, so I guess this is for everyone who wrote.

thanks for your interest. 

28/01/08 - Since starting the Free Speech in Germany Petition, http://www.petitiononline.com/hammer72/petition.html I've been having a slightly odd time.

I have been inundated with emails from all corners of the globe, some of them telling tales of woe, saying how they believe there are thousands of people in Germany itself who would sign but are afraid to do so. Others have expounded theories and solutions, some of them fascinating, some of them bizarre or even rather worrying, to the German situation. Others still have written purely to tell me that I'm evil and should go f**k myself. Beyond all this however, I've also been in touch with some well known figures. I had a very amicable exchange with Mr. Israel Shamir, for example, who signed the petition as number 527. Believe it or not and I'm still struggling to myself, I also had a rather lengthy e-conversation, which dragged on for more than half the weekend, with none other than Professor Noam Chomsky, who did not sign, which I was disappointed with as he is a man I have a great deal of respect for. 

Through these emails and conversations I have been made aware of many cases comparable to those of the German 'deniers' and although the German situation, for personal reasons, is the one I am most concerned with, I felt I would bring just one other case to the attention of readers of my website. Kareem Ameer is a 22 year old law student and Egyptian blogger who had the temerity to write anti Islamic views on his web page (among other generally atheistic and anti-establishment writings). For this he was thrown out of University, tried and given a four year prison sentence. Anyone who posts on the internet should be able to empathise with this guy's plight. The Free Kareem campaign can be found online at http://www.freekareem.org.

By the way, signatures for Free Speech in Germany seem to be slowing up, after a frenetic first week. If you have not yet signed, please do and pass the link on to others.  

26/01/08 - Thank you to everyone who has so far signed the Free Speech in Germany petition at... http://www.petitiononline.com/hammer72/petition.html

The first week has gone better than I expected and over 500 people have signed already. It is reassuring to know that there are so many people out there who share my dismay at the way 'thought crime' laws are being enforced.

Following one or two messages I have received and bearing in mind the nature of a minority of comments left by signators to the petition, I feel the need to make a couple of things clear.

Firstly, I am half German and proud to be so. I refuse to buy into the collective shame that the nation wears like an overcoat of lead. Having said that, I am not a Nazi.

As I feel the petition makes clear, my priority in designing it was in promoting the issue of freedom of speech. As a writer and someone who has been accused many times in the past of being 'controversial' it pains me to see people in prison for nothing more than expressing beliefs and thoughts. For democracy to work, a free exchange of ideas is essential. As we all know, the Nazis were not particularly interested in that. They had state enforced history and they stifled politics. They imprisoned people who spoke against them. They burned books. I abhor all that, and that is why I am not a Nazi. I'm not at all sure the German government and all those who would censure Holocaust revisionists can say the same thing.

Here's the rule of thumb: If you are in favour of the morally reprehensible imprisonment of writers, thinkers and speakers, no matter what their view, then you are far more of a Nazi than I am or will ever be.

Clearly, a few of the people who have signed my petition are Nazis. That's their choice. To those who have written to me and complained that I am providing a platform for Nazis to speak up, (which is a ridiculous comment, its an open petition and anyone can write what they want on it - the vast majority of comments are not Nazi) I say, so what? 

Again, its a freedom of speech issue. Has somebody, while I wasn't looking, decreed that freedom of speech only applies to Guardian readers from Tunbridge Wells? Or is it a right we are all entitled to?  

The same applies to anti-semitism. I am not an anti-semite, although I do have some issues with the state of Israel and their connected pressure groups, like AIPAC. However, clearly some people who have signed the petition are. Again, that's their choice and they are exercising their right to freedom of speech, which is healthy. Surely its better to get all this stuff out in the open anyway, rather than letting it fester in whispered conversations in smoky pubs.

So, if you have not yet signed the petition, please do, whatever your political persuasion. There is a tiny chance that it might actually make a positive difference to the world. And that's something we all want.

19/01/08 - Well, I have decided, for better or worse to try to do something about a situation that I feel strongly about. As most people who have visited my website over the last few years will know, I believe that there is another side to the story of Nazi Germany. I also believe that it is a side that no-one ever tells and that has been purposely suppressed. This is shown in the treatment of people the world deems to be 'Holocaust deniers' like Ernst Zuendel, Germar Rudolf, Sylvia Stolz and others. These people are currently languishing in German jails. They are there not because they stole or murdered or even evaded their taxes - they are there because they published books or spoke or created websites about Nazi Germany which the Bundestag (German government) deemed to be unacceptable. Truthfully, even I don't agree with everything these people have written and said, but that is not the point. No-one should be thrown in jail for writing a book or delivering a speech. No-one.

So, I have designed a petition.

It is here, http://www.petitiononline.com/hammer72/petition.html

If you agree, please add your name and pass the address on to anyone you think may share my indignation. When there are enough signatures, i will send it here, http://www.bundestag.de/ausschuesse/a02/onlinepet/index.html

(its the german government petition committee, for anyone who doesn't read German.)

21/11/07 - I'm not going to bother apologising about lack of updating here again. I am obssessed with my current project, which is about three quarters of the way to completion and the bottom line is, I just can't be arsed wasting my time putting stuff on this page at the moment. Every free minute I have is taken.

However I decided to just make a note of the fact that I am officially a renegade. Yes, in case you hadn't adduced it already - its official - I'm mad, bad and dangerous to know. Pardon me while I do a Billy Idol sneer. I've known about this for some time but was today given another heads up on it...Thing is, my site is barred on public / council computers in several London boroughs, apparently because it contains 'hate speech'.

How f**king typical.

To be honest I take it as a positive sign. If the PC knicker-wetters in the town halls of Haringey and Islington dislike my stuff enough to block it, then I must be doing something right. I just hope they realise what they're doing.

Their backs will be first up against the wall when the revolution comes.

(Just so we're clear - that last line was not serious.)

17/10/07 - Crap. A whole month. Again. A shoddy performance by anyone's standards. I had a few things going on, but more than anything, the reason nothing's been written here for all that time has been tunnel vision. Serious. I am on it at the moment. And when I get like that, I'm not interested in anything else. So this is a bit of a for-the-sake-of-it random thought. I couldn't even tell you a thing that's happened in the news for ages - apart from President Ahmadinejad appearing at Columbia University, an encounter in which I thought everyone managed to make themselves look like a hypocrite.

Lee Bollinger, the Columbia Uni spokesman, introduced Ahmadinejad with a true American welcome. "“Mr. President, you exhibit all the signs of a petty and cruel dictator,” adding, “You are either brazenly provocative or astonishingly uneducated.”

"And you are a smug, corpulent wanker who knows on which side his bread's buttered," replied the Iranian premier, before tackling the academic to the ground and sticking the boot in. (Ok, that's just wishful thinking - it wasn't that exciting.) But what on earth was Bollinger doing? If you invite someone to speak at your university, then you're civil to them. No-one behaves like that unless they have no idea how to comport themselves public-wise, oh my brother.

As much as I despise that pompous American attitude to limitations on free speech, I can't bring myself to cheer for Ahmadinejad. On the one hand he campaigns for Holocaust revisionists to be free from persecution, which I'm all for, on the other, the punishment for apostasy (rejecting Islam) in his country?

Death.

Call me old fashioned, but that doesn't seem very enlightened. He also made a big deal about gays, saying there weren't any in Iran. Well, I've got news for him, if the guys in his country are anything like the Egyptians (another bastion of traditional Islamic conservatism) then they pretty much all are. Sikki sikku, or summink. It was a long time since I was there.

Anyway, I'm going back to my tunnel. Fuck Mr. Bollinger and fuck Mr. Ahmadinejad. In fact, fuck everything.

How's that for quality PR? Bet you're glad you stopped by now aren't you?  

17/09/07 - When was the last time you were awestruck? I'm 34 and possess a cynical nature. Not much blindsides me these days. But on Sunday as I wandered the halls of the Natural History Museum with my four year old daughter I was absolutely blown away... by a Blue Whale. There's a new room there, with a variety of stuffed and model mammals. We entered and were confronted by it, surprisingly suspended from the ceiling and (this is going to sound corny) but I had the most powerful feeling of humility I have ever felt. It was nearly enough to make me believe in God, or become a hippy. Imagine if I ever saw a real one.

Really, as I stood before that Leviathan, faced with its sheer, magnificent size, with my little girl's hand in mine and a lump in my throat, for a time nothing (and I mean nothing) else mattered. The world stopped turning. And I remembered, for a beautiful, fleeting moment, what it feels like to be a kid.  

10/09/07 - I've been thinking about different forms of writing recently and I've come to the follwing conclusions... Poetry is about saying something that is so personal or painful that you don't really want people to hear it. If you wrap it up in enough language and metaphor and nuance, it becomes so obtuse that only the writer understands it - its catharsis without fear, bearing your soul but in such a way that its still covered, to all but yourself. Fiction is similar - in a novel or a short story you tell true stories about your life or people you know, but get away with it because you give them different names, or put them in places they've never been.

Both of these, in reality then, are just forms of obfuscation. And lately I've found them unsatisfying. There's nothing about it anywhere on this website and neither is there likely to be, but expect my next big project to be factual. I'm ready to talk openly and I'm fed up with playing games.

02/09/07 - Well the summer's passed in a blur of intoxication, senoritas and seaside shenanigans. Since the last time I mustered the will to write something here, I've pelted around Spain in a Smart Car, had a run-in with the Guardia Civil and generally arsed about like some sort of debauched aristocrat.

And now I've got to go back to f**king work. I can't believe it. Tommorrow really feels like it should be spent next to a heart-shaped pool, wearing a russet toga and talking like Terry Thomas, while smoking a suspicously large pipe and being served cocktails by mediterranean lingerie models. The sense of finality is crushing.

Pity me!

24/07/07 - ibiza, ibiza, ibiza, ibiza, ibiza, ibiza, ibiza, ibiza, ibiza, ibiza...

09/07/07 - Once again its been too long. I suppose the problem is that as a writer, I don't have a clear idea of what to do. Fiction (long and short), political / historical articles or books, a general opinion column - I try my hand at all of them but in a sporadic, unprofessional, half-arsed way. The truth is its kinda tricky when you're on the treadmill. I wrote a lot about work when I first started this website, three years ago. Scroll down to the bottom of the page if you're interested. I won't repeat myself now.

The trouble with jobs is that to do them properly you have to wear a mask. Look right, speak right, act right - if your face doesn't fit they'll be onto you. You then spend so much of your time doing that, that the mask can get stuck. I know people that have worked in one place, doing the same thing for most of their lives. That's mental. What they do becomes who they are. I'm not all that sure who I am, but I reckon I'm more than just a job.

So, without going off on one about another of my pet subjects, I'll finish with a quote from the recently deceased American writer, Kurt Vonnegut, a guy who bravely once suggested that half a million German civilians being killed by British dropped white phosphorous in Dresden might have been as bad as anything the Nazis did. In case you haven't guessed, I rate him. 

"In life you become what you pretend to be. So be careful what you pretend to be."

10/06/07 - Itan e epitas. Just watched the film '300' about the Spartan king Leonidas and his battle against the might of the Persian army. The film itself was kinda dodgy, more cartoon than anything else, but it got me thinking about war - (now having to resist from saying 'huh, what is it good for...') and the thing is, really, to borrow The Sun's advertising slogan, which is not something I thought I would ever do, we love it, don't we? All the books, songs and poems written about those who fight are testament to that. Do you think people would be making films about Leonidas 2500 years after his death if he had tried to solve his problems with Xerxes through diplomacy? Would the Viking sagas have such enduring appeal if the tribes of Scandinavia had sailed around Northern Europe discussing potential sales outlets for a new line of pottery? Would Russell Crowe have evoked the spirit of Maximus Decimus Meridius if he had been a financial consultant rather than a gladiator? Imagine our Aussie thesp, sweaty, squint-eyed, tousle-haired, sitting behind a desk and addressing his colleagues with 'we who are about to assess the needs of our customers and then try to match them to a suitable life-cover policy, salute you'. It wouldn't have the same cache, somehow, would it?

We're all quick to denounce war as it happens, to berate Bush and Blair for their belligerence, but are we being sincere? Why, conversely, do we celebrate so many warriors and soldiers? Is pacifism, non-aggression and the anti-war movement a denial of our nature?

As I get gradually older and am forced to face the sense of anomie that so many of us have in the modern world, I wonder if it is this that is lacking - a cause. Something I would be prepared to die for. Right now, on a Sunday, with another week of routine lying ahead of me, it doesn't seem so silly. 'A beautiful death' the Spartans called it. And I think I can see the attraction.

12/05/07 - yeah, hello, um...i joined this week...um... this is my first session and well, I'm really not finding this easy...sob...but I guess I want to say, my name's Mark and ...um...I'm an obsessive holocaust researcher.

applause, subtle whispers of 'its ok, you've taken the first step' and 'go on mate, we're all here with you', dabbing of eye with hanky.

Yeah...yeah...thanks guys. I mean it all started quite innocently, you know, researching for a novel and everything, just here and there, when I had the time, but I just got caught up in it and before I knew it, you know it was a...well...sniffle...its very difficult for me. It was a ...

go on mate, keep going, let it all out, the group's here for you 

well...it was a hobby... cue 2 minutes of bawling... I always thought i was too cool for hobbies, but suddenly I had one ...wail, sniff...and I enjoyed it and found it interesting.

heads nod, eyes shine, people pat me on the back

I needed that. Nothing like a self help group to clear the tubes...You see ladies and gents, I've had a bit of a week of it this week. I've been grappling with a few internal demons following a night out last Saturday involving all sorts of naughty business and a 15 mile walk home. And the thing is, as regular visitors to my site will know, I do go on about the Holocaust a lot. So much in fact, that its got me in a bit of hot water with some of the sensitive old duffers at UKAuthors.com, which was an odd experience, like getting into a punch-up at your local Crown Bowls Club, but still a bit disappointing as I've been a member there for about six years. Anyway, the point is, that as a writer, the subjects that you choose to write about say as much about your persona as the way in which you write (so they say). So the question I've been asking myself is, why do I write so much about the Holocaust?

The obvious answer is that I'm some sort of evil shit and like upsetting people, which is not beyond the realms of possibility. The unfortunate sub-plot to that though, is that if it were true, most of the people I would be upsetting would be Jews. If that was my purpose, then, that would make me anti-semitic. That idea bothers me a great deal because I'm really not. I have no gripe with any partcular nationality, group or race, because I think to have one is to be a simpleton and to over-generalise ridiculously. To be annoyed at the actions of Israel or AIPAC is not to be annoyed at all Israelis, that's common sense, just as to denounce the propaganda and rhetoric of the Wiesenthal Centre, or Elie Wiesel or The World Jewish Congress is not to denounce all Jews. I know some Jewish people and would be mortified if they thought I genuinely bore them some kind of racial grudge. If I say, 'President Mugabe is an arsehole', that's not an attack on everyone from Zimbabwe, is it?

I don't think that explanation, comforting thought it may be to people who think that moving away from Politically Correct sloganeering is to dance with the devil, holds up at all. I think the real reason for my Holocaust obsession is easy to understand. Its similar to many obsessions in its genesis. I used to bet quite a lot, to use a parallel and I remember meeting a compulsive gambler called Nigel, a regular in one bookies', who often talked about how one of the first bets he had ever laid had won him three grand. It was clear to me, observing his situation from the outside, that this was the root of his problem. This early positive experience and the enjoyment it had given hooked him in until the practice had become a habit. With me, I began to investigate the Holocaust as an ignorant outsider who knew only what most people know - what I'd been taught at school and what you see in the media. I read about 'denial' and thought 'nah, its a silly conspiracy theory', but as I quite enjoy silly conspiracy theories, I continued to read. I soon discovered that this silly conspiracy theory really has something to it. Seriously, this is not moon-landing hoax or death of Diana stuff, its real. And when you begin to understand it, it astounds you that you ever believed the original version of the 'event'. This rush of excitement, at finding a silly conspiracy theory that actually isn't, that's actually a real case of the suppression and manipulation of history, is what filled me with enthusiasm until reading about it became a habit. That's how it works. Nigel has his gee-gees. I have my ideas considered dangerous and subversive by mainstream society. Comme ci. Comme ca.

Anyway, I've made another minor breakthrough in understanding the Holocaust. Go to the taboo page, scroll down and read the second update, if you're interested. 

29/04/07 - Hands up if you’re religious.

Go on, you at the back, I can see you shyly moving your arm – don’t be ashamed to be different, everyone’s entitled to an opinion. That’s it, well done… No folks, this isn’t the day job encroaching on my web-space, this is the beginning of ‘it’.

People visiting my site for the first time will have no idea what I’m talking about, so I’ll explain. Recently I’ve had the feeling that I’m on to something, that some of my obsessions of the last few years have been drawing me towards a conclusion – an understanding, of some sort, of how the world works.

Well, I think I’ve got it. Or, at least part of it. And I've come to believe that all of us who have been brought up in a western liberal democracy are suffering under the yoke of religion. Some of us may recant or commit various crimes of apostasy, but our faith is still within us, showing itself in the guilt we feel as we turn away and the horror expressed by our fellows.

I’d like to begin by asking you if you know much about how religions work? If you’re in the UK, like most of my readers, you probably don’t, because we have become a non-spiritual, broadly secular society. Even many of those who classify themselves as ‘Christian’ here don’t really follow the faith, but apply the label simply as a matter of upbringing. So, for the uninitiated, here is a checklist of the key components of 'religion'.

1. A founding myth or story (ie the resurrection of Jesus or the meeting of Muhammed with the angel Jibril)

2. A set of laws and values which govern your life. (ie The ten commandments, the five pillars of Islam)

3. A set of practices and rituals designed to ensure you adhere to those laws (ie attending church, wearing headscarves)

4. Consequences for breaking those laws (going to hell, crucifixion etc)

5. Most religions also include a belief in some kind of omnipotent being with awesome power.

That final point is particularly noteworthy as although most mainstream, modern religions have a benevolent God, it was common among the ancient faiths to have ‘evil’ ones, like Kisin, the Aztec earthquake deity, who made the ground tremble and destroyed cities unless appeased by sacrifice, or Loki, the Norse God of wicked deeds, at whose altar Vikings used to burn the bodies of children. 

Of course, as Karl Marx famously recognised, also central to all religions is that they are used as a tool of control. ‘Worship thy God or bad stuff will happen’ people are told. The original ‘big brother’ who was ‘watching you’ was not the vide-screen image of an Orwellian dictator but the great creator in the sky, who would smite you down in righteous wrath if you engaged in too much naughty business.  

Well, the fact is, ladies and gents, that I have achieved enlightenment. Unfortunately it did not come to me beneath the Bodhi tree after years of self –denial. Neither did I chance upon it while wandering the foothills of the Andes surviving on a diet of peyote and iguanas. There were no claps of thunder or flashes of lightning to accompany my epiphany. It actually occurred while I was in my car the other day, on the A10 near Edmonton, while stuck at a red light. ‘Oh yeah!’ I thought, as the idea flashed across my frontal lobe. But the circumstances are unimportant, I feel. Are you ready for the revelation? I hope you’ve washed.

I have come to understand that in modern, post-war, western society, we are all deeply immersed in a dominant religion. Despite our pretence of absorption in the practical and the profane, we actually have a state-supported, faith-based belief system that eclipses national boundaries and grips the UK, the USA and Western Europe in its iron fist. It permeates the media, education (at all levels) and to some extent the criminal justice system. If you want to pursue any sort of profession, especially in the arts or media, you must succumb to its divine authority. If you don’t, you commit career suicide, are character assassinated and destroyed. This religion is of course, the religion of Political Correctness. And before you roll your eyes and cluck your tongue and say, ‘but that’s not a religion’, I would like to point out that I am not writing metaphorically or using some clever literary technique. I mean it. It is the religion of the modern age.

Like the ancient, pagan faiths, political correctness has an evil God. His name is Hitler and we are told that he once walked the earth as a man, snarling, insane and wicked to the very core of his being, like Ming the Merciless from Flash Gordon. Political correctness needs this evil God, the fear he inspires and the founding myth that accompanies him. Without it, it could not survive. So anoint yourself, oh shallow one, and be prepared to receive the holy words…

Yea! The destruction that Hitler wrought can never be forgotten. Let it be remembered that everything he or his followers ever did, said, or thought was evil. For he was pure evil and those who opposed him pure good. Yea! Let it be remembered that the most heinous of all his most heinous acts was the Holocaust, which can be compared to nothing ever done by other men, especially not the Israelis. Such an act could only have been done by him, for he was pure evil. Yea! Let it be remembered that he was a white man, from a western society! For such people are the harbingers of evil! Yea! We must fear the evil God, Hitler, for if we do not sacrifice to him, he will return and attempt to destroy the world once more! Yes, let it be known, in hushed words of awe and reverence and repentant fear, that Hitler can and will come back, for he is immortal. Let it be known that the slightest questioning of Political Correctness, the slightest criticism of any group other than white men, or the slightest concession, no matter how small, to any of Hitler's ideas will hasten his second coming! Let it be known that should the believers of our religion observe such transgressions, wherever and from whomever they may occur, they should remark upon them in the following way, “That is how it started in 1933”. All men must learn that any questioning of political correctness will sequentially and inevitably lead to murdering millions in bizarre and hellish extermination centres, the likes of which cannot practically be created by man. They could only be created by Hitler, who defied known technology and the laws of Science, for he is pure evil. These are the central beliefs of our religion. Question these and yea! You will become evil too.

Yea! Sacrifice must be made to Hitler, we must appease him and his memory. We do not ask for you to sacrifice your slaughtered oxen, or your children, or your free-with-the-Guardian-DVD collections, but the following. Yea! Accolytes! Apostles! Keepers of the Faith! Sacrifice your borders! Sacrifice your national identity! Sacrifice your safe neighbourhoods and allow your cities to descend into chaos! Sacrifice your culture and any pride you may have in it! Sacrifice the poor among your own people, for surely their needs are not as great as those who come from a minority! Sacrifice your flag, because waving it will certainly bring about Hitler’s return. Sacrifice any sense of history you may have in regard to your people’s wondrous achievements, for surely they are worth nothing compared to those who throw spears and live in houses made of dung. And above all, remember the most important sacrifice – that you, as a white man, have nothing to complain about – yes, you must sacrifice your right to dissent! Only minorities may complain and indeed, they should be encouraged to do so, as repetitively and self-servingly and tediously as possible, yet you must hold your tongue! For we know that when the white man voices dissent, Hitler soon reappears, like a goosestepping Godzilla, crushing whole nations underfoot and gassing innocents with his body odour!

Yea! In our devout, politically correct society, we hold these things to be self evident, based on the story provided by the sacred Nuremburg Trials, every word of which is true. (Except for the bits which have already been shown not to be). The great, holy trials were the work of pure good against pure evil and their story is therefore unchallengeable. We enshrine these truths in law and imprison those who question them, for surely they have succumbed to Hitler’s wickedness and must be punished.

Now join with me, my children and chant our holy mantra!

 
“Black good, white bad,

Jew good, Christian bad,

East good, west bad,

Woman good, man bad,

Zionism good, Nationalism bad,

Weakness good, strength bad,

Half-truths good, honesty bad.”

 
The sermon is over. Blessed are you who have witnessed. Go in peace. 

 

 
10/04/06 - To describe something as 'Orwellian' has almost become a cliche. Commentators remarking on politics, the media or the breakdown of community refer so often to Orwell's writing, particularly his most famous book, '1984', that it has become routine. The standard view of Orwell's vision is that it is a comment on life in a dictatorship, one of those demonised and deeply foreign, hellish nation-states from the past, like Stalin's Russia, or Hitler's Germany, where personal freedoms were eroded, people were dehumanised and the evil bureaucracy of the ruling elite reached into every corner of life. 'Big Brother'  remember, 'is watching you.'

For me then, this article, describing the ever-more widespread use of 'talking' surveillance cameras on Britain's streets made chilling reading. Not only is Big Brother watching us, it seems he is also now speaking to us. Yes, amazing as it sounds, wrongdoers are being hailed publicly over a tannoy in order to make them understand that they are being monitored. This is actually happening, now. Suddenly I find the phrase 'life imitating art' has taken on a sinister, new significance.

I also wonder what the disembodied voice of authority sounds like. It would be comforting, in a way, if it was brisk and Sergeant-Major-like, assertive yet quintessentially British, you know something along the lines of... "You lad, yes, you with your shirt untucked, don't even think about dropping that crisp packet. We take a bloody dim view of that type of thing around here. I've seen your kind before, sunshine. Now sort yourself out quick-time or I'll have your stinking, hooligan guts for garters." But I don't reckon they'd go for that. Too old-fashioned, you see. Too quaint. Too Windsor Davies from 'It Ain't Half Hot, Mum.' They'll probably decide to go for something really scary, to put the willies up the hardened, hoodie-wearing, Asbo-heads of today's younger generation. 

It would be the embodiment of my every nightmare if the camera's voice were calm, mechanical, yet tinged with faint menace, like 'Hal', the conscious computer from '2001, A Space Odyssey'. You know, its Friday night, you're on your way home, you go for a piss down a back-alley (come on - we've all done it) and suddenly, from above your head, comes an unsettling , soulless, monotone..."I'm sorry, Dave. I really can't allow you to do that, Dave. Please let go of your penis, Dave."

Perhaps there are plans to develop the scheme further in future. It's surely only a matter of time before some eager-to-please, young civil servant suggests mounting nine millimetre machine guns next to the cameras. A more aggressive approach could then be adopted, robocop-style... "Attention! Attention! A felony is in progress. The brown haired, 5ft 11 inch male on the bench. Do not move. You have been facially identified as David Smith and you have been observed smoking cannabis This is an offence under legal code paragraph 14 subsection 9. YOU ARE ENGAGING IN CRIMINAL ACTIVITY! (At this point a red laser-sight targets his heart, the dot unmistakeable on his clothing). Throw the drugs on the ground and put your hands above your head. (Sounds of weapons being cocked). You have 20 seconds to comply..."

(youth soils himself and throws drugs on ground, raises hands) 

"You now have 15 seconds to comply."

(youth becomes increasingly frantic, suspects computer malfunction, gets up to run away.) 

"Do not attempt to leave the area. (warning shot fired into ground) You now have ten seconds to comply. Nine. Eight. Seven..."

I'm really pretty freaked out by this. We already have the politically correct / liberal lobby telling us what we can say and think, we have wars waged for mysterious reasons ('We are at war with Eurasia - we have always been at war with Eurasia') and now we have talking cameras spying on us in the street. Could it be that the most 'Orwellian' society of all isn't some violent autocracy from the past, but is the one we are in? Our leftist, pluralist, western, 'third way' democracy, which purports to be so open and accepting and bending and kind? As I said a couple of entries ago, I'm approaching some sort of theory about this, I haven't worked it through yet and so don't fully know what I think about it all. But I do know that my desire to abandon the human race and go and live in a cave has increased about tenfold since reading that article. Maybe I'm starting to get old. 

02/04/07 - I've always been a fan of Louis Theroux, ever since he started doing the 'Weird Weekend' shows back in the nineties. His inoffensive manner disarms people and gets them to reveal things that they wouldn't normally give away. As such I've always felt he's at his best when dealing with the 'cult of personality'. His encounters with people like Chris Eubank, The Hamiltons and Jimmy Saville painted intriguing pictures of the faces behind the public masks. Last night, however, I saw a show of his which did not follow this formula, but was probably his most fascinating ever.

Louis travelled to America to spend three weeks with a family-run Christian church who preach a message of 'God's hate'. The Phelps family, from Kansas, believe that America is doomed because it accepts homosexuality. They therefore see every American death - (cancer patients, car accidents, still births, the lot) as God wreaking revenge on the sins of the nation. In order to make this point they noisily picket the funerals of American soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan chanting 'God hates gays' and 'You're going to hell' while holding up signs with messages like 'Marines are fags'. Unsurprisingly, this approach has won them little support from the mass of the American people. The Phelps' are nonchalent about their position as 'America's most hated family' and proclaim, to anyone who will listen, that it is only them, the sole purveyors of the true word of God (there's about 70 of them) who are going to heaven. All other earth dwellers, like, 6 and a half billion people, are going to hell. In addition to the gay community and the military, their specific ire is directed at those who have babies outside of wedlock, drug users and (it almost goes without saying) Swedes. No, that's not a typo - Swedes - people from Sweden - apparently they're all in league with Satan. I must admit I always had my suspicions - I mean, saunas, porn, the national obsession with crispbread. It all adds up.

Religion really is an absolutely amazing thing, isn't it? I mean some guys come along in the Middle East and preach love and forgiveness and acceptance of others but over a few thousand years people manage to twist that into all sorts of bizarre philosophies and actions. There's a 'Church of Elvis' in America too - where they believe that old mister cholestorol was the second coming. (Does that mean his death was the second going?). They sing Elvis songs and curl their lips in worship. There's nothing I can add to that to make it sillier than it already is.

Last week I watched the film, 'United '93' with an 'A' Level class, a powerful drama about the fourth plane hijacked on 9/11. I recommend it to anyone interested in the contradictions of religion. At the end you've got the muslim hijackers frantically praying to Allah as they steer the plane into the ground and all the Americans in their seats whispering Hail Marys and Our Fathers and you find yourself thinking "I'm sorry - but I think you've all got this a bit wrong - I don't reckon this is what Jesus and Mohammed had in mind..." 

25/03/07 - not so much of a random thought today, more of a message to anyone who may be considering getting in touch with regard to the taboo page. Since updating the page recently, by adding some links and pictorial sources to the 'holocaust denial' article, I have already received a couple of messages from individuals trying to engage in the sort of bickering-over-minutiae-debate that so dominates the subject across the internet. I would like to make clear a couple of things for the benefit of anyone who is interested. Firstly, I don't consider myself a 'denier' as such. I am simply reporting on the deniers' arguments, which I freely admit, I do find quite convincing. This is based on my reading of secondary sources from both sides of the debate as well as analysis of the available primary evidence which can be found online. Accusing me of 'unoriginality' or 'rehashing old arguments' is therefore completely moot. I am not claiming to be a trailblazer of the Holocaust frontier, but rather someone who is interested in the subject and is open-minded enough to take arguments and evidence at face value. In addition, I have no real interest in involving myself in potentially endless discussions about door-handle design or the technical details of the various cyanide sampling studies which throw up contradictory results. 

I believe that this has to be a fairly simple thing.

If 11 million people from various parts of Europe were taken to Poland, gassed and their bodies disposed of, the evidence should be stark. That's not the sort of thing you can do on the sly. There should be fields full of bones and teeth, huge soil disturbances where the mass graves were and clear, irrefutable documents. But there aren't. As far as I'm concerned, if you have to resort to arguing about trivialities, you may as well pick up your ball and go home, because you've missed the point. To argue against the revisionist case, you need to bring some proof of the existence of homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz, Chelmno, Treblinka, Majdanek, Belzec and Sobibor, which current historical opinion alleges to be the extermination centres. (Dachau, Belsen and the rest are no longer believed to have been 'death camps'). Also bring some proof that 11 million corpses were deposited in various parts of Poland. That's what the whole thing's about. Serious, academic, unemotional history demands that we believe only that which can be proven to be true. The fact is that even historians who support the genocide claim accept that they can't prove it. Its only those ignorant of the facts who discuss the story with certainty and absolutism. Jacques Baynac, for example, famously said, "evidence for the existence of gas chambers is at once rare and unreliable". His position is that, "If scholarly history cannot, because of the lack of documentation, establish the reality of a fact, it can, by means of documentation, establish that the unreality of this fact is itself unreal."
What he's basically saying, with this piece of tortured logic, is that history must try to prove that it is impossible that gas chambers did not exist because it cannot prove that they did.
The deniers' position is simpler (and more rational) - if you can't prove that they existed, then they didn't.  

19/03/07 - A while ago I decided to have a stab at being normal and got married. It was a silly idea and never stood much chance of success, but I mention it now because I was thinking about something that happened in those strange, stressful times and its seemed to have taken on a new relevance. My ex-wife was a Greek Cypriot and the first year we were together we spent the summer in Cyprus with her family. We had only been there about a week when there was a sudden tragedy, my ex-wife's Uncle, a high-ranking Cypriot police officer, was killed in a high-speed car crash. We drove from Larnaca to Nicosia to visit his wife and kids, as is the custom. On arrival we found the house to be full of relatives. I didn't speak Greek and had little idea what was going on and so stationed myself outside, in the front yard. Most of the day that I was there, as I shuffled from foot to foot and fiddled with my collar, there was an old man next to me who simply sat still, head in hands, lost in his own thoughts. He didn't speak to anyone and no-one spoke to him. It turned out that this was the dead guy's father, my ex-wife's grandpa, a grizzelled octogenarian who was faced with the soul-destroying prospect of having to bury his only son. Despite the lack of common language I looked in his face and had some idea of what he was feeling and that was enough. There was instant empathy and rapport.

Meanwhile, from inside the house, came the unrelenting sound of a woman's voice, wailing. She would holler a few words and then howl through her tears, shout a few more and then screech, holler, then cry, holler, then cry, holler, then cry - and she didn't stop. I kid you not, this woman, who it turned out was the dead guy's wife, my ex-wife's aunt, kept this going for about four or five hours. At one point, my ex-wife came outside to see me and I asked what the woman was shouting. The translation I received has stayed with me ever since. Apparently she was saying, "Oh my husband, you have left me, with three children to feed! You have left me and how will we pay for the house! There is no way I can afford the car payments now you have gone! Why did you have to die? We were just about to buy a new fridge..." You get the idea. It instantly left a slightly dirty taste in my mouth and when I learned that it is the Cypriot custom for family members to give gifts of money to those who have just lost their men, that taste got even worse. 

Let me ask you some questions and I won't pretend this isn't going somewhere, but please answer honestly - how would you respond, emotionally, to such behaviour? Would you feel pity? Or disgust? Maybe you're ambivalent. Which of the two grievers do you think was suffering more - the old man, with his head bowed, eyes turned in on himself, speaking to no-one, or the woman calculating, crying out for money? And who deserves respect? He who handled himself quietly, with dignity, despite the enormity of his pain, or she who sought to make a show of her grief, to make a form of theatre out of it, to advertise it, to profit, financially and personally from her family's tragedy?

If you're anything like me there'll only be one possible answer to those questions. And if so, you may be part way to understanding my views on the Holocaust and its place in the modern world.

12/03/07 - The trouble with creative energy is that it gets sapped by mundane activities. I often get up, fizzing with ideas and with a feeling of will to implement them. But the cereal / shower / traffic jam / work routine breaks it down. Monotony, repetition, the same old faces in the same old places. Its no good for the soul.

Anyway, I haven't sat down here today, almost a month after my last entry, to make excuses. As usual, I've sat down here to try to be honest with you, my readers. Both of you.

I don't know if you've ever done any Acid. But if you have, you may well have experienced that feeling of being really on to something, of having the world and all its twistings sorted in your head, but being unable to quite complete the loop. The knot eludes you.

I've been feeling that way for some time. And I haven't done any Acid for donkey's years. It began with my investigations into the Holocaust, which are still ongoing (see the taboo page) and from that has spread into wider and deeper channels of investigation. I believe, truly, that there is something quite bleak, quite ugly and quite sinister at work in the world. I see the shadow of it in many events, in terrorism and the wars that result, in the imbalance of the media and academia, in the policy decisions of the governments of certain states. Like the acid-trip-thing, I haven't quite tied it all up yet, but I can sense the links. Something is waiting for me, around the corner. Maybe its madness. Maybe I'm doomed to hunch over my keyboard writing chaotic drivel for years to come...or maybe, just maybe, its the greatest intellectual adventure of all time.

Stand by to find out.    

13/02/07 - In poignant mood, partly due to a bout of flu and partly due to just having returned from Iceland. Its an enchanting place, barren, bleak, yet beautiful. Hostile yet enthralling. I became fascinated with the ancient Norse sagas while there. And after immersing myself in tales of trolls, giants and the 'hidden people', the landscape seemed to transform. Rocks had faces on them. Trees appeared to walk. Maybe I'm just delirious. I think its time to dose myself up with Lemsip and lie down. 

On another note, congrats are due to Justin Timberlake, who emerged victorious from the 'who would you most like to see beaten up?' poll with an impressive 48.15% of the vote.

02/01/07 - Enough of the resolutions, enough! For the love of God, enough! The last posting was far too serious, so am going to start 2007 with another frivolous poll. (As we all know, there's nothing like a frivolous poll to raise the spirits - and believe me I am having to resist with every fibre of my being from lurching into a tawdry pun involving eastern europeans and vodka here). Last year I ran the very popular but offensive-to-some 'Which celebrity will die next?" poll, won by everyone's favourite incomprehensible, barrell-chested, wife-beater, Paul Gascoigne. It should be pointed out that the fella has thus far defied readers' predictions by still being alive. Haway Gazza.

This year I would like to engage your hearts and minds in the 'Who would you most like to see beaten up?' poll. (See above). The names there are my personal choices, but feel free to email me using the contact form on the home page if there's someone you'd like to see added. I'll let the voting run for a couple of weeks or until I get bored of it, whichever comes sooner.  

 30/12/06 - Well, the holiday season's nearly over and as usual, like many others around the world, I feel like crap. There's only so much alcohol, chocolate and assorted pastry dishes you can ingest during a seven to eight day period before it begins to weigh heavy on your being...Just gotta get NYE out of the way, then I am gonna live so clean... Seriously, other than a tendency to binge-drink, which will no doubt rear its head tomorrow night, as I find myself in some godawful dive in South-East London until 6 in the morning, I keep things pretty together. To be honest, I've never understood people who don't. The one thing the holiday period always shows me is that it wouldn't take too much of the booze / eating shite combination to end up as a total wreck. And that's not something I ever intend to be. Anyhoo, as I seem to be on a serious sanctimonious vibe today, here are three things to remember that will always stand you in good stead...

1. Every time you eat McDonalds you get a little more cancerous.

2. Every time you watch Eastenders you get a little more stupid.

3. Every bit of deception or manipulation makes the world a little less worth living in.

Happy New Year!

19/12/06 - There is a lot that's good about this country. And I'm actually being serious here. (Had a late one last night - too tired to make jokes). If you scroll down this page a bit, you'll find the entry I wrote for St. George's Day, which will give you a pretty clear indication of the way I feel. Once (27/10/04) I wrote that England's like an old Rolls Royce, but even if it is, its still very much in demand and is a model that appeals to an enormous range of people. I mean we have some level of justice here, which we all take for granted, we don't execute people in football stadiums with chainsaws, which they did until very recently in Afghanistan. Our streets are relatively peaceful - even in the 'chaotic' inner-cities you're unlikely to be confronted by mobs waving sub-machine guns or hand grenades, which could be a very real fear in many parts of the world. I suppose the weather could be better, but you get the idea...

One thing that really hacks me off about England though is this growing tide of self-loathing, political-correctness, which strangles free speech, individuality and fun. Its been coiled, Anaconda-like, around most of our major institutions, (Education, Law Enforcement, The Media etc) for the last twenty to thirty years and its getting to the stage where its squeezing the breath out of us.

I recently read about a report conducted by civil servants which concluded that the education system in this country is 'institutionally racist'. As I made my way through the newspaper article which outlined these findings my blood absolutely boiled. As any regular readers will know, I have been working in various guises, within secondary education, mostly in North London, for the last seven years and have seen, first hand, the lengths to which our schools go to try to accomodate ethnic minority students. I have taught an entire year of history, for example, to thirteen-year-olds at a school in Tottenham, in which every unit was designed to meet the needs of those of a non-British background. (One term was about the african slave trade, another was about Ancient Muslim civilisations and The Crusades and the other was about the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s.) It even reached the stage where some of the white students in the class complained. "Sir" they said, "when are we going to learn about our history?" I have worked at schools where there are special focus groups and twilight sessions run to try to raise the achievement of Afro-Caribbeans. I have worked at schools where some lessons are conducted in a language other than English - that's right, Science and Maths classes taught in Turkish or Arabic so as to give everyone as much of a chance as possible. Most of all, in every school I have worked at, the vast majority of teachers have been the sort of pinko, wet-liberal, do-gooding handwringers who would prefer to commit hari-kari than to do or say anything which could possibly be perceived to be 'racist'. The whole claim, which is based solely on the fact that black students, especially male ones, get in more trouble and achieve fewer passing grades, is absurd on its face. Anyone who is interested to read my views on racial disparity in educational achievement (and other areas) please see the relevant section on the 'Taboo' page, which I intend to finish soon.

Jeremy Clarkson has been another recent victim of the enforcers of thought-crime, as a result of comments  made on his TV show, 'Top Gear' in which he described a car as being 'a bit gay'. He has now been assailed by his employer, the BBC, who have apologised fawningly to those who were offended and said they will prevent such comments in the future. Sexuality, by the way, is the other topic that will eventually be covered on the 'taboo' page. I hope to have it completed within the next couple of weeks. Fortunately, I run this website, so I can't be censored. 

Whatever happened to the time when Monty Python could sing this and have an audience in stitches?

" Never be rude to an Arab
An Israeli, or Saudi, or Jew
Never be rude to an Irishman
No matter what you do

 Never poke fun at a Nigger
A Spic, or a Wop, or Kraut
And never poke fun at at a Polack...etc"

There's a few people around who take themselves just a touch too seriously...

29/11/06 - Apparently, there's been some sort of 70s revival this year. Fashion has turned its head, as usual to the past and seen fit to once more delve into the decade that brought us punk, disco and glam. Interior designers have tipped their hats (no doubt feathered fedoras worn at jaunty angles) to the period, with their championing of pod chairs and lava lamps. Music too, which seems to be stuck in some sort of 60s-90s derivative loop, has headed that way of late.

Not to be out-done, it seems international politics has jumped on the bandwagon, with the return of the Cold War. Strained diplomacy, double agents and bizarre execution methods are back, with this Russian-radioactive-Sushi thing. Fantastic. I encourage all my readers to wear furry hats and skulk around on street corners, looking out of the corners of their eyes and bemusing passers by with cryptic conversation openers like, "The swallow will fly south in winter" or "Are you also waiting for the Vostock train?".

Hopefully we will shortly be able to look forward to a similar return to 80s attitudes, during which we can all stand in dismal bars in the west end, wearing Galliano sweaters and talking bollocks (loudly), while amassing personal capital.

Watcha!

06/11/06 - despite the fact I've been through another lazy patch (I've been so tired, you know how it is, winter, work etc...) web traffic here seems to be hitting an all-time high. Lately I've been getting between 2 and 300 unique visits a day. I know (from messages through the contact form) that a decent proportion of it is in relation to the 'Taboo' page and that's to be expected - controversy is catchy, after all, like laughter, or the clap. Interestingly, though, it seems the most popular section on my site is 'Short Stories 3' which superficially seems peculiar, a little random. So why is that, I wonder? Is it due to the sparkling social commentary, the fascinating characters, the undoubted calibre of the literary content? Lets hope so.

I suspect however that it may be something to do with the fact that there's a picture of a naked transsexual at the bottom of the page... Oh yes - bollocks to the writing - stick up a bit of porn and they lap it up - I believe that's what they call 'appealing to the lowest common denominator'. Sheesh!

Come on people - I'm already accused by some of having a bleak view of human nature, there's no need to add fuel to the fire.

08/10/06 - I'd like to be one of the first to offer warm congratulations to Khum Chaibuddee, a Thai snake charmer who has broken the world record for kissing the most King Cobras on the head in succession. Mr. Chaibuddee kissed 19 cobras, one after the other, breaking the previous record of 11, which was held by some other utter maniac.

Those close to him, including his motivational trainer, fitness coach and lip-balm sponsor, have expressed concern that he has gone as far as he can in his chosen profession. "Its a tough field" said his manager, "Khum's been training for this day since he was a child. He's had to come a long way. To begin with he was only able to wink suggestively at maggots or ask slugs for their phone numbers."

In an unsavoury twist, several of the snakes are in the process of selling their stories to local tabloids. One, who preferred not to be named, said, "he just made it all sound so glamorous, I only wanted to be loved, like anyone else, but Khum treated me like a plaything. I feel used and dirty and I've lost all respect for him."

Having climbed his personal mountain, it is now believed that Chaibuddee may leave snake-kissing altogether and seek a new challenge. Numerous possibilities exist for a man of his talents and many feel he may be tempted to enter the less glamorous, but more demanding world of porpoise-frottaging. Dry-humping Iguanas is also a possibility.

Khum himself was coy about his future, in the wake of the serpent kiss-and-tell furore, insisting that he was thinking no further ahead than taking a well deserved beach-holiday break with his new lady-friend, a glamorous, long-haired Aardvark called Natinda.   

24/09/06 - After having avoided it since its release a couple of years ago, I finally capitulated and watched 'Green Street' last night. It was, predictably, maddeningly poor. The whole 'lets-be-avin-ya-you-f**kin-slag' genre of movie (to give it its industry name) should really have died a death when Guy Ritchie ran out of steam. How many more times will studios think its a good idea to get a bunch of middle class actors to swagger around London unconvincingly, wearing Stone Island clobber and white trainers? The guy who played 'Pete Dunham' couldn't even do a cockney accent properly and nobody in the movie looked remotely hard. Having said that, I must admit that the final sequence of Elijah Wood walking down a street in Manhattan singing 'bubbles' made me smile.

If any studio bosses are reading, (unlikely, but surely worth a punt...)I'd like to follow this successful formula by pitching Lenny 'the guvnor' McLean's life story, in a movie called 'Its a right old tear-up and no mistake, bruv' starring one of the blokes from Hollyoaks, (doesn't matter which, really) and with Leonardo di Caprio drafted in to play Roy 'pretty boy' Shaw. Perhaps we could also get HRH, Prince Edward, the Earl of Wessex to put in a cameo as Reggie Kray. Whaddya say? Ten million quid and I'll make it. 

16/09/06 - Well, it seems another step has been taken on the road to Holy War, as Pope Benedict XV1 has managed to enrage the Arab and Asian world with some controversial remarks about Islam. Apparently, the old fella, whom we must remember is German, a nationality not traditionally associated with tact, subtlety or open acceptance of other cultures, has referred to a speech made by a 14th Century Christian emperor which said the Prophet Muhammad had brought the world only "evil and inhuman" things. This has been met with predictable vitriol from various world leaders, including Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan and Abdullah Ahmad Badawi of Malaysia.

What raises the whole thing almost to the level of scripted comedy, however, is the fact that the parade of scowling Muslims who have, as usual, jumped at an opportunity to condemn and express outrage, seem to completely miss the irony of their actions. I am reminded of the Monty Python sketch where the customer in the 'argument room' is frustrated that he is not getting his money's worth. "You're not arguing," he says. "You're just contradicting whatever I say." "No I'm not" comes the reply.

Here we have a situation in which powerful Islamic figures are aggrieved, perhaps justifiably, that western leaders and media sources stereotype their people as kalshnikov wielding, wildly gesticulating, frothing-at-the-mouth hotheads. But then they choose to express those concerns not through calm discussion, or logic, but through ...anger. Nice one, guys!

Here's a couple of tips for the muslim world. Firstly, if you are really bothered about your image in the West, forget the Pope, who nobody rational gives a stuff about anyway - perhaps instead - and its a crazy idea, I know - you could get your fundamentalist friends to stop blowing things up (or trying to). I have a feeling that might help with the PR side of things. In addition, maybe if you don't throw tantrums every time someone says something you don't like, if, just for once, your representatives could laugh something off, or shrug it aside with genial nonchalance, you might earn a bit more respect.

Duh! 

04/09/06 - Sad times indeed. The summer's over and Steve 'Crocodile Hunter' Irwin has died, after an attack by a Stingray, of all things. Being a long-time subscriber to a number of crap, cable TV channels, I have avidly followed Stevo's five-year progress from scary-animal-baiting weirdo to international megastar. Forgive me for going slightly misty eyed, but I do recall our first cathode-ray encounter as if it were just last week. Oh yes, ahem, it was a warm day, rather like today and the sun beat down from between the clouds like so much golden...well actually it was a Sunday morning and I was hungover. It took me half an hour to tire of world championship snooker highlights and begin remote-flicking. And there he was, like an oversized toddler. Wedged between several stations showing reruns of 'Ready Steady Cook' and 'What Not to Wear' was this short-wearing, over-enthusiastic madman grappling with an unfeasibly large snake. "This guy" I thought to myself, "is a complete idiot."

Mr. Irwin did little to disperse my first impression as he then turned to the camera, unblinking, as if he were coked up to the eyeballs, or possessed by the devil, and said, "he's a beauty isn't he? Let me just put my hand in his mouth and show you his teeth." He then proceeded to do exactly that, whereupon the snake bit him.

It then emerged that the snake in question was extremely poisonous and Stevo had to remove himself from the scene to be given emergency treatment, all of which was filmed and included in the programme. While receiving his antidote, Irwin casually showed a number of other bite-scars on his body, including one on his ankle received friom a Komodo Dragon.

I remember suspecting then that one day we might hear of the man's demise, in circumstances similar to those described by this morning's headlines. Yet despite the feeling of fate around the news, I would like to say, genuinely, that over time I came to enjoy his programmes a great deal. Probably stupid, but undoubtedly brave, he made nature programmes that were engaging, exciting and challenging. Kids loved him. And anyone who can get kids to watch anything other than 'Dragonball Z' deserves cult status. He leaves behind a three year old son, too and as the father of a child the same age, that strikes a chord with me.

The one thing that always impressed me about him was that he clearly enjoyed what he did. So few of us possess that kind of passion for our work. I think that's what made him entertaining. If there's any comfort for his young family right now, it must be that at least he died doing what he loved.  

24/08/06 - 'Big ball of ice, you're just a big ball of ice', 'Planetary status, you're having a laugh' and 'You're small and you know you are..." were the drunken chants heard in Prague yesterday, as the lobby of astronomers who've campaigned for many years to have Pluto officially 'demoted' celebrated their hard-won victory at a meeting of eggheads in the Czech capital. It seems that, for a number of reasons which I don't find particularly interesting, but you can read about here, if you like, Pluto is now classified as a 'dwarf', alongside several other orbiting rocks, meaning that our solar system now has only eight (count 'em) recognised planets.

I find this worthy of comment because it means that textbooks will have to be rewritten and lots of people will have to change their belief in something thought to be absolute. Similarly (and this is old news, but I've only just read about it), a fishing boat in South Africa in the 40s caught a stumpy-limbed, bizarre fish called a Coelacanth, which was believed to have been extinct for 30 million years.

Please remember too that these are scientific revisions. They belong to the discipline which, above all others, deals only in facts and attempting to prove them. 

My point is, as Voltaire once said, when analysing any subject intelligently it is worth bearing in mind that "doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is an absurd one."

11/08/06 - According to the conservative 'Human Events', the ten most harmful books of the 19th and 20th century are:'The Communist Manifesto', 'Mein Kampf', 'Quotations from Chairman Mao', 'The Kinsey Report', 'Democracy and Education', 'Das Kapital', 'The Feminine Mystique', 'The Course of Positive Philosophy', 'Beyond Good and Evil', 'General Theory of Employment' and 'Interest and Money'.

I suppose its not surprising, coming from a Conservative organisation, that Karl Marx features so prominently and if you were looking for reasons for his inclusion, you could suggest that he indirectly led to the creation of communist China and the USSR and therefore the atrocities that were committed there under Mao and Stalin. Mein Kampf is there for similar reasons, but 'Beyond Good and Evil'? Come on! That's probably my favourite philosophy book. The Kinsey Report? That's just an investigation into human sexuality.

I would suggest that anyone who knows a few things that are going on in the world at present would suggest that there are three glaring omissions from that list, three books which have created more conflict, suffering and misery than any others. They are the bible, the koran and the torah.

08/08/06 - Modern advertising seems to be getting increasingly silly. Companies are aware that these are cynical, media-savvy times. We've all been bombarded by advertising since birth and understand how it works, so you can no longer just have Burt Reynolds holding a glass of scotch, smiling at several simpering damsels, with the slogan 'McFadden's whisky makes you more attractive to the opposite sex' and expect sales to multiply. No-one falls for that any more. So the smartarses in the creative departments have adopted two strategies. They either attempt to produce pieces of utterly abstract high art, with no relevance to anything, presumably in the hope that viewers will be so disorientated by it they will go out and buy the product by accident, (I'm thinking of Guinness and most brands of perfume) or (and this is the really clever bit) they make shit up. Recent examples of this second strategy include 'boswellox' (apparently a hugely important ingredient in face cream), 'nutrillium' (i can't even remember what this is, lets say it helps cure genital warts) and my personal favourite, 'bifidus digestivum' which is, allegedly, a form of friendly bacteria found in drinkable yoghurt. This is a ridiculously patronising approach. Not only have they made this up, they've given it a name which they hope will trigger certain reactions among their target audience (young, health conscious individuals) by including 'digestivum' within its psuedo-latin title. Does anybody believe this? What's next, 'Kellog's rice crispies, now with added flagella goodforyouatis' or 'Tropicana orange juice is a great source of keepyouhealthyus'. Shoddy, shoddy, low grade manipulation, put out by people who think they're cleverer than everyone else. Well, I, for one, am not having it. No way. They can kiss my boswellox. (See what I did there?)

25/07/06 - In fact, following on from last time, are there any rules left to break?

19/07/06 - Been offline for some time due to a house move so there's been another huge gap in updating. If I have any regular visitors left, I apologise (again). I've also used the downtime to do a bit of thinking and have concluded its probably best to steer clear of difficult and heavy subjects on this page from now on. I've decided to create a new page - 'Stalking the Wild Taboo', on which I'll discuss all the nefarious ideas that I'm not supposed to discuss publicly and which offend some people. So if you enjoy dangerous debate, click there. This page will from now on return to the conversational titbits and philosophical anecdotes for which it was originally intended, rather than being a series of long articles.

So to begin... on reflecting on the torpor of modern youth, the dearth of creative energy in art, music and fashion, the lack of a concerted movement that causes outrage and fear among the elders (whoever they are), I think its important to remember that you you have to know what the rules are before you can break them. 

14/06/06 - As anyone who knows me or visits my site regularly will appreciate, I am a fool. The cornerstone of my foolishness is a belief in the importance of principles. Principles are more important to me than people. Isn't that ridiculous?

I mean, can you go out for a beer with your principles, or rely on them to help you if you're in a spot of trouble? Will your principles make you laugh or help you feel accepted? Of course not, all you can do with them is repeat them to yourself (and anyone else who'll listen) as some kind of spiritual affirmation. But, there it is, that's me.

One of these principles of mine is to tell the truth about the world as I see it. To me that's just hugely important. I've always believed that its only by starting with truth that anything is achievable. Growth must begin from the root. But the trouble with truth is that it can be elusive and uncomfortable, to some it can be offensive and to others, who have spent years of their lives investing in lies, it can even be dangerous. But to me its pretty much the only thing worth having. Give me truth over love any day. (More foolishness?) Love is superficial and weak and tends to fade, like a hit of mdma, but truth is like steel. If I could fill myself with it, I would. 

Since my last posting, my general interest in the Holocaust as an apparently untouchable piece of history (see below) has turned into something of an obsession. Simply by trawling the internet, I have stumbled across things which have amazed me. I now firmly believe that this topic MUST be discussed publicly and I find the fact that it isn't being openly debated very worrying. There is clearly, to any reasonable person, enough logical evidence suggesting that homicidal gassings did not occur in German concentration camps to make it at least worthy of discussion. Yet time and time again, authorities tell us that the subject is closed. People will say, just for writing this, that I'm being anti-semitic.

If you have any interest in history, official lies and the attempt to establish truth above propaganda, I suggest you click the link below this entry and watch the video that commences. It's a film made by a young Jewish (yes that's right...) investigator called David Cole who toured the concentration camps in 1992 to assess the credibility of the holocaust story. Being Jewish and wearing the traditional skullcap, he was able to ask difficult questions without arousing the suspicion that a blonde haired, blue eyed journalist (for example) would. The revelations made in the video are controversial to say the least. Interestingly, he was subsequently vilified by sections of the Jewish community for being a 'traitor'. In particular an organistaion I was previously unaware of, 'The Jewish Defence League' who brazenly threatened him with violence, in a disgraceful internet article which issued a fatwa-style request for information of his whereabouts. It is amazing to me, as someone who believed that freedom of speech was an accepted western value, that such a thing was allowed to take place, especially as at the time Mr. Cole apparently became a minor public figure, making several chat show appearances in the States. Unsurprisingly, as the pressure upon him mounted and fearing for his own safety, Cole took the sensible option, recanted the findings of his films and returned to anonymity, yet despite this, his documentaries and the answers he received from his interviewees make compelling viewing. They stand for themselves. It is a testament to the levels of censorship and thought control that exist in our media that David Cole's programmes have not been broadcast on Channel 4. I challenge anybody to watch this film and suggest that Cole is anything other than rational and logical. At the very least it suggests that the questions he raises MUST be asked. So here's the link, it will take an hour of your time to watch the entire clip. I hope if you click, you will do so with an open mind.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5730629725967885378

24/05/06 - Ever since November last year there’s been something bothering me. I’m referring to the event of the British historian, (or ‘pseudo historian’, depending on your point of view) David Irving being imprisoned in Austria for the crime of ‘holocaust denial’.

There are many issues at stake here and I have read numerous relevant articles, from various sources, which take up different positions, yet the most striking thing to me, on engaging with the topic, is that no-one, not even Irving himself, is actually ‘denying’ the holocaust. Having spent five months trawling through a variety of material on this subject I have not found one commentator who claims that the holocaust didn’t happen. What people such as Irving suggest is rather that it didn’t happen in the way we have been told it did. In particular they tend to focus on the total number of deaths, (usually suggesting it to be much lower than the official figure) and the majority cause, citing typhoid and malnutrition rather than gas chambers. As such, they prefer to be known as ‘revisionists’ and without getting bogged down in semantics, I think they have a point. To my mind, someone who says, ‘the holocaust never happened’ is a denier. Someone who says, ‘the holocaust did happen, but I disagree with the standard historical version in the following ways and here is my evidence for holding such views’ is not denying anything. They are simply offering an alternative interpretation. There is a massive difference between the two.

To set this in context, it needs to be understood that the process of ‘revision’ is a natural part of History and has gone on for centuries. To give one example, from thousands of possibilities, The Battle of Agincourt, immortalised by Shakespeare, was believed for many years to be a monumental English triumph in the face of overwhelming odds, in which their Army was outnumbered four to one by the French. This version of events was told again and again and again for generations until historian Anne Curry, through exhaustive research into payrolls, suggested that the numbers were actually only three to two in favour of France, having been exaggerated by patriotic Brits.[1]The matter has been debated sensibly and rationally by various individuals and the prevailing consensus now is that Curry is right.

On the subject of the Nazi treatment of Jews during World War Two, however, persons in authority have apparently decided that history is untouchable. It would seem that here the official version of events is the ONLY version and to say otherwise is a crime. Forgive me, but I am reminded of Orwell’s ‘1984’, (we are at war with Eurasia, we have always been at war with Eurasia...) in which he states that ‘freedom is being able to say two plus two equals four, everything else comes from that.’

Now read this bit carefully, because this where it gets really interesting. The contradictory fact in all of this is that holocaust history is not absolute and has been revised on several occasions. Confused? So was I...

Immediately after World War Two and the Nuremburg trials, the world was told that six million Jews had been killed by the Nazis, of whom four million had met their deaths at Auschwitz-Birkenau.[2] This figure was cast in stone, literally, on a plaque outside the camp’s gates which read, “Four million people suffered and died here at the hands of the Nazi murderers between the years 1940-1945.”[3] This plaque remained at the site until 1989, when, as the result of an ever-growing body of evidence suggesting that the figure was an exaggeration, it was quietly removed and replaced with one which reads, “Forever let this place be a cry of despair and a warning to humanity, where the Nazis murdered about one and a half million men, women and children, mainly Jews from various countries of Europe.”

Now Maths was never my strong point, but you don’t have to be Stephen Hawking to see that that constitutes a pretty big revision. I mean, we’re talking about two and a half million people here, almost half of the total we were told the Nazis killed altogether. Mr. Irving is in prison for saying something similar, yet that piece of revision is now official, set in stone. Following the precedent set by Irving’s arrest, shouldn’t that mean that logically, the curators of the Auschwitz museum be decried as ‘holocaust deniers’ and locked up? Who are they to dare to alter the previously existing story?

Another case in point regards the infamous macabre tale that Jewish carcasses were being used to make soap (from body fat) at various camps. Apparently not content with murdering their victims, the Nazis also felt the need to desecrate their bodies in the most sick ways imaginable. I remember being taught this at school myself and in fact, as recently as three years ago, when teaching the subject to fourteen year olds, found this to be still presented as fact in the history text book I was using. However, in April 1990, it seems that professor Yehuda Bauer of Israel's Hebrew University, regarded as a leading Holocaust historian, as well as Shmuel Krakowski, archives director of Israel's Yad Vashem Holocaust center, confirmed that the human soap story wasn’t ever true. Camp inmates "were prepared to believe any horror stories about their persecutors," Bauer said,[4] going on to relate that this nauseating fabrication was apparently started after the war by the Russians, who misinterpreted the letters "RIF" stamped on bars of German-made soap as standing for "Pure Jewish Fat" ("Rein judisches Fett"). In reality, the initials stood for "National Centre for Industrial Fat Provisioning" ("Reichstelle fur industrielle Fettversorgung"). This absurd bit of conclusion-jumping was then perpetuated by various parties, including the famous 'nazi hunter' Simon Wiesenthal, for forty-five years, despite the fact that for the Russian interpretation to work, the letters would have to have been 'RJF' not 'RIF'. As this spelling error and the misconception that sprang from it formed the basis of the entire sorry story, it has now, after chemical analysis of the soap also repudiated the claims, been abandoned. Yet surely these leading Israeli authorities on the Shoah are guilty of ‘denial’ and should be given custodial sentances? Irving's theories aren't so different - and just like him, they have had the temerity to challenge what was previously regarded as proven truth.

There are other examples of this too, but I won’t list all of them for fear that people will assume I am taking sides on the holocaust question – which, I would like to emphasise, I am not. Despite my research into this subject over the last few months I do not feel that I possess the expertise to posit any sort of judgement on exactly which elements of the holocaust story are true and which aren’t. It may be that all of it, as it is presently told, is true. It may be that very little of it is. But that is not my point.

My point is that it is a piece of history and should, like all history, be open to review by anyone willing to investigate it. If David Irving or anybody else believe they have some evidence or a new angle from which to draw conclusions, they should be heard and then, if necessary argued against rationally and sensibly, with counter-evidence. Anybody who says otherwise is advocating thought-control and dare I say it, fascism. We can’t be selective and claim it is only acceptable for certain people to revise history, that’s a ludicrous standpoint. In the free world, if that’s where we live, it is everybody’s right.

Linked to that, I found the comments of Deborah Lipstadt, the holocaust historian who emerged victorious from a slander case with Irving, saying that, “I am not interested in debating with Holocaust deniers… they are not historians, they are liars."[5] to be remarkable, coming from a respected academic. She is resorting to the classic ‘ad hominem’ position – attacking the speaker and not their argument – which is regarded within critical thought as being fatally flawed. It’s like saying, ‘I’m not going to listen to Tony Blair’s new education policy because I don’t like him.’ If the whole world took the same approach as Lipstadt and the Austrian judicial system, we would truly be living in some sort of Orwellian, totalitarian nightmare.

In summation, what I’m trying to say is that as uncomfortable or offensive as it may be to some, historical revisionism can never be anything other than healthy. Stifle it and we’ll be back to burning books pretty soon.

[1] Anne Curry. Agincourt: A New History, Pub Tempus, 2005, ISBN 0752428284 [2] The New York Times, April 1945 [3] See pics. [4] The Nizkor Project http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/ftp.py?camps//stutthof/soap.05 [5] Deborah Lipstadt quoted on the BBC website 4/01/06 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4578534.stm

15/05/06 - I know this probably won't mean a lot to many of you, but I really feel the need to post up a few lines about the FA Cup final on Saturday, because I was there and other than the birth of my daughter it was probably the most emotionally intense experience of my life.
This was a team of mostly young, English players, backed by a proper, traditional fan base, playing one of the big glamour clubs with international support and megabucks to spend. This was a side only just returned from relegation, who had not been in contention for a trophy for 26 years, against the European champions. This was supposed to be a one sided no-contest, similar to Manchester United's 4-0 humbling of Wigan in the league cup final earlier in this season.
But it wasn't.
I will never forget how close we came or how I felt when we went two up and I found myself hugging a complete stranger.
I will never forget how our fans were only silenced for a few seconds by their equaliser at 2-2 before rising up to a man and raising the roof again.
I will never forget how every time they pegged us back, we went at them harder, how even at 3-3 in extra time we ran them ragged.
I will never forget either how Marlon Harewood played the last 10 minutes hobbling with injury and how Roy Carroll, our sidelined keeper, ran on to the pitch in his suit to lift Anton Ferdinand off the turf after his missed penalty, burying the youngster's face in his shoulder.
I will never forget how we stayed for the presentation of the trophy - not sneaking away to cry into our pints as losing fans usually do - and were still louder than the scousers.
I will never forget the standing ovation we gave Steven Gerrard as he lifted the trophy that was so nearly ours. He may have caused our dreams to fade and die, but my God did he play well.
Neither will I forget how in the post match interviews, nobody connected with West Ham moaned, made excuses, blamed an official or complained about an opposition player.
We may not have won the cup, but we weren't losers.
Mourinho, Wenger, Jol, Ferguson and your respective fans, despite your delusions of grandeur, we're better than you and we showed the world that fact in Cardiff. We have something you lost a long time ago.

We showed you how to do it.

Irons!

01/05/06 - Apologies all round, as usual, as despite promising to get back to updating this page weekly, its been two weeks since the last entry as I was caught up in FA Cup semi-final excitement last weekend and completely forgot to post. Still, its probably just as well, as the response to my 'English' question wasn't particularly enthusiastic. I had only two replies of note, one of which paraphrased the (very) old chestnut about Englishness being 'driving a German car to an Irish pub to drink Belgian beer, then have an Indian meal' etc, etc while the other was a semi-hysterical rant from someone who's written to me before (in a similar tone, when I posted a random thought about 'holocaust hype', last year) who basically thinks I'm a Nazi, which I can't really be arsed to discuss.

So, after all that, I guess I have to conclude that the overriding finding of my enquiry into the nature of modern Englishness is apathy, which was fairly predictable, I suppose. Let's face it, we'll probably all be citizens of 'Greater China' in thirty years, so who cares?

Anyway, time to sign off, must dash as I've got to go and invade Czechoslovakia.

16/04/06 - Today I think I'll write on a topic which fascinates me and is somehow very dear to my heart, but I realise may only be also of interest to medal-wearing war veterans and that group of skinheads who meet up at 'The British Lion' pub in Deptford every Friday evening, but so be it. If we're being honest, small audiences have never bothered me in the past, there's no reason why I should let them concern me now. You see, my dear reader, next sunday is St. George's Day. That's right, this country, my home, which comes in for so  much criticism both from internal and external commentators, which is accused of intolerance yet houses as large a mixture of nationalities, religions and cultures as can be found anywhere, which is supposedly stuffy and snobbish and violent and thug-like all at once, the land that many other nations hold responsible for much of the world's ills - speak of England what ye will, for all her faults she is my country still - this people, whose origins lie in the 4th century when invading Germanic Angles, Saxons and Jutes conquered Romanised Britain and pushed the Celts out to the fringes of the Island, celebrates its National Day, yet unlike the scenes in Brixton for Jamaican or Nigerian Independence Day, or Haringey when the Turks or the Kurds or the Albanians or whoever all go nuts and jump up and down, unlike St. Patrick's Day, when we all drink green Guinness and sing 'Molly Malone', there'll be precious little celebration. Why? Because we have learnt to be ashamed of our national heritage.

Through a sense of guilt over the wrongs committed in the name of the empire, we have been taught to despise ourselves and to ignore our history. (And what a history it is!) From the people who built Stonehenge, a complex astronomical instrument, in 3000BC and used the runic alphabet (the world's first known form of written communication) to the great military leaders, inventors and explorers, this nation has consistently led the world. But this is seldom remembered with anything other than irony. Our schools teach our children about the ancient Egyptians and Greeks, even the origins of Islam in the Arab regions, but not about the Druids, the Picts or the Anglo-Saxons. The manner in which our nation rose steadily over the last 1000 years to become one of the most powerful and influential on the planet is apparently something to hide. Most of us, especially the comfortable middle classes, would prefer to wear a fez and belly-dance up the Edgware Rd than admit to a sense of their own national identity.

And is this shame justified? I think not.

Obviously, as a great imperial power, from the 18th to the 20th centuries, atrocities were committed, we were a powerful nation and abused our power, as throughout history all powerful nations have done. Yet there is no need to dwell on that. In that respect we were no different to the Romans, the Greeks, the Ottomans, the Tartars, the Moors, the modern day Americans (to some extent) and many, many other nations or races who have dared, since the dawn of time to venture beyond their natural borders. The fact is that where we are different to all those others, is in how we have given the world industry, medicine and enormous cultural influence, ranging from organised sport through to music and literature. The English sense of justice and fair play is still recognised in every corner of the planet, as demonstrated by the fact that people come from all over to seek refuge and asylum here when experiencing difficulties in their homelands. But do we ever mention any of that? No, for fear that someone will look upon us with horror and call us 'nationalists', a word whose true meaning has been strangled by politically correct hyperbole.

It has even got to the stage where we are ashamed of our flag, associating it with far right extremism rather than what it is intended to represent. This prejudice has reached the point where certain groups are now suggesting that we abandon the St. George Cross (which was really the flag of Christianity, not any particular nation, flown by Richard the Lionheart at the crusades and used ever since) and return to the white dragon, the flag of England from the country's official beginnings in the 4th century, to the final days of Harold Godwinson, the last of the Anglo-Saxon Kings, in 1066.

So anyway, what I'd like to know from you lovely, intelligent, witty people, in the week prior to St. George's Day, is what it means to you to be English. (You don't need to be English to answer that, either.) If I get any interesting ones, I'll put them up next week. In the meantime, here are some quotes, to get you going...

“…there is no such nationality as English” (John Prescott, politician)

"Ask any man what nationality he would prefer to be, and ninety nine out of a hundred will tell you that they would prefer to be Englishmen". (Cecil Rhodes, governor of Rhodesia, now Zimbabwe)

"By this sacredness of individuals, the English have in seven hundred years evolved the principles of freedom". (Ralph Waldo Emerson, American Philosopher)

"Let not England forget her precedence of teaching nations how to live". (John Milton, poet)

“The extraordinary consensus of opinion against the English on the score of their greed, stupidity, their cruelty, their snobbery…is thoroughly well-founded and arises basically from the fact that the English...are intolerably arrogant and overbearing." (Hugh McDiarmid, Scottish writer)

“The Battle of Britain was twenty-three years ago and the world has forgotten it. Those young men, so many of whom I knew, flew up into the air and died for us and all we believed….What did they die for? I suppose for themselves and what they believed was England. It was England then – just for a few brave months…The peace which we are enduring is not worth their deaths. England has become a third rate power, economically and morally. We are vulgarized by American values. America, which didn’t even know war on its own ground, is now dictating our policies and patronizing our values.

We are now beset by the “clever ones”, all the cheap frightened people who can see nothing but defeat and who have no pride, no knowledge of the past, no reverence for our lovely heritage…Perhaps, just perhaps – someone will rise up and say, “That isn’t good enough.” There is still the basic English character to hold on to, But is there? I am old now..I despise the young, who see no quality in our great past and who spit, with phoney left-wing disdain, on all that we, as a race, have contributed to the living world…I say a grateful goodbye to those foolish, gallant young men who made it possible for me to be alive today to write these sentimental words” (Noel Coward, playwright). 

07/04/06 - oh dear, oh dear, its been such a long time, hasn't it? I've decided, despite my misgivings about the actual point of the internet, to start updating this page again more regularly - once a week at least - but before I move on to the meat of today's fascinating ramble, I thought I should offer an explanation as to my prolonged inactivity here. The thing is, guys, I've been swamped with inspiration. Oh yes, that's right, not kissed by a muse or having my mental light bulbs charged, but swamped by a Niagara-style deluge of ideas. About two months ago I just picked up a ballpoint and began scribbling in an old exercise book I had lying around. I've now filled six of them and a loose leaf pad too, with the novel that will supplant everything else I was working on as my second. I really feel reinvigorated by this project - I've rediscovered my enthusiasm, which can't be a bad thing. So although I've not posted up random thoughts for a while, its all gravy, as they say.

Anyhoo, in the meantime I've been running a poll as to the identity of the British celebrity who will die next. I'm pleased to announce that the one and only Paul Gascoigne of 'howay the laads' fame, is the winner, with a smashing 35% of the vote. Many congratulations to Paul, whose prize, two bottles of armagnac and a handful of barbituates, is winging its way over to him by courier as we speak. Further to that, I recently received an email from someone who was incredibly upset by my fame-death-poll and called me 'immature' and 'deliberately offensive'. I wrote back denying the charges and saying that to think that they'd have to be a 'stinky bum-bum', obviously, but in fairness, this individual got me thinking. I mean I have written quite a bit of stuff that people have taken umbrage at. I've covered paedophilia, necrophilia and all manner of crime at one time or another. Even 'The Rainbow Maker' was descibed as being 'overtly racist' by one reviewer. I suspect that my next book will sail the stormy seas of controversy too. But is it something I do on purpose?

It took a short time for me to crystallize my views on this, but here it is...No, I don't. The fact is I don't ever write with the intention of offending people, BUT i don't write with the intention of not offending them either. I just work with the world as I see it. People are entitled to react however they want, but equally I am entitled to write what I want. Quid pro quo, Miss Starling, quid pro quo...

26/01/05 - Ahh...the cult of fame. It seems, in the modern era, that if you are a celebrity in need of PR, there are only two options to you. One is to die, preferably slowly, a la George Best, the other is to go on some sort of reality TV show, a la George Galloway. (I know which option I'd go for). Personally, I ignore all reality TV, as it only serves to increase my psychopathic urges. So I've chosen to focus my attention on those who pour fuel on the flames of their notoriety while retaining some shreds of dignity. This can only mean, ladies and gents, that without procrastination or further ado it is time to embark valiantly on the sickest vox pop ever... Which celebrity will be the next to kark it? Whaddya say? My money's on Paul Gascoigne or Johnny Vegas, with someone like Barrymore as a dark horse. Please use this voting tool thingy or mail me an alternative name through the contact form on my homepage.

 28/12/05 - Its been a while, so I thought I'd better add something. The problem is, folks, I'm getting a bit disillusioned with the internet and find myself spending less and less time on it. I mean it has the potential, with its limitless boundaries on freedom of expression to be the most exciting tool of communication ever known to man, yet just like TV, or the Press or the film industry, 99.99% of it is utter crap. Most community sites, for example, are populated not by interesting people exchanging original ideas, but by dull saddos with too much time on their hands, satisfying their need for some kind of interaction by winding each other up or engaging in pointless chit-chat about their humdrum everyday realities. Why anybody would want to spend all day comparing pictures of each other's cats is completely beyond me...

So yes, ladies and gents, once again you heard it here first (unless you actually heard it somewhere else first). We blew it. The internet is shit.

28/11/05 - Those who spend their lives improving on their weaknesses find social acceptance. Those who devote themselves to improving their strengths may, or may not find glory. 

25/11/05 - There is nobility in fighting an oppressor. But there is none in continuing to fight, for fighting’s sake, after the oppressor has capitulated.

21/11/05 - Strive for strength. Strength is not something to be ashamed of. And those who possess it should not adopt an apologetic manner. The only way to be truly noble is to be strong - it is so easy to be fair and considerate to others if you are weaker than them! It is a form of defence. To be stronger than someone and treat them as an equal shows true quality of character. 

19/11/05 - Religion is mankind's greatest conceit. If you need to find evidence of our blind self importance in the face of nature, read the bible, or the Koran, or the Torah...

03/11/05 - I am nearly lost for words about this, it just defies description or analysis. Below is an article from yesterday's 'Yorkshire Evening Post', which, if fictional, would be worthy of an award. Unfortunately, its completely real. I think it's quite possibly the funniest thing I have ever read...

A drunk who claimed he had been raped by a dog was yesterday jailed for
12 months by a judge. Martin Hoyle, 45, was arrested by police after a
passing motorist and his girlfriend found a Staffordshire bull terrier,
called Badger, having sex with him at the side of a road in
Huddersfield, West Yorkshire.

Prosecutor Ben Crosland said the couple had stopped to help because they
thought Hoyle was being attacked by the animal. But when they got closer
they saw that he had his trousers round his ankles, was down on all
fours and the dog was straddling him from behind.

"The defendant mumbled something about the dog having taken a liking to
him," said Mr Crosland. "The couple were extremely offended and sickened
by what they saw." Another passing motorist contacted the police and
Hoyle was arrested as he walked with the dog down the road.

Hoyle, of East view, Marsh, Huddersfield, told police "I can't help it
if the dog took a liking to me. He tried to rape me."

He repeated the rape allegation at the police station and added "The dog
pulled my trousers down." Hoyle, who has had a long-standing alcohol
problem, was jailed for 12 months after he admitted committing an act
which outraged public decency.

His barrister said Hoyle had no memory of the incident because of his
drunken state, but was now very remorseful and incredibly embarrassed.

Jailing him, Judge Alistair McCallum told Hoyle
"Never before in my time at the bar or on the bench have I ever had to
deal with somebody who voluntarily allowed himself to be buggered by a
dog on the public highway. Frankly it is beyond most of our
comprehension. It is an absolutely disgusting thing for members of the
public to have to witness."

29/10/05 - It is the doing of terrible deeds that makes the man a devil, not the conjuring of terrible thoughts. The cultivation of mental integrity is a waste of time, so revel in your flawed humanity - conjure, conjure!

19/10/05 - The trouble with honesty is that it is subjective. To set great store by it is therefore to set great store by yourself. In times of weakness and doubt it becomes as expendable and easily shed as dry skin.

04/10/05 - did a personality test the other day - don't know why - it asked me a load of random questions and i had to pick preferences from lists of words, that sort of thing. Anyway, this is what it came up with...

Mark is a direct, forceful, competitive and logical individual with a high drive to achieve. Mark is not constrained by the need to be popular, so he will often bypass others in order to achieve his goals. He is decisive, demanding and continually seeks out challenges. Mark tends to lack natural empathy and can be extremely critical of both himself and of others. He is fast-paced, likes to move forward with tasks and is results-oriented. Mark can be straightforward and aggressive with those whom he perceives to be not pulling their weight or as incompetent.
Mark is motivated by power, authority, responsibility, recognition and results. He needs room to move, tangible and challenging goals and a wide and varied scope of interests. Companions will need to be competent and quick-paced with goal-achievement as their first concern. Mark has an innate fear of failure and could become uneasy when confronted with people he perceives to be too friendly or indirect.
Mark is a direct, plain and logical communicator. His style is straightforward, demanding and challenging.

Now I don't know, not being in a perfect position to judge, but I reckon that's f**king accurate. And seeing yourself summed up in a few paragraphs like that is pretty weird...

I remember reading somewhere that there is a very high correlation between the personality test results of creative people and those of serial killers. Hmm...

04/09/05 - Reality TV has plumbed new depths. I've just watched the first five minutes of 'Celebrity Shark Bait' and had to leave the room in disgust. Be warned, I feel strongly about this and there's a rant coming on. I'm not  going to waste space discussing the indignity of the minor personalities involved. Trying to increase your fame / popularity by doing these types of shows seems to be commonplace these days. What next, I wonder, 'Celebrity Gynaecology'? 'Celebrity Self-Mutilation'? 'Celebrity Matricide?' No, I'm not dwelling on any of that, just skipping straight to the point, which is that anyone, semi-famous or not, who thinks its a good idea to sit in a cage and dick around with sharks makes me incandescent with rage. An Aussie once told me you need 'balls of steel' to do it. And I think that's the attraction for most shark tourists, the glamour, the imagined courage, like a lion tamer of old.

Great whites are one of the planet's oldest surviving species, the closest thing to evolutionary perfection that exists. So, to those who indulge in this activity, or would like to, I say...to get kicks by sitting in a reinforced steel cage, baiting these magnificent animals with chum and fish guts, so you can rub their bellies as they circle and film them on your fucking underwater camcorder, just so when you return to the mundaneity of your office and neighbourhood, you've got something interesting to show your buddies over drinks - 'Dude, that must be such a buzz!' 'Oooh, Justin, you're such a daredevil.' 'Oh. not really, I just did it to understand myself better' - is a total piss-take of everything that should be sacred. Where's the respect -the respect for nature, the respect for life, the respect for yourself? Are you so up your own arse that you think this proves anything about you as an individual? You're taking the pinnacle of the food chain and turning it into a circus act. Why not take a hoop or two and see if you can get it to jump through them? Hell, maybe one day you can tame them and ride on their frigging backs, while they balance beach balls on their noses.

Yeah, right.

Ask yourself this. If somehow your smug technology failed, and the mighty fish ripped into your cage with its rows of saw-like teeth and the thrashing of its tail, what would you think then? If somehow, through some force of divine justice, it smashed the protective metal from about your body like balsa wood, knocked the stun gun from your hand and the aqualung from your back, reducing the situation to the way it should be, to you and a 17 foot long, 4,000lb master predator, capable of swimming at 20mph, with a cavernous mouth full of revolving rows of three inch inc