How very true.

A tweet the other day offered a sad reflection on modern attitudes and values. It read something like "Pakistan, if you want the world to take notice of you, just stick a cat in a wheelie bin!"

Ha ha.

Coincidentally, I've come across this joke twice in different places over the last week or two, so I think it's trying to tell me to share it -
A man says -
"My wife and I have found the secret of a happy marriage. Twice a week we go out to a nice restaurant, eat a good meal and have a few glasses of wine.
I go Tuesdays - she goes Fridays!"

What goes around...

Apparently we are not using our libraries as much as we used to, and this, coupled with councils' need to make savings, has led to the idea of library services being handled by other outlets - pubs and supermarkets have been mentioned. But if memory serves, didn't Boots used to run a lending library many years ago? Nothing new under the sun, you see.

I have a cunning plan...

One of the (many) points of disagreement between the coalition partners is over Trident - or rather the question of its replacement. Which got me thinking... You may remember an episode of the comedy series "Yes, Prime Minister" , where the question of actually using our missiles was under discussion and Jim Hacker is presented with a series of escalating scenarios (...the Russians invade West Germany - you press the button? No? OK, the Russians invade Belgium, Holland and France - you press the button? ...and so on...) making the point that it is virtually impossible to imagine a situation in which we would actually initiate nuclear war, so Trident's raison d'être is purely one of deterrence - the so-called MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) approach - if you launch nuclear missiles against me, I will launch mine against you, and although I may be razed to the ground, you will be too. Which means that we don't actually have to have a nuclear capability, all that is necessary is that other countries think we have it. After all, this is a strategy which served Saddam Hussein well for a good many years, even though it backfired against him in the end. So the plan is clear - we announce that we are going to develop Toasting Fork (son of Trident - geddit?) , we debate it in Parliament, we make all the necessary noises and go through all the appropriate motions, but we don't actually do anything, and spend the money instead on other more worthy things. As the meerkat would say - Simples!

The body in the woods.

Conspiracy theorists have had a field day over the death in 2003 of Dr David Kelly, who was reputedly the source of the BBC's claim that the dossier making a case for the invasion of Iraq had been "sexed up" in an attempt to make going to war more publicly acceptable. He was found in woodlands with a slashed wrist and having taken an overdose (though probably not a fatal one) of painkillers. There was no inquest, but an inquiry was ordered by the Government and this (the Hutton Inquiry) determined that he took his own life. Strangely Lord Hutton later ruled that all the evidence from the inquiry should remain secret for 70 years. Like I say, meat and drink for conspiracy theorists, and many of them have gone somewhat OTT, but there are a couple of points which I myself find strange and a little disturbing. Firstly Dr Kelly was not wearing gloves, and yet there were no fingerprints on the knife with which he supposedly cut his wrist, nor on the bottle containing some of the pills he had ingested. Secondly all the evidence is that he was a devoted family man, and yet he had made arrangements to meet his daughter that evening and it seems inconceivable that he would not have left some message of apology for her. There are calls for a proper inquest, which might help clear the air. Let's hope we get one

Another fine mess...

I'm sure there's a myth or a fable or something where some starving unfortunate is taken to a table laden with food, only to have it snatched away just as he is reaching for it. We seem to have got into much the same situation with University places don't we? A generation of kids have been brought up to believe that if they carry on at school after 16, work hard and get good A-level results, they will be able, if they wish, to go to University. But what's happened? An awful lot of them have done just that only to find that the Universities are full and there are no places for them. How has this situation arisen? Is it the result of "dumbed-down" A-level papers resulting in a plethora of A and A* grades? Is it down to more students being encouraged to take
"soft" non-academic subjects to inflate a school's position in the league tables? Is it simply the result of insufficient forward planning? Whatever, those who find themselves out in the cold this autumn have every right to feel angry.

Le retour

Nice cottage. Weather could have been better but didn't stop us doing anything. Went to Corfe Castle, Swanage and Poole and to Beaulieu to see the motor museum which was quite something. My abiding memory though will be of the number of animals just wandering around all over the place - not just horses as you might expect, but cattle. donkeys and pigs - all just strolling around in the road and on the grass verges. Very rural to a townie like me.

Les adieux

Well I'm off for another week with the kids. Nothing exotic this time - a cottage in the New Forest. Hope the weather holds up. Feeling quite positive about it this time. Will report back.

Justice?

Are you really innocent until proved guilty? That's the basis on which our criminal justice system is supposedly grounded. Unlike Scotland, we don't have a "not proven" verdict, which essentially means "the evidence isn't strong enough to convict you, but we're pretty sure you did it". So what do we make of the refusal to grant any compensation to Sion Jenkins for the six years he spent in gaol? The facts are that he was tried and convicted of the murder of his foster-daughter, but that conviction was later quashed on appeal and a new trial ordered. At that new trial, and again at a second new trial, the jury failed to reach a verdict, and so, as is normal in such circumstances, the prosecution dropped the case, and Mr Jenkins walked free. The guidelines for granting compensation state that it should only be paid where someone has been shown to be "clearly innocent". Where does that leave Mr Jenkins? His original conviction was quashed, so we can forget that one, and at both new trials he was not proved to be guilty - so according to the rules, he's innocent. I'm not quite sure what adding the word "clearly" is supposed to achieve - you're either innocent or you're not. It rather smacks of "not proven" doesn't it?

Dog in the manger.

Southampton Football Club have been left in bad odour following an attempt to make money by banning press photographers from their ground, and making newspapers wanting to show photos of the match, buy them from their "official" photographer. Pretty stupid really to go up against the power of the press, and The Sun newspaper in particular retaliated by refusing to use their name, and headlining their report on Saturday's match, which they lost to Plymouth, "Opposition 0, Plymouth 1". A local newspaper had the bright idea of sending a cartoonist to the match to do sketches of the action. Thankfully Southampton seem to have seen sense and backed down.