Will Barak Blink?

Today Hillary Clinton officially concedes defeat to Barak Obama. This might be the first clear sign of his sweeping to power in the election against John McCain later this year. I have to express grave concern about this. My concern is that he doesn’t have a grasp of the realities of the Middle East, and that is the biggest single problem facing an incoming American President. The one thing that must not be allowed to go wrong is the Middle East, or we will all pay a terrible price.

Let me take the positives first. It would be a wonderful step forward if America were to prove itself rid of its abhorrent racist past by electing its first black President. Obama is also clearly capable of being a spellbinding and amazing public orator, able to sum up emotion, common sense and a clarion call with disarming charm and power. Obama is a fresh face, unbound and unsullied by the strictures or deals done in the back rooms in the past.

Obama looks good, and that’s a big plus. Unlike Bush, who looked like a putz, Obama looks like a President. You cannot exaggerate the importance of visual perceptions. If I were wrong you would have seen some bald Presidents and Prime Ministers since Churchill and Eisenhower, but you haven’t.

And yet, with all these pluses I have a sneaking suspicion that just as McCain seems to have no grasp of economics, (well that is what he said) I have the same feeling about Obama and his lack of a real grasp of the Middle East.

I am concerned because, for years, questionable people surrounded Barak Obama and he did nothing about it. This group could be called Neo-Anti Cons and was led by his radical preacher friend, the Reverent Jeremiah Wright, who has a long history of race hate and anti-American sermons. Also this week a fundraiser for the Democrat nominee, a Syrian born property developer, Antoin Retzko, was convicted for corruption in a Chicago court. This is another questionable friend for the nominee; Obama seems to have way too many such associates for comfort.

I am not questioning Obama’s right to be friends with whomever he likes, but we do have to seriously question the man’s judgement of people. Obama did, immediately cut all ties, and did return the money donated by Retzko to charity, but again he has opened himself up to attack. Perhaps he has disassociated from these lunatics, villains and thieves that appear to have populated his world, a little too late.

In the example of Reverent Wright, his church appear to have had some very questionable friends from the far extremes of Islamic intolerance, like Louis Farrakhan. This man has soul mates in the leadership of Iran and has openly expressed his extreme and Nazi like anti-Jewish and anti Israel attitudes. Obama had years in which he could have pulled away from these people, but didn’t do so until political exigencies forced him to do so.

I recall my rabbi (she has since moved to another congregation) making a sermon from her pulpit, which I disagreed with. I articulated this difference of opinion to her. We wrote to each other and talked about our views. If I could do this so should Barak Obama have done so, there is no excuse for a man of principles to remain silent in the face of evil. But this leads us to ask, were his views different from those of his crazy Reverent.

At best Barak has proven himself to be a politician like any other, disingenuous. At worst he has been lying to us all, and the reason he didn’t protest at his preacher’s outrageous statements was because he agreed with them.

I do not share the liberal myth that George W. Bush and Tony Blair got it wrong with their “wars” in Afghanistan and Iraq. I think we needed to do more, earlier and better.

Let’s also get our history right. Whether you like it or not the United Nations Security Council and NATO were fully in accord with the action they led in both places. It is a fact, these were not illegal wars, and they were sanctioned.

But, for the liberal left, it appears that historical facts don’t matter, they are more selective. They will howl in anguish that the reasons given for the wars have since been disproved. I question that rationale also. There had been weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The question is what happened to them. Between the two Gulf Wars enormous stocks of these weapons were dismantled. The man supervising the location and destruction of the nuclear program was from the Atomic Energy Commission, and was himself of Arabic origin. This man and that group clearly stated that there were stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction and much of the stockpile was destroyed. We do not know where the rest of it is, either buried in the desert, or transferred to a friendly, neighbouring country, such as Syria or Iran.

Before any sceptical reader claims this to be a fabrication do remember that Iraq parked its entire air force in Iran when the first Gulf War began, and never managed to fly it home. It should also be remembered that Israel recently destroyed a secret Syrian nuclear facility that no one else had ever said existed. Take this in addition to the admitted facts surrounding Iran’s reaching out to become a nuclear power and you have the environment that Obama enters.

The next canard thrown at Israel, to level the playing field, is that Israel has never admitted or denied that it has a nuclear deterrent. The argument goes, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. There is no equivalence. Israel has never threatened any of its neighbours with destruction, but its neighbours constantly threaten Israel. As Benjamin Netanyahu said, " If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel. "

The liberal left constantly claims that Israel is not a legitimate state. It’s as if they think that if they constantly repeat this lie that the country will be de-legitimised and then will cease to exist. Wait a second that is exactly what they are seeking to achieve. It is not only becoming an accepted, politically correct chant of the chattering classes that Israel is always wrong, and shouldn’t have been there in the first place.

Sadly for these people Israel is not just going to be vaporized, or conveniently commit national suicide. It is a legitimate state that does have a Jewish majority and was voted into existence by the United Nations. It was the first state to receive this honour. Since that time Israel has much more to be proud of than to be ashamed about. That’s about all you can demand of any country.

If Barak Obama were to win the election you can be certain that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the other leaders of Iran will quickly test him. In case your memory is incredibly short you should read the Iranian leader’s statement of last Monday in which he repeated his prediction that the “criminal and terrorist Zionist regime” would soon disappear off the map.

We saw the result of a response to this explicit threat when Israel’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Transportation and Road Safety Shaul Mofasz, responded to a question about Iran. Mofasz was born in Iran, and has a thorough knowledge of military reality having served the Israeli Defence Forces as a Lieutenant General and Chief of Staff. He speaks with some authority, as he knows both the mindset of the adversary and the military rationale behind any such need to attack. He stated, “If Iran continues its programme to develop nuclear weapons, we will attack it.” His comments struck fear into the oil traders. Their reaction to this plus the news of America’s unexpectedly high jump in unemployment pushed up the price of crude oil by $11 in one day. Ironically the headlines demonstrated the perversity of the global perception, “Oil hits record price as Israel threatens Iran” was the heading in today’s Daily Mail.

We live in a world turned upside down. Where black is white and insanity rules. Imagine a situation in which your neighbour constantly threaten to kill you, burn down your house and destroy your family, and then scatter the ashes. You go to the authorities and they tell you, that despite this same neighbour killing many people like you in the past, not to worry he doesn’t really mean it. You then tell the authorities that if this man shows you his loaded gun you will have no alternative but to stop him using it. You then get tried and convicted for threatening him! That’s what the world is currently doing if they blame Israel for any of this madness.

My central theme here is that the Middle East will decide the future for us all. The Middle East is the place we must pray our leaders get it right. It isn’t the economy stupid, as Bill Clinton once said, when describing what single element would decide his last election; it’s the Mid East, which decides whether we all live, or die.

The test of Obama is liable to take place against a background of escalating tensions between the West with Russia, which is beginning to flex its newfound economic muscle. This scenario is eerily reminiscent of the situation President Kennedy found himself in when Khrushchev tested his resolve with the placing of the nuclear missiles in Cuba. Before we all get to see who blinks first Obama needs to make it perfectly clear that he is not going to let his country, or his allies be pushed around. If he doesn’t show iron resolve at that point we will all face a very uncertain future.

Do we trust our very existence to Barak? This is a man of uncertain judgement of character. What does Obama really believe? When push comes to shove, will Barak blink?

Liz Rymer - Higher Education Lecturer Responds

Sometimes I get an overwhelming response on something I’ve written but one note stands out from the crowd. This is one of those occasions. Yesterday’s article about how Higher Education is working in the UK generated a large number of comments from all different types of people. Those of you who wrote unanimously agreed with my article.

However, there was one response, which articulated the general response of almost everyone who works within the academic field and that came from my friend and previous colleague, Liz Rymer. I reprint her comments, with her kind permission, below.

Liz is a teacher who really cares about her students, as do all of the good lecturers I know.

“I largely concur with your (TK’s) musings - however, I want to add to it.... we have been experiencing a marked decline in the standard of education in our 'recruits'. My (educated) impression is that these young people are being short-changed by the schools. I was told by our Dean that 'we don't have a selection process; we recruit'. Meaning that our institution, and I'm sure many
others outside the Russell Group do not interview - we look at credits - if a potential student has enough, they get on; if not, they don't. This assumes that the student, having passed A levels, has the necessary aptitude to study for a
Degree - by and large, they don't.

In a great many of our students, we are finding a poor standard of literacy, a complete lack of self-awareness and absolutely no idea what independent study at HE level actually entails.

It is not their fault.

It is the fault of a system that pushes ill-equipped students into HE, compounded by the fact that league tables and pass rates dominate every teacher's [and lecturer's] life. Retention rates at HE level have hit the headlines this week - the 43% who do not complete are testament to the fact that they are not ready to take on the responsibility, nor do they have the academic ability (even a BA in Media requires this!) to deal with what is required of them.

I am deeply saddened by all this - these young people are being forced through a sausage machine, modules are dumbed down, students that should by rights fail, are given slim passes to assuage the Governors and HEFCE and keep the money rolling in. Education is not a business, it should never be predicated on money.

Students are not looked upon as people (with aspirations and hopes), but as beans... and whilst the bean counters are running the show, it will only get worse.

I hate Tony Blair and I blame him and his acolytes for this, bastards all.

Lecture over!!

Liz Rymer,
H.E. Lecturer”

Thank you Liz, all I can add is that I agree with almost every word you write. Except I don’t hate Blair, I hate the fact that we have a government that just doesn’t listen to anything except the echo of it’s own voice.

Too Knolwedgeable?

Education is something about which one should be objective, but I guess I’ve become too knowledgeable to remain objective.

University entrance in the UK is a thorny subject. Most people who pontificate on it are equipped only with ignorance and bias, as they are about modern degree programs. Having worked extensively in the British university system and to some extent overseas I do have some expertise in this area.

Some myths; not all degree courses are easy and were much tougher in the past. Different, in some cases yes, but easier, no.

Media, sport, leisure etc. are all soft subjects that are not worthy of being on any university curriculum. Not true. Media falls within the creative industries sector that now accounts for about 10.4% of this country’s Gross Domestic Product. It seems pretty important to me, even, dare I say it, vital that we educate and train our young people to service and grow this super successful sector of our economy. The same case can be made for sports and leisure, ever growing parts of our society. How are we going to excel if we don’t educate?

When I was a kid something under 4% of our school leavers had places available for them within the British university system. That number has increased by more than tenfold. Therefore there are more opportunities, for a more varied series of courses, in a disparate plethora of guises and places. Currently it is more like America than our own past.

We have very strict rules of how to keep some kind of parity between the different courses at different universities. This is not achieved on a trust basis, as might have been the case in the past. Now there are major internal and external inspections conducted of a very thorough basis. No detail escapes the attention of these bodies. I have been through this process on several occasions and as they say in the proverbs, no one expected the Spanish Inquisition!

Each course also has its own Exam Boards and External Examiners to keep the course team honest. These inspections are, at least, annual, and can be more often if necessary. You cannot serve beyond 3-4 years in the capacity of External Examiner as familiarity might tend toward chumminess and collaboration.

In addition to all of this there are course documents for every aspect of every course, and these are distributed to academic institutions, the teaching staff, and above all others, the students. If anything doesn’t meet these written requirements there are several methods of putting matters right. This system is rigorous and has worked well.

The result of this is that there is some measure of equivalence between, let’s say, a Criminology course in two different universities, wherever they are in the country. As a consequence if a student graduates with a 2:1 honours degree at any of our universities we know they had roughly the same education. It is true that the standards vary from one place to another, but not so that they are unrecognisable, one from the other. This variation is at its most exaggerated between the 15 top universities and their newest counterparts.

But the truth is that the British system tends towards feudal towers of power, silos of knowledge, jealously guarded by the different heads of school. These schools sometimes appear to be led by gentlemen who combine the wisdom of youth with the energy of old age.

In the newer universities these schools were not purely agglomerations of subjects or programs of study, but more likely, were the local Polytechnic educating in the more technical knowledge sets, mostly vocationally. These were converted to Higher Education, university status in the last 15 – 20 years. Each of these brought with them their own ethos and history, and usually their own campuses, which have since been rationalized and generally rebuilt as part of British education’s huge capital growth.

One of the problems most of the new universities have experienced, to varying degrees, has been the retention of their newly recruited students. Some institutions have reported up to 50% drop out rates by the end of year one. 20% is a more common figure. I believe this is a by-product of totally inappropriate recruitment procedures. If there were a more rigorous interview procedure and a better understanding by students of what their courses would entail this would lead to more square pegs in square holes. Putting the right procedures in place might be counter-productive when you are being put under pressure to recruit larger cohorts. Large swathes of our educational establishments have had to recruit ever more students, into bigger campuses, satisfying an ever moving set of targets from government, consumers and commerce. All this is to be achieved with less money per student than previously.

There is another, inescapable conclusion that has been largely ignored. This is that too many young people who are simply not suited to academic pursuits are being pressured into pursuing higher education when they don’t want to do so, or are incapable.

During my work as a part of the degree validation team from Britain’s excellent Open University Validation Service I was sent to examine a university program in a German city near Lake Constance. It pointed the way to a different type of university experience that we might do well to imitate. There the Professoriate didn’t select their intake. Employers, who sponsored the program and the students, made their own choices from amongst their young staff. They generally selected people who they considered would benefit from higher education. The selected staff had the option of going back to school. If they agreed to do so they faced a very rigorous education that was broken down into six month sections over a couple of years, with no holiday breaks. After the first six months of study the students were sent back to their commercial companies to put into practice what they had been learning. They then had to write reflectively about this when they returned to academia. This then escalated in difficulty and complexity until they were of much more worth to themselves, their commercial enterprises and most of all, society.

I had the opportunity to explore the university, this course, the sponsors and the academic leaders. They were a might impressive bunch. The sponsors overcame my reticence about their method of recruitment that had resulted in a zero drop out rate. In comparison with Britain there was total involvement by commercial partners at the most senior of levels. I sat with the bosses of major corporations for several hours whereas in the UK you would be lucky to meet the junior Human Resources officer for an hour. During lunch we were introduced, in private, to a cross section of these German students. They were erudite, bright, appreciative and very aware of the benefits of their university course. I asked them their ambition. I expected to hear that these super bright and committed students would be seeking senior appointments within the businesses, which had invested so much time, energy and money in them. Imagine my surprise when they almost unanimously expressed the desire to come to London to work in our creative industries. Where did we go right after doing so much wrong?

As Marty Feldman, the gifted comedian who I had the honor of playing soccer with many times during the early 80’s said, the pen is mightier than the sword, and considerably easier to write with.

Sepia Memories of Friendship

Beginning about fifteen years ago I started to meet friends from my childhood. It started when I was editing a small video series I had produced in London. Someone saw my name, and remembering me from our mutual childhood he contacted me. His name is Roger Miller. I recalled a tall, blond, thin guy, but then that was when he was young. Time passes, and now Roger, although still tall, is no longer the proud owner of a head full of lustrous blond hair, and you couldn’t call him thin, but underneath the years he’s still the same Roger I lived one street away from. I suppose we all carry some carbuncles on us now, and perhaps a few pounds of excess baggage. But when I look at Roger I still see the hopeful teenager, and I guess he feels the same way about me.

Then I was looking for a house a few years later in Stanmore, the same district I had spent some of my formative years. The real estate agent told me that the house I was looking at was also being reviewed by another couple, and that they would be at the agency later the same day. I heard them mention the name Nigel, and that being a pretty unusual name, I asked whether it was a man called Nigel Schneider, and the woman clearly thought I was toying with her. It was indeed, the same Nigel I had last seen a bit more than forty years before at our secondary school, Harrow High School for Boys. Years after which he had been the blind date I had set up with my girlfriend's best friend, Avril. I remember that particularly well as I later married that Avril.

I followed up and Nigel and I met. It was reassuring to discover that his memories of school and adolescence were the same as mine. Up to that point I had begun to think I must have imagined some of the strange and deviant teachers it was our misfortune to encounter. Along with the good memories we had endured paedophilia from some of the senior staff that no one believed. I remember writing about this for our unofficial school magazine, Fanfare, which I produced with another great friend of the time, Michael Elton. Our publication was soon brought to an end despite it being a big success. We told our parents about the constant groping of some of the male staff, and in those less enlightened times, we were ignored. It was only when our headmaster was arrested for importuning outside a Gentlemen’s public lavatory in Harrow and was, as a consequence, banned from teaching at any boys’ school were we believed.

Some things have changed for the better, and the control of inappropriate adult supervision is certainly one of them.

More recently I received a communication from two friends who I went to primary school with. Jeff Gitter and Neville Spiers. The school was Holland House in Edgware, on the outskirts of North West London. These two venerable gentlemen hadn’t seen each other in nearly fifty years. At their reunion my name came up, in the spirit of whatever happened to Tony Klinger. They knew I had gone into the entertainment business but nothing much more. Whilst they raised my name the partner of Neville, soon to be wife, (mazeltov for later this month!) Roz Bluestone, overheard. Earlier that same day she had been in contact about the charity showing of my film, Full Circle, for the charity she works at, World Jewish Relief. By ridiculous fluke she was able to tell the guys where I was that day!

Some people call that kismet, but in our vernacular we would call it bashert, our way of saying an event is fated or predestined.

We have since followed through and become friends once more. But I have to admit that when I look at Neville particularly, I see the eager ten or eleven year old and not the middle aged man. I wonder if that’s why it’s so particularly comforting to rekindle these old relationships. It’s like throwing on a comfortable old sweater, you know it isn’t the most fashionable shape or colour, but it feels good, smells better and keeps you warm. I wonder if he sees the grey haired me, or the small boy in the pictures he had kept of us? We were both in the boxing and soccer teams, and we were small and nervous about getting hit on the nose. My mother used to let me go to school on boxing match days with the admonition, “don’t let them hit you on the face!” I did try mum, no one ducked lower or more often than me, but still they tried to hit me, the bastards. Happily they didn’t connect too often on the Klinger proboscis, as I only lost once.

I remember my grandfather’s friends telling me, “hit them on the nose and in the kishkeh, they’ll sprout some claret and be sick and it’ll be all over! Roughly translated it meant I should hit them on the nose to make it bleed and in the belly. Schoolboy amateur boxers and their families never did understand that it’s best not to eat for many hours before a fight. I have to admit that in my mind I was boxing like Cassius Clay (later known as Muhammad Ali) but I was floating like a bumblebee and stinging like a butterfly.

But in the small world of Holland House we were holding our own and building happy memories. Looking back its hard not to see everything through a rosy glow of happy memories. Of course the world was not in sepia, and the sun didn’t always shine, but it was a simpler world, and there seemed to be a clearer distinction between right and wrong. There was less grey, more black and white. The world was better for this clarity and it certainly felt better. Wouldn’t it be great if our present society were to rediscover some of those forgotten core values of civility, courtesy and honesty?

The Arrogance of Fame

I have known a great many very successful and famous people in my life. I think that many of these people go a little crazy. I was watching the actor Wesley Snipes after he had been sentenced to a term of three years in prison for failing to file a tax return and non- payment of taxes. Apparently he failed to file over an elongated period. Like the next man I fully understand anyone’s desire to minimize the amount of tax they will legitimately pay, but who but an egomaniac or just a simple maniac, would think they could simply decide not to pay tax? That’s what Wesley did; he genuinely believed he could simply refuse to file his tax return and pay up.

I was once traveling in a helicopter, being piloted by a singer from a world famous rock band when he, looking down at the traffic jams on the road below us from his Olympian height, asked me, without irony, “I don’t understand why everyone doesn’t have one of these.” He had no sense of irony as he continued,” Do you understand it, I mean, its so much faster than being stuck in the traffic?”

Have you noticed that the super rich and pampered amongst our number seem to have a smooth shine to their faces as if nothing worries them? This is sheen beyond Botox. I think it comes from believing that you’re inherently superior to anyone else. Of course this is spectacularly obvious in Beverly Hills, where I was situated when I wrote this article. Even the pet dogs there are richer than most mere mortals like you and me. I don’t think that I’m imagining that they even bark posh.

People who were edgy and interesting, like the author, J.K. Rowling, become smoother than the finest cashmere, and they also lose something, call it reality. I was once quite friendly with a very well known novelist, Wilbur Smith. My late father, Michael Klinger, produced two of his books into films, Gold and Shout at the Devil, and I worked on them in a line production role. Wilbur was a lot of fun, and quite a character. After he became a giant success he appeared to grow a carapace that I’m confident he views as simple self-protection. The truth is, and I am concerned, that Wilbur shares the belief of the super successful that his pooh no longer smells. Rest assured Wilbur, it does. While I’m on the subject of Wilbur, it does seem a little odd that he has chosen to dedicate his books to each of his wives of the time as if they are the only woman in his life. I haven’t checked but does he change this dedication to reflect the current partner when a book is reprinted?

Famous people usually start out as a lot of fun when they still have a real sense of their place in the world. Perhaps their original peer group imbues them with a sense of their real place in the world that is lost when the moneymen and fame groupies surround them. Take yourself too seriously, and it’s over. The more money and fame that a star accumulates the less likeable he becomes. When a star has a huge amount of fame and money you can guess at the result. I’m sure that these stars genuinely mean well in their commendable charity work but that doesn’t excuse their arrogance and rudeness elsewhere or make someone a saint.

This is not always the result and generally it isn’t when the person concerned is secure in themselves and their ability. A solid family life back home will help. It also helps when the famous person is intelligent. That is not always the case. Many younger stars would do well to study and emulate Michael Caine, who never became a caricature of himself and as a consequence he is still one of the good guys. But for all their money and articles in Hello and OK magazine telling them how great they are, most celebrities can’t grow a bigger brain, however hard they might try. The result is generally the same, when the fame goes, the luster lessens and the money vanishes or diminishes, and the big star becomes just like everyone else, they are left alone, with their mirrors, checking the sagging jowls, and the missing family and friends.

Electing the Unelectable?

Electing the unelectable. That’s what’s happening in the USA later this year. Of course the definition depends on who you’re speaking with. For those who like Obama they will tell you it’s inconceivable that McCain has a chance. That’s if you entirely discount the chances of Hillary Clinton, who the Democrat party appear determined to make disappear. Perhaps she’s just hoping for some dramatic revelation, or huge event to sweep Obama aside and her to the leadership of the Democrat party. I discount that as a probability, but it is still possible. I think Hillary is right about one of her more recent claims, in that she does appear to have more chance of winning against McCain in the Presidential election than Obama does.

The brevity of my recent visits to that great country probably taints my understanding of the American election process. Another hindrance is the fact that most of the people I speak with are either from the urban conurbations like Los Angeles or New York or I’m reading feature articles from opinion formers from Washington or Chicago. These people tend to share a smug set of values that taint their objectivity. They only listen to one another, and mirror the same, glass bubble beliefs.

The truth is not what they say it is. Their elitism distorts facts to fit the required image, the accepted truth. It’s very much the same in the UK with the intellectual left holding sway at the Guardian newspaper and the BBC. They really don’t know that outside of their gilded cage the vast, sweaty public doesn’t see life the same way. I saw how true this was in the States when Arnold Schwarzenegger was standing for election as Governor of the State of California. Every person I met in the liberal elite of Los Angeles scoffed at his chances. They considered Arnie a total joke, without any chance of election. The facts are different; elections are won and lost in the vast hinterland of America, not in just a few rich, snobby enclaves. In California, despite Schwarzenegger being Governor for quite some time, the liberal left is still in denial of the fact.

Like many observers of a more neutral disposition I talk to as many people of different types, race, gender and social economic groups and look at a cross section of the polls and as many, and listen to as many different objective opinions as its possible to obtain. What I’ve discovered is that if Clinton were to pull off a miracle and beat Obama then she is about level with McCain, but if Obama wins, as anticipated, then he will probably lose to McCain.

Nothing is certain but it is also worrying to hear the nasty whispers saying that if Obama were elected the maniac assassins are already loading their guns.

I have rarely heard a more inspirational speaker than Obama, who could be what America needs, or he could be a bigger fool than McCain presently appears to be. How much does any of this mean in the real world of elections? Remember how the world scoffed at Ronald Reagan but he turned out to be the great communicator. Not only that, but he did, much to the liberal left’s consternation, decisively vanquish the evil Empire of Soviet Communism.

Now that Communism is effectively dead as a world religious order, because that’s what it was, it has been replaced by a more insidious threat, Islamic fundamentalism, as the primary enemy of freedom. I shall call it Islamism. This word means the expressed, public desire emanating from Islamic extremists to convert, conquer or kill those who do not subscribe to their faith.

Islamism must be combated by brain as well as brawn. Bush demonstrated plenty of the latter, but not so much of the former. Has Obama the stomach for this fight, and does McCain have the brain?

ENOUGH!

I walk past a young man every week who tries to sell passers by the Big Issue magazine. This is a brilliant scheme for the homeless. All around our fair land, the young and homeless, who have no chance of getting a job until they have a home address, use the selling of this magazine to start on the way back to normalcy. The Big Issue originator thought of this scheme to help those who had the will, but not the means, to help themselves back onto their feet. We have a situation here in which if you don’t have an address you can’t get benefits so this is a way out for those that want to get off of this merry go round.

He seems a pleasant guy. This Big Issue seller is trying to sort out his problems for himself. He smiles outside the Coop store, which is his pitch. It looks like a difficult way to earn any money, but he needs to be encouraged, so occasionally I purchase a copy of the magazine. He smiles happily, and we both feel good, him for making a sale, me, for doing a little something good. The only downside is when I read the magazine, which is annoyingly a left leaning tract of politically correct news and current affairs opinions. But maybe I’d be making the man feel like a beggar if I just gave the money and didn’t take the magazine, so I take the magazine and generally dump it into the bin after a quick glance that generally annoys me.

The need for such schemes is that there is a breakdown in the way our society is working. Values have been turned upside down and the government doesn’t handle many of the things it should, which is the underlying problems with the poor and homeless that the private sector can never totally solve, but does involve itself in many of the parts of our lives that are none of their concern.

It was reported yesterday that the murderer Ian Huntley, is receiving extraordinary preferential treatment in jail. Part of this takes the form of the prison authorities instructing their staff to treat Huntley, and some of his fellow inmates as “extensions of their family” and either to use their first name or address them as “Mr.”. Mister Huntley has been granted a private room (I think they used to call them cells), does not have to wear the standard issue uniform and officers have allegedly been told to humor him and to engage in games with him, such as chess, Scrabble and darts. All you have to do to get this treatment is murder a couple of ten-year old girls and then try and commit suicide. My view is that we should help the evil bastard to die.

Someone in our government seems to know what’s best for the rest of us at every turn but doesn’t do what we do want.

This weekend there was a proposal, apparently already becoming law in Scotland, that all smoking brands be removed from the packaging. Of course they are already eliminating marketing and advertising, and now sales will almost be prohibited, except, of course, for that bit of the transaction where the country gets to collect the tax from the sale. Don’t you think there’s a moral paradox in our government making such a song and dance about the evils of smoking whilst they collect huge amounts of money from those sales?

Personally I stopped smoking about twenty years ago, and really don’t understand how I ever smoked. I have no hankering to go back, but it isn’t my business to force others to stop. They must reach their decisions for themselves. I’m happy for our governments to advise people that smoking is bad for your health, and yes, they should limit the places in which you can smoke so as to protect those that have no wish to join them in breathing the smoke. But it isn’t the job of our governments to force people to behave in a proscribed manner for the benefit of the individual concerned. That must be the individual’s choice.

We can feel the first stirrings of anger within the British hinterland as the truck drivers have started mass protests against the imposition of even higher fuel taxes that, they insist, will bankrupt their businesses. You also hear the growing whispers of discontent of an angrier population. Everyone is beginning to notice that his or her freedoms are being eroded.

Governments everywhere are making it illegal to speak on your mobile telephone whilst driving. Again I understand and agree with the reasons for this, being about safety for the driver and other road users. But it seems as if it’s only in the UK that the authorities are trying to add other constraints on our freedom. They seriously want to add smoking, tuning your radio and probably picking your nose to those things you will not be allowed to do whilst driving. How much of this garbage is the British public going to accept before they scream ENOUGH?