31/07/2007 by Lee.

There has been outrage in some quarters recently about the posting of videos showing children fighting each other on sites such as You Tube. Police are saying that the web sites should monitor and remove such films, whilst the sites themselves say they rely on users to flag content to them. In amongst this fine piece of buck passing the point is somewhat lost. Regardless of whether these films are on the web or not, the fact remains that they are still being made. Surely the police would be better off trying to stop the kids fighting rather than simply trying to stop them posting videos of the fight. If Hitler hadn’t been captured on film it wouldn’t have prevented his attrocities from happening.

A spokesman for the Association of Chief Police Officers said of the web sites, “They are responsible for what is on their products - they are making a profit from this.” What a ridiculous statement! Would we hold the History Channel responsible for Bubonic Plague as they screened it? Did the BBC cause famine in Ethiopia simply by carrying coverage of it? 

For as long as the police try to pass the blame to the web sites the problem will persist. I am not anti police, I think they do a good job that I certainly wouldn’t do however, in this instance they need to address the cause rather than the outlet.  

Posted in Random stuff | 1 Comment »

23/07/2007 by Lee.

In a publicity stunt for the new Simpsons movie, a giant Homer Simpson was painted on the hillside at Cerne Abbas, Dorset, next to the somewhat older chalk outline of what some think to be an ancient fertility symbol. Local pagans were somewhat shocked by this, and promised to do some, “rain magic” to wash the paint based version away. ENOUGH WITH THE MAGIC!!!!

The question is, having proclaimed that they were going to perform this magic in the national press and the the deluge that then followed, can we hold these people accountable? They said they were going to make it rain, and it did. Could those that have been devasted by the floods launch legal action against them? It would certainly raise an interesting debate. The pagan rainmakers would either have to admit that they brought this rain, ergo caused the flooding and the responsibilities that go with that or, admit that it’s all bollocks and they didn’t do anything other than stand in a circle, chanting with sheets on their heads. Either route is a poor option for them. Admit that they have no power and it’s all mumbo-jumbo or that they are really powerful uber pagans and due to a bit of a cock up they’ve placed most of England under water, oops, our bad.

This is not unlike the dilemma faced by the church in the Billy Connolly film, ”The man who sued God“. If you get a chance to see this you really should. Connolly plays Steve Myers, a lawyer turned fisherman in Australia. During a storm, Myers’ boat is destroyed and the insuarance company fails to pay out, citing an Act of God. Myers goes on to sue the church as Gods representative on Earth for destroying his boat. The quandry of course that if it was an act of God, then the church is liable and the only way to avoid liablity is to admit that God does not exist. I won’t go on to spoil the rest of the film for you, but it is well worth watching.

I wonder if the DVD is doing the rounds in the pagan community at the moment?

Posted in Random stuff | 1 Comment »

19/07/2007 by Lee.

I read with interest a debate recently about the complex nature of spelling within the English language. There is an argument in some quarters to change the way we spell words to make them simpler for people to learn. The argument goes that changing and simplyfying our spelling will improve literacy rates amongst children. As a user of the language I am the first to admit that a lot of our words are sound different to how they look. Take my recent article on knights for example, just what rational is there behind the “k” in knight? Advocates of the scheme believe that phonetic spelling is the way forward, spelling words just the way they sound. Wimmin not women, lern for learn, slo for slow and so on. The argument however is full of holes, not the least of which is the spelling of “phonetic” in the first place.

Being a good northern boy that I am, I pronounce some words differently to people from other parts of the country. Take the old favourites grass, bath, laugh and graph for example. My southern wife inserts an “r” into the pronunciation of these words, phonetically making them grars, barth, larf and grarf whereas my phonetic spelling would be gras, bath, laff and graf. So already we have one country (actually one household) that would need two different spellings for one word. The crux of the phonetisists (if that’s a word) argument is that spelling is purely to allow the annunciation of the written language: essentially the purpose of writing is to be read out loud (or lowd).

We can read words two or three times faster than we can speak them, and the reasons for this is in part the rules of our language and spelling that tell us how to treat individual words. We treat some words as a “whole” rather than breaking down the consituent letters. Words like “and”, “if” and “the” are treated as one symbol much like “%” and the letters themselve are not so important. Other words like “guest” and “gesture” rely on the silent letters giving us the correct meaning. There has even been research that suggests we do not need to see the whole of the letters in a word in order to interpret its meaning. How many times do you miss a simple spelling error in a document that you have written, even when you’ve re-read it (and how would phonics treat “red” and “read”?) How many times have you struggled to read a text (or txt) message sent in text speak?

What this boils down to is that we are dumbing down our education system to suit the lazy. If we give kids in school the message that if you can’t do something we’ll just change the rules and make it easier for you then we are heading for a meltdown. Instead of working out how we can change our spelling, we should be concentrating on how to improve the skills of those that are both teaching and learning.  

Posted in Random stuff | 2 Comments »

17/07/2007 by Lee.

Let me start by saying that after typing that heading, what a bizzare looking word “knight” is. All the letters are wrong to make the sound that it does. Any-hoo, on with the post.

I’m a traditionalist deep down. I like our history and quirky ceremonies. I feel it helps define England as a nation. The main point of tradition is that it by and large remains unchanged down the years. Yet knighthood has changed beyond all recognition. Knighthood itself dates from around the 10th century and by the 12th century the image we have in our heads of a knight started to form: the armoured leader of men on horseback. The principal duty of a knight was to fight with and lead heavy cavalry into battle. Knights were not “appointed” as such, but trained from the age of 6 or 7 to be a “page” in a noble persons household. Schooled mainly by the women of the household in manners and courtesy the prospective knight also learns falconry and basic hunting, along with horse and weapon care.

At 14 or 15 years old, our would be knight becomes a squire and sergeant for an already existing knight, a personal aide if you will. Following his master into battle and tending to him when injured the squire would learn the mainstays of knighthood. Much of the training still focused on chivalry, politeness, compassion and loyalty. Upon judging the squires training to be complete, the squire would be knighted by his Lord and master and free to use the title “Sir”. Having been trained in battle from childhood, learned skills in hunting and chivalry the knights would be called upon by the King to lead men into battle to defend the nation, or Christendom.

How much of this do you feel Sir Elton John has been through? Could he be called up to Iraq or Afghanistan to lead troops on horseback? Sir Alex Ferguson could no doubt organise a quick kick about for Lancelot and Guain, but could he hunt with a falcon? Speaking of falcons, Sir David Attenborough could be useful with the birds and Sir Steve Redgrave could row our men into battle. Before you say, “Ah yes, but these people are honourary knights.” let me assure you they are not. Bob Geldof is an honourary knight, as is Bono and frankly if I was going into battle I’d rather follow Sir Bob than Sir Cliff Richard.

Knighthood was designed to show that you had reached a level of skill in battle, you were a leader of men, loyal to your cause and able to pass on those skills to the next generation all with the manners and grace to say “Sorry” as your broadsword hacked your opponents arm off. It was not meant to celebrate your latest album. Monty Python sang, “We’re knights of the round table. We dance whenever we’re able. We do routines and chorus scenes with footwork impec-a-ble.” and sadly that is now the level of ability for many of our knights. They could do a chorus scene, their footwork would be great, but that doesn’t make them a knight.

Give honurs to recognise charity work or commitment to a cause. I’m all for it, isn’t that what CBE’s, OBE’s and MBE’s are for? But don’t confuse it with an order that was trained from the age of 6 to fight for King and country.   

Posted in Random stuff | 2 Comments »

13/07/2007 by Lee.

First off, my apologies for the lateness today. My bad.

So Harry Potter has hit our cinema screens again and the final book is due out next week. Hats off to JK Rowlings people for scheduling the 2 events so close together, it’s guaranteed to drive up sales for both. Potter madness is also starting to gain momentum. Currently, if you were to remove the i-phone, Harry Potter and porn from the web, all you would be left with is my blog and www.bringbacktheporn.com (which may or may not already exist, I’m certainly not going to check from my work machine). Rumours abound about Harrys final fate with book shops under strict rules about selling arrangements. Bloomsbury (Rowlings publisher) have been a little short sighted with this though. They implemented what we in the corporate world call a tactical rather than strategic solution.

For past Potter releases, book sellers have been told that if they sell the book early they will not be supplied with the next edition. All well and good except we have now reached the final edition. The threat doesn’t sound so strong anymore does it? Rowling is so keen for the ending not to be revealed early that she has been on several fan sites and begged them not to post any rumours. Seeing as this isn’t a fan site, I feel I am free to add my thoughts to the debate.

1. Harry and Voldermort form a civil partnership. Being wizzards they “create” a child, Vol der Potter. Vol der Potter is raised in the Netherlands and becomes a big player in the international coconut trade.
2. Ron discovers that upon leaving school his gingerness prohibits him from getting anywhere in life and dies destitute on the streets of Torquay where he had been operating the candy floss machine on the beach. 
3. Harry wakes up and discovers it was all a dream and he isn’t really a wizzard
4. Ron wakes up and discovers it was all a dream. He is still ginger though and has no friends

Whilst none of these may be true, I am tempted to join the queue next weekend, purchase my book, flick to the back and scream, “Oh no, Harry dies” before retreating to a safe distance. Photocopies of the last page could be dispatched to schools up and down the country, stuck up in bus stops and playgrounds. Maybe even call into a popular talk show under false pretences and just blurt it out, “Harry was gay and died in a homophobic incident at Kings Cross.”

If you feel this is too much for todays youth, just join your local queue for the book, flick to the back and just shout, “Hooray!” at the top of your voice or “What a cop out”, maybe even, “Well bugger me!”. You see it doesn’t really matter what you shout, as long as you shout something.

If only I had the voice of Brian Blessed. “Potters alive!?”

Posted in Random stuff | 1 Comment »

12/07/2007 by Lee.

Nope, mind has gone blank. I’ll try again later.

Posted in Uncategorised | 2 Comments »

11/07/2007 by Lee.

Why are pidgeons more stupid than other birds?

On my drive to work I pass numerous road kills, most of which are being scavenged by birds. Crows and magpies all fly off when they hear the car approaching, generally in a safe direction. A magpie even seems to be able to deduce which side of the road I’m on and remain in place if it is in no danger. Not pidgeons, oh no, not them. Firstly, it takes them some time to detect my approach. You would think a ton of steel moving at 70 mph would make some noise, but obviously not on the correct frequency for this dumb bird. When it eventually does realise that there may be trouble on four wheels bearing down upon it, the rat of the sky goes into panic mode. Whilst evidently capable of flight, a pidgeons “fight or flight” reflex seems to have become, “fight or strut around in circles like a loon” reflex.

As I get closer, the circular srutting becomes ever more frantic, before the memory of flight trips a switch in its head. Sadly, this switch always seems to get turned on just as I get level with the soon to be “ex” pidgeon.

Luckily for me, I only caught the bird a glancing blow. No doubt enough to leave the bird playing a harp on a cloud somewhere, but without leaving the normal residual detritus all over my car. I don’t recall ever striking any bird other than a pidgeon, yet they are only one breed of this prolific species. There must be a gene or part of their DNA make up that makes them dim and susceptible to an early death.

If only we could isolate that gene and lace all Burberry clothing with it, we could solve many of societies current ills. 

Posted in Driving, Random stuff | 1 Comment »

10/07/2007 by Lee.

I normally have a bit of difficulty coming up with something to put here Monday to Friday, but now that problem has doubled. I am having to provide my Facebook friends with status updates on a daily, if not twice daily basis. Not being a pretentious soul (unlike Steven Hawking, a man from Kent that speaks with an American accent) I have problems describing myself in the third person. “Lee is…” is a really poor way to start a sentence describing yourself. Should I really be putting, “Lee is going to work now” or “Lee is at work”? Will this make a difference to your life?

Yet strangely, Facebook is a compelling and vaguely addictive system. Just this week I’ve told the world what I’m reading, exchanged nonsense with an ex-colleague in Jamaica all whilst trying to arrange a reunion between people I haven’t seen for years and are now scattered all over the globe. The old argument goes that technology is destroying human interaction by removing face to face contact with the populous at large, but surely now the argument has turned by 180 degrees. I am in contact with people that I had previously lost touch with, I can quickly dash off a message to a group that are scattered from Calgary to Crawley. The effort required to do this in the past would have prevented me from doing so, but not any longer. I am especially bad at remembering birthdays, but Facebook can tell me when my friends birthdays are, allowing me to send them an email or another message. Suddenly the world is a better connected place.

If you can sort the wheat from the chaff, deny the ridiculous applications, be selective who you accept as a friend and manage your notifications, Facebook can be a great tool. Let it get on top of you and you may have to run for the hils though.

Posted in Random stuff | 1 Comment »

09/07/2007 by Lee.

This weekend I finally cut the grass in my back garden. It’s been a while, and due to poor soil, drainage and laziness it has always been a struggle to get a decent patch of grass. Earlier in the Spring I bought some Canadian grass seed, which is supposed to grow in just about any conditions. Knock me down with a feather, it bloody well has too! I know have a lawn which by no means Wembley standards actually looks OK. Contrast this with the story of a Utah pensioner that has been arrested, handcuffed and bloodied for not having a decent lawn.

The United States is rife with gun crime, drugs and poverty, yet the good people of Orem feel that maintaining a decent thatch is the secret to a good society. According to the latest available statistics (2005), murders have increased by over 21% in Utah, yet the arrest rate for these crimes is declining. The citizens of Utah are quite literally getting away with murder. Car theft is up 7.4%, and whilst larceny/theft is down, it is still above the U.S. national average.

I’m not suggesting that Utah is a worse place to live than anywhere else in the U.S. but maybe in this instance they have got their priorites in the wrong order as the 56 murders and nearly 1000 rapes that took place in the state in 2005 would seem to testify. So is the charge of “not maintaining a garden” unusually weird for Utah? Sadly not. Let’s take a quick look at the statute books for Utah.

• It is illegal to fish from horseback
• It is illegal to detonate any nuclear weapon
• It is illegal not to drink milk
• It is a felony to persistently tread on the cracks between paving stones on the sidewalk of a state highway
• It is an offense to hunt whales (this in a state with no coast)
• it is illegal to cause a catastrophe

Quite clearly, these are serious crimes. It is also worth bearing in mind that for something to be outlawed there is usually a genuine need for it. So are we to assume that all these “crimes” have been commited at some point in Utah? Did somebody once hunt whales in this land locked state? Were they using nuclear weapons at the time, perhaps whilst on horseback? If so, was it a catastrophe?

Posted in Random stuff | 1 Comment »

06/07/2007 by Lee.

A bit lacking in subject matter today, so here’s some questions for you that have always puzzled me. Answers on a postard or the back of a stuck down envelope please.

1) Who discovered you could milk a cow and what were they trying to do at the time?

2) Who pulled a potato out of the ground, covered in dirt and thought, “I’ll eat that”?

3) At what point did rolling up tobacco leaves, putting them in your mouth and setting fire to them seem like a good idea?

4) Back to cows for this one. Who looked at one and thought, “I bet if I killed it, skinned it and then dried its skin, it would make a cracking pair of shoes”?

5) Why are there 10 commandments? Is that not a rather fortunate number to receive from on high for a race using the decimal system? Why not 7 or 12? Or even better, 3. I’m God, only me and nobody else, don’t be a criminal, respect other people.

6) Still with commandments. Why do they all start, “You shall not…” It’s hardly a positive message is it. Why not, “You will be good” and so on.

7) Jade Goody. Just why? What is the point of her?

Why have people got different accents? What started that?

9) Why are people from the Netherlands called Dutch?

10) In a library, is the Bible stored under fiction or non-fiction?

11) Who thought “Rock-a-bye baby” would make a good lullaby? The baby falls out of a tree and dies

12) Why is there an Easter Bunny? When was the last time you saw a rabbit with eggs?

13) What do atheists swear on in court?

14) If you only have one eye, do you blink or wink?

15) Why do we only breath out of one nostril at a time and why does it swap over every 20 minutes or so?

16) If I stand exactly on the North Pole, what time is it?

17) Why isn’t “Phonetic” spelled the same way that it sounds?

18) How important do you have to be before being murdered becomes being assasinated?

19) Why isn’t Donkey Kong a donkey?

20) Why can’t I have my cake and eat it? What’s the point of having a cake if you’re not allowed to eat it? 

Posted in Random stuff | 1 Comment »

05/07/2007 by Lee.

Socialite (polite speak for lazy slacker) Paris Hilton still seems to be in the news. To me, Paris Hilton is the embodiment of America, in fact, she IS America. Looks good from a distance, wealthy, brash, stupid, no regard for the rules, inability to cope with the consequences of breaking those rules, no discernible talent and no clue what is happening in the rest of the world. She has acheived her status on the back of the success of others and expects the whole world to pay her some attention and listen to what she has to say. Is this not modern day America? The America that did report on the recent incident at Glasgow airport but followed it up with the question, “So what does this mean for America?”. NOTHING, YOU FUCKWITS! It happened in Scotland, not Sacremento, although it has probably been called Scotlandshire or 2000 miles east of Washington DC by now.

Yesterday was the 4th of July, a day of celebration for Americans, BBQ’s were lit, parades marched, bands played and fireworks went bang. The fireworks even went bang in California, depsite the fact that there has been so little rain there lately that the bush fire risk is at a high level, yet everyone thought it would be a good idea to fire explosives on a stick. In Britain we do not pay much heed to the 4th of July, yet I feel that this should change. Instead of independence day we could call it, “Thank God for that, that was a close shave day” and celebrate the fact that we are no longer responsible for our wayward child. The official celebration party could even be held at the Hilton hotel, just for an extra touch of irony, before gathering at an oval race track to drive round and round for several hours only turning left whilst the crowd joyfully shouts, “woo-hoo!” and “yeah!” in a mindless act of noise making just for the sake of it. The following morning, the 5th of July will be the real celebration though. The realisation that, despite the fact people got drunk and made complete tits of themselves the night before, there will be no clamour for “therapy” or “group”, none of us will need “closure” after a drunken romatic folly. We will deal with our “issues” like adults and some of us will even renew our passports, because at least we have them unlike an estimated 80% of Americans.

So next time you bump into an American and they say, “Happy 4th of July” you should reply, “Yes it is. Thank you.”.

Posted in Random stuff | 1 Comment »

04/07/2007 by Lee.

Despite what the weather is telling us, summer is upon us. For the film industry summer is a time for big releases and the big blockbusters, a time to show the public how America single handedly won the second world war, led the crusades and invented air. Normally, the summer blockbuster movie is at least a new film, even if it uses a tried and tested formula, but this summer that has all changed. In years gone by, we all poked fun at Rocky for constantly re-running essentially the same film, just changing the number at the end, yet this year Hollywood has surpassed itself. Let’s take a quick look at what is currently faring well at the box office in the U.K.

Shrek the third (3rd Shrek film)

Fantastic Four: Rise of the silver surfer (second time around)

Oceans Thirteen (3rd in the series)

Pirates of the Caribbean: At worlds end (3rd again)

Hostel Part II (at least this is only the second)

It doesn’t end there. Coming soon is Die Hard 4.0, a 4th rehash of the same film, Indiana Jones is in production yet again along with more to come from the Shrek team and Pirates of the Caribbean.

At least Harry Potter is an evolving story, even if it is a little far fetched, do you know any ginger kids with 2 mates? I accept that to appeal to a mass market there is a limited number of formulae availble to Hollywod but please give us new film titles. Without this, I may stop watching films altogether.

Anyway, there’s a re-run of Top Gear on tonight along with I’m a celebrity builder on holdiay from hell get me out of here that I’m especially looking forward to.

Posted in Random stuff | 1 Comment »

03/07/2007 by Lee.

There is a theory that any one of us is only 6 people away from knowing anyone on the planet. The thinking goes that if I have a friend (which I do) that friend will know more people. Each of them will know more people and so on and so forth. So theoretically I have a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend that is the Queen. Testing this theory has always been problematic, but now we have social networking sites on the internet.

With the growing popularity of Facebook, I began to wonder if the theory could be proven, albeit in a limited way. I was looking through Facebook yesterday for people who are relatively famous and who are likely to be connected to other people of note. The great difficulty (as the BBC commented on) is knowing which members simply happen to share a name with a famous person, which use a PA to update and manage their profiles and which are the genuine article. Thanks to the BBC I now know that Stephen Fry is a genuine Facebook user, and has set up a group to manage friend requests by proxy as he was being inundated with requests for friendship. Whislt this is indeed a novel approach it does not help me on my quest. I had no choice, I had to send Mr Fry a message directly.

I’ve explained what it is I’m trying to do and sought his help. The question remains as to whether he is able or indeed even willing to help as no doubt he is a busy man. Every journey starts with a single step, and by attempting to contact Mr Fry I have taken that step. Should I not receive a response, then I’ll try someone else. I’ll keep you all updated with how far (if anywhere) I get.

This time next year I might even be your friend.

Posted in Random stuff | 1 Comment »

02/07/2007 by Lee.

I paid a cheque into my local bank over the weekend, yet it will still take several days to clear and actually reach my account. This is even more staggering when the cheque was issued by the same bank that I was paying it in to. No doubt, in the ensuing days my bank will add these funds to all the other cheques they’ve had recently and make a fair few quid by investing the money before they finally have to let me have it. THIS IS MY MONEY!!! I can pay someone in Australia instantly over the web using my debit card, the money leaves my account right away and they get the money just as quickly. Yet if I actually make the efffort to go into my bank, and hand them a cheque drawn against one of their own accounts it will take a week. If you think about it, a cheque should be little different to cash. They are both promisory notes, neither of them has any intrinsic value in itself, merely the promise to pay.

I have questioned for some time now the need for cheques at all in the modern world. I can’t recall the last time I wrote a cheque for someone. They only operate in one currency, take days to hit your account and are a pain to validate for the recipient. Prone to going missing in the post and easy to steal and fraudulently use they really have no place in modern banking and transactions. Isn’t it about time that the retailers of the world united and killed the cheque. Just stop taking them.

No witty line to close, as this was a struggle as it was.

Posted in Random stuff | 1 Comment »