Roman Polanski Must Go Back To The US

Roman Polanski is an acclaimed Oscar winning Film Director. He is the man responsible for films like Chinatown and The Pianist.

He is also the man who admitted the drugging and sexual abuse of a thirteen year old girl, while he was photographing her for a magazine in 1977. He fled the USA before he could be sentenced and has been openly 'on the run' ever since, living mainly in France.

Last weekend, he was detained in Switzerland while travelling to the Zurich Film Festival where he was expected to receive a Lifetime Achievement award. He now faces being extradited back to the USA.

Polanski is now 76 years old and has lived what can only be described as an eventful life. He was the son of parents with both Polish and Jewish backgrounds and he was forced to run from the Germans, when they sealed off his Jewish Ghetto in Krakov, in 1940. His mother died in the gas chambers of Auschwitz.

In later life his wife, the actress Sharon Tate was murdered by the infamous Charles Manson cult while she was eight months pregnant.

With this background, it is hardly surprising that Polanski has lived his life in the headlines.

His thirteen year old victim was plied with drugs and champagne before Polanski had unlawful sex with her at the home of the actor Jack Nicholson. Of course, despite admitting his guilt, he maintains that the girl was sexually experienced and her participation was consensual.

So, should Polanski be dragged back to the US after 32 years, to be sentenced for his crime?

The answer has to be yes.

He may well be a famous old man but he is also a self confessed child abuser. The passage of time does not erase the act that took place over thirty years ago, or change it's status in law.

Polanski maintains that the legal process, after he was charged, was flawed and the prosecutor and judge dealing with his case had been negligent.

If he has a case to make against the legal procedures prior to the time of his escape, now is the time to challenge them.

The law is the benchmark by which all decent society survives. It cannot be allowed to suffer from alzheimers.

Polanski must go back and face his past. Celebrity, fame and wealth, cannot be allowed to re-write the truth.

Perhaps, Polanski is about to receive his Lifetime Achievement Award after all!

Andrew Marr Angers PM's Aides

Aides to PM Gordon Brown are said to be furious that he was sandbagged, during an interview with Andrew Marr, on BBC1, when asked whether he is taking prescription painkillers.

Marr said:

"A lot of people in this country use prescription painkillers and pills to help them get through. Are you one of them?”

The PM relied:

“No. I think this is the sort of questioning which is all too often entering the lexicon of British politics.”

There has been much speculation over the last couple of weeks about the subject (I wrote a post 2 weeks ago) but until today, it seemed that no-one from the mainstream media was prepared to actually ask the question directly.

Whether this is because the media machine at Number 10 had deliberately tried to suppress such an enquiry or whether it was because none of the favoured political commentators wanted to risk their controlled access to the PM, we cannot be sure.

However, it is a justifiable enquiry to make and one to which we should all have the right to an answer.

If the PM is to survive until the next election and beyond, he needs to come out fighting and forget the scripted answers that his advisers prepare for him before interviews. He needs to 'shoot from the hip' and look like he is in control.

If he does that, then we might start to think of him as a worthy leader after all!

BBC Bans The Word 'Butcher'

I am irritated!

Tonight, while travelling home from work, I was listening to the excellent Eddie Nestor who hosts the drivetime programme on BBC London 94.9FM.

Eddie is one of the few broadcasters who has the rare gift of being able to discuss any subject, however sensitive, in a fair and amiable way, while still being able to express his own opinion without causing offence.

Tonight, he was engaged in a telephone conversation with respected financial expert, David Kuo, about a new London initiative called the Brixton Pound. It is a concept that is aimed at promoting trade in the locality of Brixton and David was explaining why it might not work in reality.

To help his explanation, he was using the examples of a Butcher's shop and a Grocer's shop to demonstrate how the Brixton Pound might be used in practice.

However, half way through his explanation, he was told by Mr Nestor that he could not use the example of a butcher as it could cause offence to those with certain religious beliefs, or non-meat eaters. Nestor had been told to explain this, by his programme producer, while Kuo was talking.

Are you getting irritated yet?

Has the normally excellent BBC finally become a censor for the political correctness movement?

Surely the whole point of a phone-in show is to exploit the values and principles of free speech and to hear the views of the callers by promoting discussion? It is not to publically admonish a guest expert for describing a profession that has been the mainstay of most high streets and food stores for as long as commerce has been in existence.

Sadly and unusually, Mr Nestor did not challenge the instruction he was given by the time I arrived home. I can only hope this is because he was in a state of shock at being given such a pathetic instruction by his producer.

In reality, though, I fear incidents like this will become more common.

If you are one of those whom the BBC assume would be offended by the mention of professions to which you do not approve......tough!!

Last time I checked, the majority of us were still sane.....just!

PM Finally 'Graduates' From Business School

"We are doing the right thing to make sure that for the future as we move into a full recovery we will invest and grow within sustainable public finances - cutting costs where we can, ensuring efficiency where it's needed, agreeing realistic public sector pay settlements throughout, selling off the unproductive assets we don't need to pay for the services we do need"

The above words were spoken by Gordon Brown to delegates at the TUC conference in Liverpool today.

They describe what most students learn, in chapter one, of the guide book to running an efficient business.

So, why after all these years in power, has this government only just discovered how to run UK plc?

Time to man the lifeboats methinks!

Is Our Prime Minister Depressed Or Just Useless?

There has been an increasing level of discussion in the 'world of blogs' over the last week about whether Gordon Brown, our Prime Minister, is suffering from depression and whether he is being treated with medication.

To my knowledge, the mainstream media have not, so far, made reference to the theory but I am sure they are fully aware and are just waiting for the right moment.

If it were true, it might help to explain why we have seen so little of the PM over the last few months and why, when we have, he has seemed so unconvincing. It might also explain why the likes of Lord Mandelson and David Miliband are taking so much of the limelight and announcing initiatives that by right should be publically introduced by the PM.

If GB is depressed, it is fully understandable and should not be interpreted as a weakness. There are few of us who can honestly say they have never suffered from the ailment at some point in our lives - especially at times of stress.

Sadly, though, depression is a mental illness and anything that has the word 'mental' in it, is instantly judged as something we should all fear. However, many successful and brilliant people have lived with the condition for most of their lives and despite their personal burden, the public have not even noticed.

When it comes down to it, depression is really just a 'flu of the mind' and can easily be eradicated or controlled.

If the stories are true, I hope that the PM will 'come clean' and help to educate everyone who would stigmatize those who suffer from mental problems.

If they are not, then maybe he is just useless as a Prime Minister after all?

ITV Need More Than Just Product Placement

The government is expected to announce a trial to allow independent television companies like, ITV, to profit from product placement in their programmes.

This is another form of advertising where the bottles behind the bar in Emmerdale or the drinks in front of the judges in the X Factor will become paid space for manufacturers who have the money to pay for the exposure of their products.

The benefits are obvious as the broadcaster can make easy money and the manufacturer avoids the present situation where many viewers just avoid watching their expensive adverts, during the commercial breaks, by either flicking to another channel or putting the kettle on.

ITV have been campaigning for product placement for ages and have been using the excuse of financial hardship caused by a reduction of advertising, due to the economic climate.

What product placement will still not solve, however, is that if decent programmes are not being provided by the broadcaster, then neither the ad breaks or the product placement will be visible to the viewers as they will not be bothered to watch the channel in the first place.

It seems that ITV, in particular, have been slow to catch on to this most basic of theories!

Dying To Negotiate A Bargain!

According to a report in today's Independent, the average cost of bidding farewell to one's dear departed, is now £7,018 taking into account legal costs, funeral expenses and flowers etc. This is a rise of 42 percent over the last five years.

The funeral industry says the cost of new environmental procedures has been largely responsible for the steep increase, but others say it is a lack of competition amongst funeral directors, since many have been taken over in recent years by larger companies.

Another factor is that bereaved families are often loathe to haggle over the price at such a distressing time.

It seems that we no longer just have to struggle to survive financially when we are living but now we have to worry when we are dead too!

I think I have the answer....

I am going to refuse to die unless they give me a good price first!

Calling Time On Alcohol? - Mine's A Large One!

We have a habit in the UK of punishing the majority for the sins of the minority.

The latest attempt to deprive us of choice comes from the British Medical Association (BMA) who are campaigning for a complete ban on all alcohol related advertising and to bring an end to the supermarket special offers and happy hour deals that are so popular with all who enjoy a tipple.

Of course, the pub trade will be in a bit of a dilemma, as they blame the cheap supermarket deals for their own problems. They will not, however, want to back anything that will ultimately reduce their profits any further.

There has never been any firm proof that advertising bans work - although campaigners against anything at all will always try to claim success.

The advertising ban on cigarettes has not stopped people from smoking; the young, who see it as being a cool thing to do, are not that gullible.

The fast food advertising ban on TV during the hours that children might be watching, has not seen a rise in healthy kids, nor has it seen the likes of Mc D's complaining about a fall in profits. All it has done is deprive companies like ITV of the money needed to commission and supply quality programming for children and destroy an industry that was once the envy of the world.

Being rebellious is part of growing up and we have all drunk, eaten or smoked too much at some point in our lives. Most of us grow out of it but there will always be some who will not be able to break the habit. Their problems will not be solved by the absence of advertising, or of alcohol, or of any other substance.

We drink because it is what we want to do. Those of us who are responsible - and can handle it - should not be punished because of those who do not have the ability to know when to stop!

Cheers!!

BBC - Face To Race!

Today's big 'storm in a media teacup' is whether the BBC should invite a spokesperson for the British National Party (BNP) to sit on the panel of the political discussion programme Question Time.

Of course they should. It is a no brainer!

The BNP are mainly known for appearing to be a party with extreme and racist views and their outlandish statements have been seized on by the media and our MPs as being unacceptable. But, they have managed to openly voice the concerns that are genuinely held by a large number of voters worried about what is perceived as being a huge increase in immigration in the UK.

There have been many varied and diverse arguments, both for and against an appearance on Question Time, but like it or not, the BNP are becoming a legitimate political party because an increasingly disenchanted public are using them as a protest vote against the humbug spoken by our mainstream political leaders.

Many of those in favour of the BNP appearing on the programme, have said it would expose them as having no other policies and no idea what they would do about things like the economy but hey....we have been watching the regular panelists for years who suffer with the same problem.

The real reason for them appearing, though, should be because we constantly preach to the world that we live in a democracy where everyone has a voice and we cherish the right to freedom of speech, however distasteful the words that are spoken.

We should remember that the leaders of Sinn Fein - who were accused of far worse things than the BNP could ever hope to achieve - were once gagged by Margaret Thatcher. Their voices were muted on newsclips and replaced by a commentary.

Today they are entitled to sit in the Houses of Parliament.

But whatever we all think, the real winners will be the BBC who will get an increased rating for a programme that most people would normally avoid watching.

I can't wait!

Wake Up Prime Minister And Face Reality!

On the day that Labour MP, Eric Joyce, resigned his job as parliamentary aide to the Defence Secretary, our Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, has decided to try to convince us all that things are really going well in Afghanistan.

Mr Joyce, a former army major, said last night in his letter to the PM:

"I do not think the public will accept for much longer that our losses can be justified by simply referring to the risk of greater terrorism on our streets. Nor do I think we can continue with the present level of uncertainty about the future of our deployment in Afghanistan."

The PM said today that we need to train Afghan troops with more urgency to allow us to hand over control to them sooner rather than later.

He also said that the tactics of the Taliban had changed from a head-on military conflict to guerrilla warfare using explosive devices - 1,000 of which had been dismantled this summer.

Hello....!! isn't that what 'terrorists' do?

Probably the most stupid thing the PM said was that there was "nothing more heartbreaking" than meeting the families of those killed, or those who had been seriously injured, while in action in Afghanistan.

Sorry to disappoint you Mr Brown but there certainly is something "more heartbreaking".

It is to face the reality that your loved ones are returning to the UK in a coffin, after being killed in a conflict that has never been fully justified nor explained and in a country of which most of us have no idea of its location or politics.

Perhaps, Prime Minister, it is time to stop trying to justify the unjustifiable!

The Camera Never Lies - Except In Afghanistan!

The conflict in Afghanistan is taking a heavy toll on resources and human lives in both the US and the UK.

The media and public in both countries have taken a long time to wake up to the fact that it is not going to be an easy war to win against the Taliban and that our military might is easily matched by the terrain of the country and the unpredictability of the opposition.

Our politicians are panicking at having to face up to the the problem of convincing us all we are making progress, before there is a political price to be paid, domestically, for our continued involvement. They need to show us that normality is returning, due to our efforts and we are liberators and not occupiers.

Enter the media and Public Relations experts!

What is more normal than to go out into the streets of what was once one of the most dangerous towns in Helmund province - the area where the majority of deaths and casualties to our troops have occurred - and buy an ice-cream?

You can almost hear the collective brain of the media machine suggesting the idea as a classic illustration of normal life returning due to our military efforts in the region.

Cue Lieutenant General Jim Dutton, Deputy Commander ISAF (NATO’s International Security Assistance Force) as the man nominated to be sent into the busy town bazaar to purchase the ice-cream.

There is no doubt that it would make a convincing picture - just as long as the 50 US Marines, British army troopers, Royal Marines, Afghan army troops and the police who were providing his protection were not seen in the resulting image!

Just a few miles South, both US and UK troops were still in the thick of the fighting.

The camera never lies......or does it? Beware of false images!

Red Arrows - Simply The Best!

An article in today's Independent is praising the RAF's Red Arrows display team and it is right to do so.

Although they are officially part of the UK's military forces they represent far more than just military might. They display the very best of training, discipline, bravery, skill, spectacle and engineering.

Wherever they appear - and they fly at airshows all over the world - they are invariably top of the bill and normally leave all other displays looking ordinary, while the crowds cry out for more.

I travelled to see them fly in the Southend Festival Of The Air back in May of this year and I was left spellbound and open mouthed by the show they put on.

The article in the Independent asks why middle England can't get enough of them but it is not a matter of class, for they transcend those barriers.

They are simply the best ambassadors this country could possibly send to demonstrate the very best that the UK has to offer the world!

More pictures of the Red Arrows and others displays at The Southend Festival Of The Air can be viewed here.

Falling In Love - With A Perfect Beauty!

Last Thursday, I fell in love.

It was not with an attractive female and certainly not with a man - although I am not saying there is anything wrong with that (tokenistic PC gesture over!)

It was not even with a racy looking car or any of the thousand things I constantly desire from the Apple store.

It was instead with a word ... and that word is 'Defenestrate'

It sounds so perfect and is a joy to pronounce. It's meaning is just as beautiful as its formation, for it is used to describe the action of throwing something out of a window.

Therein lies another piece of its beauty. Throughout the history of rock music, bands have been idolised not just for their music but for throwing hotel TVs and the like through windows. They never even knew they were performing defenestration.

Our English language is often criticised for being overly complicated and reformers argue to simplify the multitude of words we use to communicate the things we see; we are highly unlikely to ever see words like it included in the dictionary of 'text speak'.

I would also challenge you to find another language that has bothered to incorporate a word that was originally formed from Latin and include it as a dedicated word for such a ridiculous action.

But, that is the beauty of English. Unlike the languages of those who live across the waters, we have always been thorough. While they have been brewing and drinking wine and beer or inventing gastronomic delights, we have been sitting around increasing the quality of our vocabulary.

I hope our relationship with words will continue forever and we never get divorced from such perfect beauty!!

Thank you to the guys at tmesolutions in Maidstone for introducing me to the word - I never knew a meeting about a possible website could turn out to be so interesting.

Michael Jackson 'Homicide' - What The Coroner Found..

The much revered Michael Jackson, who died after suffering a cardiac arrest in June, had a cocktail of drugs in his body which included Midazolam, Diazepam, Lidocaine, Lorazepam and Ephredrine.

The Los Angeles coroner has now announced the official cause of death as 'homicide due to intoxication by anaesthetic' with the primary drugs responsible being Propofol which is the powerful anaesthetic and Lorazepam, a sedative.

His personal physician, Conrad Murray has strenuously denied any wrongdoing and said that MJ had been given the drugs as part of his treatment for insomnia.

It certainly seems to have worked!!

Enoch Powell Was Not A Racist......He Was A Prophet !

A Tory Member of the European Parliament, Daniel Hannan, has got himself into hot water with his peers - yet again.

Two weeks ago he was severely criticised for describing the NHS as a "60 year mistake" - his Party Leader David Cameron publicly denounced his views as "eccentric".

Hannan's latest 'crime' is to tell a TV interviewer in the US that Enoch Powell had been a great political influence on his career.

For those who lack memories long enough, Powell was sacked from the shadow cabinet back in 1968 by Edward Heath after making a speech on the dangers of immigration which became known as his "Rivers of Blood" speech.

It was in the days when MPs were free to speak as their consciences guided. They were not tethered to electronic pagers and worked hard to represent the views of their constituents - even if they were at odds with the official party line.

Powell was, arguably, one of the greatest orators in the history of Parliament. I clearly remember his captivating speeches and his daunting presence. He had a personality that most of today's politicians would die for and could easily hold his own against his critics - using reasoned argument and not the cheap jibes and backbites of today's MPs.

His "Rivers of Blood" speech was, in retrospect, a mistake and caused immense damage to his following career. He was held up as an example of all that is bad in the politics of 'racism'.

When asked by David Frost in 1969 if he was a racialist he replied:

'It depends on how you define the word "racialist." If you mean being conscious of the differences between men and nations, and from that, races, then we are all racialists. However, if you mean a man who despises a human being because he belongs to another race, or a man who believes that one race is inherently superior to another, then the answer is emphatically "No."

His words are arguably even more relevant in today's politically correct world, where 'blackboards' have become 'whiteboards' and the nursery rhyme 'bah bah black sheep' has become 'bah bah white sheep'; 'blacklists' have become 'blocklists' (see earlier post) and comedians are not allowed to joke about people from other countries.

We have been forced into a world of PC fear and this particular quote, from 1970, seems to sum up our present situation perfectly:

Have you ever wondered, perhaps, why opinions which the majority of people quite naturally hold are, if anyone dares express them publicly, denounced as 'controversial, 'extremist', 'explosive', 'disgraceful', and overwhelmed with a violence and venom quite unknown to debate on mere political issues? It is because the whole power of the aggressor depends upon preventing people from seeing what is happening and from saying what they see

He added:

The public are literally made to say that black is white. Newspapers like the Sunday Times denounce it as 'spouting the fantasies of racial purity' to say that a child born of English parents in Peking is not Chinese but English, or that a child born of Indian parents in Birmingham is not English but Indian. It is even heresy to assert the plain fact that the English are a white nation.

Whether those who take part know it or not, this process of brainwashing by repetition of manifest absurdities is a sinister and deadly weapon. In the end, it renders the majority, who are marked down to be the victims of violence or revolution or tyranny, incapable of self-defence by depriving them of their wits and convincing them that what they thought was right is wrong.

The process has already gone perilously far, when political parties at a general election dare not discuss a subject which results from and depends on political action and which for millions of electors transcends all others in importance; or when party leaders can be mesmerised into accepting from the enemy the slogans of 'racialist' and 'unChristian' and applying them to lifelong political colleagues..."

A lot to read I know, but when you consider the words were spoken almost 40 years ago, it seems that Mr Powell was lucky not to have been denounced for being a psychic!

What A Clever Advert - A message For All

I thought I would give us all a day off and share what I think is the very best of clever advertising.

How could anyone fail to fall in love with Evian after this?

Politically Correct 'Block' Heads Remove Black As A Colour!

This should not take long to write....

The politically correct management of the Citizens' Advice Bureau has decreed that spam emails should not be placed on a 'blacklist' but instead be placed on a 'blocklist'.

Can you spot the subtle difference? Clever isn't it?

A spokesperson said:

Our approach to language is not prescriptive or dogmatic, but where we know or become aware something is offensive, fosters stereotypes or prejudice, or is inaccurate, it makes sense and is respectful to use alternatives"

We are not even talking about people here!

How is it that our fellow citizens who happen to be born 'black' are quite happy and proud to call themselves 'black' while a minority of white people have to work so hard to convince us all they are 'right-on' and colour blind?

There would not be any perception of racial divide in this country if idiots like those who made the decision at the CAB, did not keep trying to alter our language and pretend the difference in our colour was non-existent.

If you happen to be black and disagree please let me know!!

Government Need Autumn Election - We Don't!

While Gordon Brown spends his summer vacation in Scotland, possibly looking for a new job, and his 'stand-ins' try to make the headlines in the national press, it is time to start wondering how Labour is going to survive the next few years.

Given the public's disappointment over recent political events and our perception of a lack of leadership in all things that matter to us mere mortals, it seems almost a certainty that the Conservatives will be asked to form a government after the next election - due by the Spring of next year.

That timing causes another problem for the present government, as all the difficult and unpopular decisions (to save us from ourselves) need to be implemented before then, meaning the government will face even more resentment from the voting public before polling day arrives.

The financial pain created by paying back the huge public borrowing deficit will be an enormous burden to the average voter.

Added to which, there is also the likelihood there will be attempts to replace GB as leader before, or during, the Autumn party conference.

If the Conservatives do gain power next year, they will be able to claim that none of the hardship we are all suffering was of their making and they will probably retain power for years - especially if the financial conditions gradually improve and we all start to feel better.

Not a very attractive proposition for Labour, so how do they tackle it?

The easiest way would be to accept they are going to lose, but limit the fallout.

If they were to call a snap autumn election this year, they will almost certainly place the Conservatives into government and thereby force them into the spotlight to take the blame over what will be necessary, but unpopular, decisions.

They will avoid the PR nightmare of having to force out their leader and be able to gently sideline him, while he eventually steps down to 'spend more time with my family'.

They will have sidestepped having to make the difficult decisions over our increasingly unpopular role in Afghanistan and will be able to criticise our new government from the safety of the opposition benches.

In short they will be able to re-build quietly and covertly.

It is very likely that the Conservatives will have been exposed as being nothing more than hype and, have themselves become so unpopular after their first four year term, they will be removed at the following election.

The new re-invented shiny Labour will, by then, have regained the public's confidence enough to return to power.

See? it's easy really...let's just hope they don't think of it!!

Director Of The FBI Is A Hypocrite!

Predictably, the outcry over the compassionate release of the only person convicted of the Lockerbie bombing, Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi, has been loud and spoken malnly with an american accent.

Poor old Kenny MacAskill, Scotland's justice secretary, has been the main target. He claims to have made the decision to release Megrahi all on his own but as we all know it is very unlikely to have been allowed to proceed had it not been part of a much bigger political picture.

Poor old Kenny has, today, received a scathing letter from the director of the FBI in the US, Robert Mueller. In it he writes:

"Your action gives comfort to terrorists around the world who now believe that regardless of the quality of the investigation, the conviction by jury after the defendant is given all due process, and sentence appropriate to the crime, the terrorist will be freed by one man's exercise of 'compassion'."

Hmm now where do we start on that one?

Megrahi's trial is generally accepted to have been, at best, controversial and was not tested in front of a jury but in front of a panel of three Scottish judges sitting in a 'neutral' country. Proof of the quality of the investigation normally rests on the evidence presented to the court and again this has been disputed with claims that some of the 'proof' was fraudulent or fabricated.

Sadly, Megrahi's release stopped his scheduled appeal, which would have tested all of the above and hopefully brought a more balanced judgement on the guilt of the accused.

But what could almost be the funniest part of the letter, if it was not so serious, is the part saying:

"Your action in releasing Megrahi is as inexplicable as it is detrimental to the cause of justice. Indeed your action makes a mockery of the rule of law."

Remember this was written by a senior law officer in a country that has brought the word 'rendition' into the English vocabulary, where anyone suspected of actions that could be even remotely related to terrorism, were flown around the world while hooded and chained, were tortured by water boarding and worse, were mentally abused and held in a prison camp on foreign soil without due process of law or being formally charged with any offence - all for years on end.

If this is the definition of justice to which Mr Mueller refers then it is hard to know who is the greatest danger to the 'rule of law'.

To be able to criticise Mr MacAskill, the distinguished director of the FBI should first have made certain he was writing from the lofty peaks of the moral high ground.

If the recent behaviour of the US intelligence services is now seen as a benchmark for 'justice' then... stop the world..I want to get off!

Lockerbie Bomber Leaves More Questions Than Conviction!

The only man convicted over the Lockerbie bombing 20 years ago, Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi, has, as expected, been released from his life sentence on compassionate grounds.

Megrahi is said to be suffering from prostate cancer and is not expected to live for more than a few months.

No one can deny the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, over the Scottish town of Lockerbie in 1988 was a terrible act. The deaths of the 270, both aboard the plane and in the town, was unforgivable and the sheer audacity of the attack rightly shocked the world.

It is only natural that the families of the victims have been vocal in their criticism of Megrahi's release.

However, I am one of several people who has severe reservations about the legitimacy of his conviction and the circumstances of his release - it all seems to be a little bit too neat.

The evidence against him at his trial in the Netherlands was said to be mostly circumstantial. Indeed, one of the UN observers openly expressed his concern over the fairness of the proceedings and spoke of the possibility of a spectacular miscarriage of justice.

Despite such reservations, the governments - and their intelligence agencies - on both sides of the Atlantic needed someone on whom to focus the blame. Megrahi was convicted and sentenced to life in a Scottish prison. He has been there for the last eight years.

The timing of his compassionate release, therefore, seems to be a little convenient coming at a time when he had served so little of his sentence and just before his second appeal was to have been heard by the court.

His defence team were convinced they could present new arguments proving that much of the evidence at the original trial had been fabricated.

No one has ever explained how Megrahi managed to carry out such an attack on his own, his motivation for carrying it out or who financed his action. Surely those three questions would have been the first asked in the original investigation?

He just does not seem to fit the accepted profile we have come to accept of a radical terrorist.

Perhaps, it is because an appeal could have proved embarrassing in certain quarters, that a deal was done for him to drop his action in return for an early release.

Perhaps, the need to quench our thirst for Libyan oil is seen as being more important than the incarceration of a terrorist bomber whose conviction raises questions.

The fact is, a doubt has been left that makes me ask those questions

Megrahi has, throughout, been consistent in maintaining his innocence and today said:

"The remaining days of my life are being lived under the shadow of the wrongness of my conviction. I have been faced with an appalling choice: to risk dying in prison in the hope that my name is cleared posthumously or to return home still carrying the weight of the guilty verdict, which will never now be lifted.

Sometimes, the overwhelming need to see justice done overcomes the need for truth.

I hope that today's events will not mean that the full and complete story will now be buried with the deaths of both Megrahi and his appeal!

Time For 'Dinosaur' MPs To Be Extinct!

Just when we thought the public scandal over the expenses claimed by our parliamentary representatives was dying down, one of their number seems to have woken up from a coma and announced that he thinks the salaries of his buddies should be doubled, in exchange for not claiming some of the living expenses of the past.

Sir Patrick Cormack, who was one of the candidates for the recent Commons Speaker vacancy says the salary of an MP should be doubled from £64,766 to over £130,000.

He appears to be oblivious to the fact, that most people living in the UK are struggling to pay for one home and keep their jobs, without even a thought about claiming an increase in pay.

Sir Patrick said:

"I have reluctantly become convinced over the last few weeks that the most effective way of restoring public confidence in parliament is for there to be a significant increase in members' salaries and an abolition of all allowances, save for the allowance to pay staff and a constituency office"

One of his colleagues, Douglas Hogg, who you probably remember claimed for the cost of cleaning out his moat, agrees and has declared the pay of an MP has now fallen so low, it is no longer sufficient to support the lifestyle "to which most professional and business classes aspire"

If, as they like to claim, they are members of either a professional or business class, they have shown they have no understanding of the product they represent and have enough arrogance to completely disregard the public outcry of the past few months.

Like the majority of their dinosaur colleagues, it is time they became extinct!

NHS - In Sickness Or In Health?

Right wing politicians in the USA have been knocking our NHS system and predictably, our own political leaders have been very vocal in, rather hastily, jumping to it's defence.

While it is admirable for them to do so, a cynic might focus on the fact that almost 1.4 million people are employed by the NHS and they will represent a considerable number of votes when the next general election takes place.

Few can deny, the NHS is a fantastic part of the UK's foundation and most of us are grateful for the right of access to what we are told is free medical treatment. However, what we often forget is that it is not really free at all and it is certainly not a perfect system. We all pay for our treatment through our taxes and National Insurance.

The NHS is a system that has, like government, grown to be an unwieldy and ever costly organisation that is open to abuse and wastage.

Treatment is not consistent throughout the UK and it is often misused by 'medical tourists' from abroad.

The costs of administering the NHS are massive and it probably has more managers and admin staff than those in the front line medical areas.

While the government keep reminding us that the waiting times for treatment have gone down over recent years, operating theatres are still not used to their maximum potential and are sometimes left 'on standby' for at least one day a week because the surgeons do not want to work on those days.

Hospital consultants are often at odds with their local management about basic working procedures and frequently try to resist attempts to introduce more efficient working methods.

In short, it is far from being a perfect system and has, over the years, naturally become a political football between the parties.

It is an organisation made up of 'the haves' and the 'have nots'. Some make a very comfortable living from working for the NHS while to many, it has to be thought of as more of a vocation, with long hours and a poor financial reward.

What would really help at this time, is if our politicians would pause for thought and consider some of the criticism before they go into 'auto pilot' in creating sound bites that defend a system of which they personally have little experience.

After all, when was the last time our political leaders chose a night waiting for treatment in the local casualty department over using the benefits of their private health insurance?

Most of the rest of us live with the real life flaws of an NHS we would never want to lose but we pray will keep getting better and better!

Paramedic Struck Off After Oral Sex!

A much needed paramedic who was caught during the act of being given oral sex in the car park of a hospital, was today struck off the register.

The chair of the disciplinary panel hearing his case said the act would:

"offend the morals of any right-thinking member of the public"

Had the 53 year old paramedic been spotted by a member of the public the comment might hold some truth but he was not. He might as well have been accused of offending Martians, for it was 11pm at night and he was spotted by security officers who watched his actions on their CCTV cameras.

Describing the incident, they said it looked like "a performance of oral sex" as the woman's head moved up and down in the man's lap.

Hardly a damning indictment but then I am sure they spent some considerable time adjusting their 'controls' before confronting the guilty parties.

It's good to know that yet another 'spy' camera has been put to such good use to protect us all against the threat of a serious crime by consenting adults.

Meanwhile, I wonder if the morally upright chair of the tribunal would have refused the paramedic giving him treatment in the event he was to suffer a serious health failure....me thinks not!!

Baby P - Should The Gagging Order Have Been Lifted?

The case of the torture and death of Baby P, two years ago, is still shocking.

The 17-month-old child had been abused over a period of months during which his back and ribs had been broken along with other horrific injuries. I still cannot bring myself to read all of the details.

The fact the social services had failed to either notice, or act on his behalf - even though he was on the Child Protection Register - was criminal.

The fact his mother had stood by while her boyfriend had dealt the abuse was also criminal. Both her and her lover have now been convicted of causing or allowing the death of the child. It is worth remembering their actions were not a 'heat of the moment loss of control' but deliberate and systematic abuse of a small child.

A judge ordered their identities should be protected because they were involved in a second trial where the boyfriend was found guilty of the rape of a two-year-old girl, while Baby P's mother was acquitted of child cruelty after it was alleged she witnessed the rape but did nothing to stop it.

Last night the judge removed the anonymity order and today the media has been busy discussing the pros and cons of whether they should have been publicly named.

A Professor of Psychology, even insisted during a radio interview, they should remain anonymous because they had probably themselves been abused as children and therefore were not totally responsible for their actions.

What total Cock!!

If they did not know the basic difference between right and wrong, then they should not have been allowed to have control of a child - far less have been living openly within our society.

Justice needs to be seen to be done and now we all know who was responsible for Baby Peter's death.

It is worth remembering that if his death had been caused by a vicious dog, the law would have ordered the immediate destruction of that dog.

His death was, instead, caused by people he should have been able to trust as his protectors.

Maybe it is time to change the law with regard to people!!

Mandelson - Prince of Darkness Will Stay Out Of The Light!

Much has been written this week about whether Peter (Lord) Mandelson has plans to take over from Gordon Brown to lead the Labour Party.

It seems to me, to be a bit of a ridiculous proposition and the only question that should really be asked is why should he, or anyone else for that matter, want to?

Labour, as it presently stands, is a busted flush. It has no direction, no leadership and very little support either from the public or its own MPs. The fallout from the recent expenses scandal has damaged Labour far more than its rivals - even though, MPs from all parties were equally guilty.

With an election looming on the horizon and the country still deep in a recession, it seems almost an impossibility that Labour will have a chance of retaining power.

Why then should Mandelson,want to lead what will become the next opposition - probably for years to come based on the voting trends of the last thirty years.

Mandelson has far more power in his present position, than he ever would as Party Leader. He seems to know where the 'skeletons are buried' and he is able to manipulate and cajole events - and the media - to turn in his favour. He has an arrogance that is both detestable and admirable at the same time. He has proved himself to be a truly remarkable political survivor, despite being forced out of the cabinet, in disgrace, on two separate occasions.

It is unlikely that whoever succeeds Gordon Brown will pass the 'test of time' to make it back into power. The party is far more likely to go through a long period of self destruction, re-evaluation and blame, before it can ever settle on unity again.

Mandelson is far better placed to orchestrate the long term future of Labour - and retain his control - from his present position than from being its leader. At the moment he is in a place of respect - as a leader he would be in a position of blame.

He has proved himself to be far too canny an operator to be caught out like that.

He is a Kingmaker and not a King

Peter (Lord) Mandelson has more than earned the right to be known as 'The Prince of Darkness'

Poor Wee Scotland .... It's truly Offal!!

Just when we English were thinking things were ‘at peace’ with our neighbours north of the border it seems we might be about to upset them again.

After years of controversy over the ‘plundering’ of North Sea Oil and decades of arguing over self rule for the wet, windy, mountainous and I might add very hospitable and beautiful country, a historian claims to have discovered that the Scottish National Dish, Haggis, was not invented by the Scots!

Instead, Catherine Brown, has found a reference to it in a 1615 English book. That’s a clear 200 years before any mention of it in Scotland.

However, former world champion haggis maker, Robert Patrick, disagrees:

"Anything that's to do with Scotland, everybody wants to get a part of.

We’ve nurtured the thing for all these years, we’ve developed it, so I think very much it is a Scottish product"

Still, one good thing to come out of it ....they might soon be advertising for skilled bricklayers to rebuild Hadrian’s Wall......cue the Pipers!!

Buy One Get The Rest Free ..... In German Brothels!

Walk through any shopping centre in the UK and you will see discount offers a plenty, aimed at boosting trade for a range of struggling businesses.

The German's have gone one better and are offering customers of their brothels the chance to sleep with as many prostitutes as they want.... all for a one off fee!

If that isn't tempting enough, they have other offers, including rebates for customers on benefits or pensions, free shoe cleaning for overnight guests and ten per cent off if you arrive on a bicycle or by public transport.

With deals like that, I am sure our euro MPs will be queueing down the street for the chance to get the taxpayer the best value for their claimed expenses!!

Cameron Is A Complete Tw*t

If I ever had any doubts about the Opposition Leader, David Cameron's ability to lead this country after the next general election, they were confirmed today.

As a guest on a networked radio show he 'inadvertantly' used swear words and has since made a carefully crafted 'apology'

Explaining why he does not use social networking site Twitter he said:

"Too many twits might make a twat"

then, talking about the impact of the expenses scandal on MPs' reputations, he said:

"The public are rightly pissed off - sorry I can't say that in the morning - angry with politicians."

His aides say he did not go on the programme with the intention of swearing. However, someone with Cameron's slick PR background does not easily make a 'mistake' such as the one today.

I can only assume he was trying to court publicity by trying to appear hip to the younger voters in the UK.

Instead, what he has shown today, is that he is not hip but hype.

He has chosen to promote himself to the public based on what he thinks will be popular and 'cool' rather than what he really is.

This country is in a mess and we need a true leader with conviction and policies - not a Chameleon - to guide us back into better times.

I am not easily offended by swearing so I will be honest and admit I think he has been a complete twat!

Afghanistan - We Will Eventually Have To Talk!

My goodness, it has been three weeks since I last posted. I have been trying to think of a reasonable excuse for being so unreliable and have failed miserably.

During my 'downtime', more of our troops have lost their lives in Afghanistan and two more have died today.

Politicians of all parties have been making accusation and counter accusation about the lack of helicopters available to our military but none of them are owning up to the fact they have known for many months of the situation but have not wanted to be seen as the first to break ranks with the government. In short, they have first waited for the media to question the increasing number of deaths so they can capitalise on the public shock.They are spineless!

The government are, of course, still promoting the 'war against terrorism' excuse as being the reason for our presence in Afghanistan but no one has yet pointed out that all previous such situations have only ever been resolved by sitting around a table and compromising over beliefs and demands.

If anyone should ever doubt we talk to terrorists they should remember we have a number of MPs, with Irish accents, elected to the Commons - and who are claiming large amounts in expenses and salaries - who in the past, have been involved in what was perceived as being terrorist offences.

Indeed, even Nelson Mandela, who seems to be only a breath away from Sainthood in the minds of many, was himself branded a terrorist before being incarcerated for all those years. He is living proof that time changes our perceptions and we all eventually have to talk.

Meanwhile, a report in the Independent on Sunday has stated that our military action in Afghanistan has cost every man, woman and child in the UK, £190 since 2001. That money would have financed 23 new hospitals, 60,000 new teachers and 77,000 new nurses.

The cost of the lost human lives cannot, of course, be valued but it seems to me that any expected benefits from what has been described as "a war we cannot win", are unlikely to be worth the price we have so far paid!

Afghanistan - Is The Gamble Worth The Lost Lives?

In the space of a week, seven British soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan.

UK Defence Secretary Bob Ainsworth has now admitted what we all know already.... that even more lives will be lost.

The total number of UK military personnel killed in the conflict is now 176.

The Defence Secretary justified our continued presence in Afghanistan by saying:

"for Britain to be secure, Afghanistan needs to be made secure".

But is he right? Can we achieve anything approaching stability in the country and will it really make any long lasting difference to the security of the UK?.

Indeed, do most people in the UK even know where Afghanistan is?

Politicians are now starting to give various new reasons for our military presence but our main aim is, apparently, to defeat the Taliban and to stop Al Quaeda being able to operate from within the country. The only trouble with that aim, is that few of the terror organisations' permanent bases are within the borders of Afghanistan; they are operating, instead, from within neighbouring Pakistan and it is unlikely that situation will change in the near future.

We are, therefore, going to be gambling with the lives of our troops for years, if not decades, to come.

History has shown that the military might of most foreign powers has ultimately suffered defeat in Afghanistan.

If our politicians are to continue gambling, I just hope they can prove history wrong!

Government - The Illogical Cost Of Logic!

The politicians are, once again, taking shots at each other over the spiralling cost of government and how they are going to reduce it.

The Leader of Her Majesty's Opposition, David Cameron, said yesterday he would cut back on the expensive and unelected quangos should his party win the next election.

What is needed, though, is much more than that; it is an understanding of how the system works in the first place and that is something that no-one seems to be able to get their head around.

The best illustration of the way our government is run was printed in the letters page of The Kent on Sunday at the weekend. It read thus:

Once upon a time, the government had a vast scrapyard in the middle of a deserted industrial estate.

A civil servant said: “Someone may steal from it at night.” So they created a night watchman position and hired a person for the job.

Then the Prime Minster said:

“How does the watchman do his job without instruction?”

So, they created a planning department and hired two people - one to write the instructions and one to do time studies.

Then, the Minister for The Department of Work and Pensions said:

“How will we know the night watchman will be doing the tasks correctly?”

So, they created a quality control department and hired two people - one to do the studies and one to write the reports.

Then the Chancellor said: “How are these people going to get paid?”

So they created the positions of time-keeper and payroll officer, and hired two more people.

Then the Treasury said: “Who will be accountable for all these people?”

So, they created an admin section and hired and administrative officer, assistant administrative officer and a legal secretary.

Then the Chief Secretary to the Treasury said: “We have had this command in operation for a year and are £18,000 over budget. We must cut back overall costs.”

So, they made the night watchman redundant!

Seems to be a pretty fair summary to me....!

Michael Jackson - Controversial To The End!

The King is dead - well the much celebrated 'King of Pop' anyway!

In the unlikely event you have been hidden away in a cave and not heard the news, singer, dancer and musician, Michael Jackson, passed away during Thursday evening (UK time) from what is said to have been a heart attack.

The media, of course, are questioning if this was brought on by the excessive use of painkillers and whether one such drug was administered by his 'personal physician' a short while before his death.

Whatever the outcome, MJ ended his life as he had lived through most of it - in chaos.

He is a spectacular advert for not pushing your children into the world of showbusiness at an early age. His life seemed to be, at best, unrelated to reality, and at worst seedy and questionable. Both his unhealthy fascination with young people and his obsession with changing his appearance through the use of the surgeon's knife clearly demonstrated a mind that was not at ease within it's own framework.

Commentators are saying we will all remember where we were when MJ died. Personally, I will not.

He was unquestionably a great entertainer and had a knack of grabbing the headlines whenever he wanted. That is as far as it goes for me - but then I do not share the fascination for celebrity misfits that many people do.

It could be argued he was seen as a role model by many of his fans but surely a lifestyle like his is not something to be envied or aspire to?

It seems that Jackson has departed this earth as he lived his life - in a huge mess that others are going to spend years cleaning up.

R.I.P. MJ!

UK Policing -A Change For The Worse!

Last time I checked, we were living in a free society where the right to demonstrate was just that - a right.

When it was peacefully carried out, it was unhindered by the police - intervention only came about after a public order offence was being, or likely to be committed.

This disturbing video report in the Guardian newspaper shows how police tactics have now changed for the worse and we should, perhaps, start examining our own society more closely before we start to criticise those in other countries.

Judge for yourself....

PM Wants To Teach Not Lead!

Speaking in a peculiar but presumably honest interview in today's Guardian, Gordon Brown has said he would like to go into teaching when he leaves office. He has also admitted to being a poor communicator and admits he has lacked the ability to forward plan because he has had to concentrate on dealing with real time matters.

Not exactly great qualifications for teaching!

He also admits (I think understandably) he has been badly hurt by the recent attempts to force his resignation and:

"I'm not interested in what accompanies being in power. I wouldn't worry if I never returned to all those places - Downing Street, Chequers...And it would probably be good for my children."

Why then, did he fight and scheme so hard to take over the leadership from his predecessor, Tony Blair?

He also said:

"To be honest, you could walk away from all this tomorrow"

So why doesn't he?

Maybe it is because this interview reads as nothing more than a last ditch attempt to drum up support based on the nation's sympathy vote; he has, after all, tried everything else.

What we certainly do not need in these times is a leader who openly admits he is not up to the job.

I am finally coming round to the idea that it is time the removal men were called to Number 10!

It's So 'Transparent' They Think We Can't See Through It!

With what has turned out to be rather bizarre timing, the government announced on Tuesday, their plans for a broadband tax on phone lines in the UK, to guarantee all of us are able to surf the internet at the highest possible speeds.

Today, the Commons authorities have published over a million documents on the internet relating to the expenses claimed by our politicians over the past four years.

According to the Prime Minister:

"My principle in this is the maximum transparency - it's got to be consistent of course with security but I think people have got to be as transparent as possible"

The released documents are so "transparent" that most of the interesting detail has been blacked out and cannot be read.

Of course, the censored sections have nearly all been revealed by the Daily Telegraph revelations already. So what is the reasoning behind such an action?........you've guessed it.......security!! That convenient excuse for hiding embarrassing facts, has been brought into play again.

Apparently, it is to protect the politicians from their constituents knowing their home addresses. However, this also makes it difficult to see which politicians have 'flipped' their homes over the four year period.

One of the people who brought the original Freedom of Information request targeting MP's expenses summed it up thus:

"I can see that avoiding embarrassment has been the key motivating factor of what's been deleted"

It makes me wonder, how much of the proposed super fast broadband will be conveniently blacked out when 'transparency' proves it could be embarrassing!

The 'Dud Missile' Of An Iraq War Enquiry

Yesterday afternoon, our failing prime minister, Gordon Brown, finally announced what many have been demanding for years - an enquiry into the Iraq war. So far so good.

The fully independent enquiry is to be held in secret, will not report until after the next general election and will not apportion any blame. Now that is all bad!

After the recent scandal over MPs expenses when the prime minister promised a more transparent government, does he really think the British public will have any trust in such an enquiry? Has he not been told of his party's total crash in the polls?

Many questions about the legality of the Iraq war still remain unanswered, even though the original claims about weapons of mass destruction have been proved false.

A secret enquiry where no-one ends up taking responsibility is about as much use as a cat flap on a submarine.

The families of thousands of dead Iraqis and those of the 179 British service personnel killed as a result of the conflict, deserve much more than just another high profile cover up!

Planet Earth to Collide with either Mars or Venus!

We're all doomed!

Computer simulations have predicted that our planet Earth might collide with either Mars or Venus- but not for at least another billion years!

By that time, we will probably already have destroyed ourselves by one of a multitude of perils like Swine Flu, nuclear stupidity, global warming, another crap government or boredom from watching the contestants on series one billion of Big Brother!

Roll on the collision I say!!

The Perils Of A Big Majority!

Predictably, the Labour party have been well and truly trounced in the European and local elections; they have suffered the worst results in living memory.

Predictably, the Conservatives have gained a massive power base and are looking good for when the country eventually goes to the polls in a general election.

Sadly, apart from a few isolated cases, the alternative parties have only managed to make moderate gains and there lies the problem....

We do not need another government holding power with a massive majority. We have lived through that cycle of events since Mrs Thatcher's Tory government came to power all those years ago.

Innovation and a fair society does not come from having big majorities. It only comes when the political parties have to work together and take the best of each other's ideas.

We should have learned by now that big majorities just bring arrogance, deceit and abuse of the democratic system.

If anyone should ever be tempted to doubt that fact, they only have to watch what is happening in UK politics now!

Voting - An Exercise In Freedom!

Twenty years ago, this week, the demonstration for democracy and freedom of speech took place in Tiananmen Square in China. Few will forget the iconic picture of 'tank man' who stopped the military armour by refusing to move out of its way.

It seems ironic that today, when we are supposed to be exercising our own freedoms by voting in the local and european elections, many of us will be too apathetic to place our crosses against the name of our chosen candidate. We are so used to living in a free society, we tend to take it all for granted.

After weeks of hearing the stories of greed and arrogance by our politicians, it is almost understandable some of us will be reluctant to vote for anyone, though to remain silent, will only play into the hands of the major political parties.

From my own point of view, I went to the polling station and voted for those whom I had actually met, while they were campaigning hard on the streets over the last few weeks.

Needless to say, they were not from the complacent 'big three' political parties.

Time for change!

PM Brown Takes Low Blow From Blears!

If the wheels on Prime Minister Gordon Brown's bus have not yet fallen off, they are certainly wobbly to the point of collapse.

Following yesterday's rumour that Home Secretary Jacqui Smith is to leave his cabinet, Communities Secretary Hazel Blears, has now followed, using perfect showbiz timing (some might question what she ever did anyway).

Of course, both women have been severely criticised recently for their dubious use of the expenses system and both were tipped to be removed from their positions in the cabinet in the next few days. But, while it might be almost believable that Ms Smith's intentions are honourable, in the case of Ms Blears they are most certainly not.

To walk out so publically just a day ahead of tomorrow's polling, is nothing short of a treacherous act, aimed at toppling her leader over the cliff edge, on which he is presently balancing. She is, by her action, hoping to kick-start an open revolt amongst Labour MPs to force the PM from office. It could be that she will succeed.

Tonight, it was reported, that the signatures of over a hundred MPs have already been collected, in a sign of no confidence in their leader.

Blears' actions have been described by one political commentator as being "Deliberate, calculated and with intent".

Whether Brown goes or stays - and I really could not care as they all seem to be odious individuals who command no respect - I just hope that Blears, by displaying such disloyalty, will never be seen performing in the political spotlight again.

Queuing For The Right To Die!

Today, I was shocked to learn that over eight hundred people in the UK have added their names to a waiting list - to die.

They are queueing to attend special clinics in Switzerland, where the law permits assisted suicides and where they will be helped to end their lives with dignity.

Of course, most of these people are suffering from terminal illnesses and they do not want to remain in the UK where the present law forbids assisting in the ending of a life. They do not want to cause undue suffering on themselves or their loved ones, by waiting for the inevitable to run its course; they want to end their lives while they still have some control.

The House of Lords is presently debating whether UK law should be changed to allow assisted suicides to be made legal here. The reality, is that for years, many doctors have been assisting in speeding up the ending process. It is not done officially but is achieved through prescribing heavier than needed doses of drugs to those with little hope of living a quality life and who deserve some compassion and humanity.

Predictably, many of those of a religious nature are outraged at the possibility of assisted suicides becoming legal. They frequently argue their point, by mentioning the 'word of God' and by saying no-one has the right to decide their own end - except, of course, the Good Lord himself.

I do not know whether there really is a God or not. For me it is purely an academic argument.

I do know, there is a suffering that many people do not deserve to experience and if they can find a peaceful way to end their pain, they should surely be given the ultimate decision over their own destiny.

The act of suicide is not, as many would argue, a cowardly one.

To decide to cross the point of no return takes incredible courage and determination. It is not an attention seeking exercise but a final act of desperation and we should, surely, try to respect the views and the wishes of those who feel they no longer have a choice.

Britain's TV Talent

This weekend saw the largest audience for a UK TV show since 2004. It has been described by many as "car crash television" and by some as being "a freak show". Whatever the various opinions expressed, there is no denying that the final of Britain's Got Talent (BGT) attracted a peak audience of 19.3 million viewers.

It can only be described as a massive success for the ITV network, where the average viewing figure for a Saturday night is normally around 5.3m. If you combine the peak rate advertising revenue to the income from phone-in voting at 50p per time. it must have been television's version of winning the lottery.

Despite what we are told, BGT is a mongrel in the history of TV talent shows; it is not, as we have been led to believe, an original format but is instead a mish mash of various shows that have gone before.

Where it scores over its predecessors, though, is that it has had a huge amount of money invested in it and has high production values and massive publicity and hype.

The three judges have no obvious qualification for judging 'talent' but head judge, Simon Cowell, has always demonstrated a huge talent for tapping into the naivety of the British public while at the same time, exploiting the massive earning potential of the successful participants at the top of the competition.

The show's producers, under the control of Cowell, have successfully manipulated the various senses within each of us, by letting us share the ridicule, amazement, sympathy and embarrassment carefully woven into each episode and subsequently judged by the panel. The balance between entertainment and discomfort has often been a delicate one.

We enjoy the guilty pleasure of being the voyeur when a ten year old contestant stops singing in the middle of a live performance, has a semi tantrum and insists on being able to start over.

We love the feeling of guilt when we judge a contestant on her plain looks and then, when she starts her performance, are left mouth agape because she has a truly amazing voice.

Personally, I wish that TV entertainment did not have to rely on exploiting such feelings within us but then 19.3 million people think I am wrong!