I'm not an animal lover (that's probably the French in me) but I do know that some people who like pets suffer from the disgusting bugs they carry around with them unless they're cooked to rare at gas mark 6. Fear not, oh hypersensitive Brits, for soon you will be able to acquire a hypo-allergenic cat to soothe your ills.
This is surely the only comment required on Sunday's soupendous Pizzagate fiasco.
Fox (prop. R. Murdoch) is well known for its extremely biased coverage of all things political and its anti-Democrat stance. (In fact, we're likely to see more of this kind of thing in the U.K. with the increasing reach of Sky News on free to air digital broadcasts and the Mail group of newspapers stake in ITN.) But it's interesting how the media attempts to damn those who it opposes while trying to look like it's not engaging in character assassination. Check out this Fox story, for example, which suggests Kerry isn't the all-American baseball fan he claims to be. No need to tackle the issues, no need to question his war record: if he's a point out on the score, he's not Presidential material. Of course, he does actually know where Vietnam is...
Having found that Iraq didn't have nuclear weapons but did show incontravertible proof of possessing the intention to make them, it appears that we should excuse some intelligence dossiers having a word or two out of place. Or even just a letter: didn't they mean Iran?
The U.S. wants to impose sanctions on Tehran for pursuing a nuclear energy policy that could allow arms research. There is no claim that Iran has instigated a weapons programme, but they do seem to possess that sanctionable intent.
European efforts to migrate Iran to more advanced nuclear energy techniques that wouldn't be suitable for weapons have been met with dismay by the U.S. State Department, who fear that this will give Iran time to develop a bomb.
Of course there are few qualms expressed about Pakistan or Israel, who have implemented this technology already and tested it. The message seems to be, if you want a nuclear weapon, you'd better not show it until you've actually developed it (and the means to fire it into a neighbouring country).
While MPs are only now having to divulge all their expense claims, you are able to check up on their activity (or lack of) through this useful site.
Ahead of the match in Athens, I thought I'd set out my stall on how Arsenal and others are likely to perform. And I can't see Arsenal winning the tournament.
The defence lacks strength in depth, both in personnel where if Campbell or Touré were injurerd the team would really suffer and on the pitch, where the bulk of the defensive onus is placed on the centre backs and Vieira. There isn't enough defensive capacity in the rest of the team to sustain a successful European campaign. The teams that best meet those values are Chelsea and Juventus, with Milan and Manchester United being other contenders.
In the league it's different however. I can't see anyone beating Arsenal, even when they suffer injuries; they score goals from every part of the pitch. I realize this was the case two years ago, but this time Arsenal's rivals aren't strong enough to capitalize on any slips.
But the managers who have made the biggest impact in the Premiership remain Moyes and Santini. Moyes has demonstrated what you can achieve with little skill -- he's ideally qualified for the Scotland job -- while Santini has turned Spurs around by doing the blindingly obvious effectively. Why Pleat and Hoddle failed to realise that the Spurs midfield couldn't run and that the defence was a shambles is beyond me, but Santini has addressed both from the outset. He's such a miserable git though.
I'm often struck by the force of conviction that people with religious faith have that they are right. But why shouldn't they be self-righteous when they have a book that justifies all they say, be it the Torah, Coran, Bible, Guru Granth or whatever? Because there's no suspension of judgement, no further investigation, no intellectual exercise; just a displacement of confidence away from the self to text that has been interpreted for them.
It's little coincidence that the times of the greatest religious fervour have produced the least progress in human knowledge. The industrial revolution saw the greatest decline in church attendance in Britain, while the Cultural Revolution in China (little red books this time) hardly compared favourably with increasing levels of education in neighbouring Japan.
Marx may have looked on religion as an opiate, assuaging those in poverty that they would be rewarded after they died. But its hallucinogenic qualities are no less evident as it blinds us to resolving issues (west bank, stem cell research, capitalism) that should be considered in a little more detail.
The web is a worldwide community, a source for people of diverse languages to communicate with each other. As such, this on-line dictionary of abuse has to number among my favourite sites.
Do you think there's a trade fair for trade fairs? Where stands compete to see who provides the most lurid jelly beans and salesmen in suits recount patronizing blandishments about things you never asked about in the hope you'll forget a pertinent question. Then lumber you with a carrier bag full of glossy documents you'll never read and non-biodegradable plastic. Such is the fare of corporate ennui.
