Just a thought...

I have often heard people say 'You made your choice, now you have to live with it!'... But the older I get, the more I learn about life, the more I doubt the accuracy of such a statement.

For example, if I chose to be a dustbin man in my teenage years, should I always live with it? Or what if I did drugs and became a drug addict, does that mean I should just accept the fact that I am hooked on drugs? After all that was my choice.

Such a statement leaves a very bleak picture for the ability we have to make a better future for ourselves. Perhaps a more accurate sentiment would be to say that we have to live with the consequences of our choices, but we do not have to live with our choices.

If I make a poor decision in my life, it is within my power to make another choice. A better choice. Or at least I hope it will be a better choice.

Changing your mind, admitting that you made a poor decision however requires courage. It takes a brave person to admit they were wrong, and it takes a strong person to try and change the path of their life.

London riots: 2011 and Beyond

Over the past few days London has been rocked by scenes of rioting, but unlike other riots in recent memory, this has not been localized. It has been wide spread, and the rioters have been many in number. But what has caused this wide spread malcontent far and wide across London.

Initially the riots began in Tottenham, after a protest in which another black man dies in Police presence under suspicious circumstances, but it is unlikely that a large number of the rioters were friends with this young black man or were associated with him in any way. So why would they take to the streets in the manner that they have, and why was it not immediately after his death?

It is my belief that the treatment of the protesters was the straw that broke the proverbial camel's back. Still reeling from the death of Smiley Culture in police custody, and not believing the official line that he committed suicide, yet another black man dies shortly after and his family are not being given clear answers or information regarding what happened. When there is a peaceful gathering outside of the police station to protest the treatment of this family, the police then respond in a heavy handed manner and thus throw a lit match onto the volatile combination of suspicion, mistreatment, poverty and injustice - both social and legal. And it is perhaps the latter of these ingredients that can address why the unrest has spread so far and into so many different communities in London.

Due to the recent government cuts, Haringey Council has seen its youth services budget slashed by 75%. Given nothing to do, and no where to go to have questions answered or their views heard, resentment and frustration was bound to grow, and it was a matter of time before it was expressed. That it was expressed with such destruction and vehemence should serve as a wake up call to the government that the social repercussions of making cuts in the manner they have done will only alienate youth and minorities in a similar manner to that of the 1980's. There is a burning question in many peoples minds as to where the parents of these youths are, and although I cannot answer that, I will say that in the growing poverty and hardships that many are facing, they are possibly working two and three jobs just to make ends meet. In 2008-09 22% of the British population was living below the poverty threshold with a greater proportion of those in Inner London in the low income bracket. Government cuts have placed an even greater strain on families and support services aimed at assisting those that need help the most.

A crucial factor in this I believe is the recent wide spread vilification of the police in the media and in the halls of Westminster, for their role in the phone hacking debacle. The fact that the wide spread corruption has now been outed, it only reinforces in the minds of youths and minorities that they cannot trust those that are supposedly meant to protect them. No matter how much the Metropolitan Police may talk about a few bad apples among their ranks, the truth is their image and reputation has not been tarnished as much as it has been completely destroyed. In the wake of the McPherson report the Police force was found to be institutionally racist, an accusation they could in large parts claim ignorance to. But to now be found not just institutionally racist but also knowingly and willingly corrupt is a wound that may be so great, that among ethnic minorities, the Metropolitan Police may never recover from.

In large parts the Government of the day has also played its part in encouraging these riots. (In Egypt, in Syria, in Libya, William Hague calls them protesters, but in the UK they are known as rioters). By encouraging people to rise up against a government that is un-elected and refuses to listen to the people, the British government has only itself planted the seeds of revolt in the minds of its own people. The current coalition government that finds itself in power in Britain is not elected, and for an example of refusing to listen to the will of the people one need think back no further than December 2010 and the student protests and the heavy handed crackdown and response to them. There will be those that say that the circumstances are different, because people's lives are not at risk, well that is clearly not true, and further to the black men that have died at the hands of the police, think Ian Tomlinson.

This is only a brief outline of some of the possible reasons for the events taking place in London today, but it is by no means an attempt to diminish the suffering that many people have had to endure, and sadly will endure because of these riots. I only say with regret that I do not believe this to be the end of the riots as the systems and policies that gave rise to such discontent still endure.

One Terrorist Down... Only Bush and Blair to go!

So Osama Bin Laden is dead and there is great rejoicing and celebrations through out the United States. Am I the only one a little disturbed and disgusted at these actions and the hypocrisy of this nation of war mongers?

The flag of the United States of America is burned, or one of their soldiers is killed and as a nation they are shocked at the uncivilized behavior as some people dance in the streets and cheer, and yet they do the same over the death of a human being?

"But he was a terrorist!" you say. "He was an evil man!" I hear you cry.

But was he?

In the West, we supposedly believe in a concept of due process; of being innocent until found guilty by a jury of our peers, and on that basis I say that Bin Laden has gone to his grave innocent in the eyes of man no matter how guilty he may be before the throne of God. The nations in which he masterminded attacks, we robbed of the opportunity to find him guilty in their courts by the self serving, selfish and arrogant actions of the United States.

I am also concerned about the manner in which he died. A single bullet to the head. That was an execution carried out without course for appeal to the sentence, and yet the claim goes out that justice has been done. This was not justice. This was murder.

Murder carried out in another country by American Special Forces that did not give the government of a sovereign nation forewarning that they were carrying out an operation on their soil. Could the arrogance of the USA be any more apparent? All they need to do is change the motto on their crest to "We do what we like, how we like, and when we like.". Or perhaps more appropriate they could redesign their flag and just put a hand on it, middle finger extended and underneath the slogan "**** you".

Perhaps the more worrying issue in all of this is that instead of becoming more secure, the threat of terrorism has only increased. Or that is what we have been told in the media and by governments. Is this the precursor to an excuse to sending ground troops into Libya? I would not be surprised if it were. The announcement of Bin Laden's death has come at a time where interest in the 'war on terror' was waning, where economic crisis has gripped the world and when the pressure on the need to secure natural resources (oil) is increasing. By destabilizing the Middle East, the Western nations have given themselves a reason to invade by claiming they are just going to 'aid in stabilizing the region'.

With this in mind, I have to ask who is the real terrorist?

Osama Bin Laden is dead, and millions of people are wondering when their country is going to be invaded. They live in fear that their countries will be cast into war due to the meddling of Western nations... And those in Western nations live in fear of a terrorist attack due to the actions of their governments. So once again who is the real terrorist? Bin Laden is dead and we are still living in terror, so was he the real cause of the problem or is there a need to look closer to home.

Shoot the messenger

It seems every time I turn on the TV I am hearing that Libya is in crisis, but what I see is the population rising up and saying they are not happy with their current system of governance. As I am not Libyan I will not comment on whether it is right or wrong, or whether it is fair, but as someone who lives in the Western world, I am left wondering why there was no threat of NATO troops invading Britain in December 2010.

Tony Blair, the ex British Prime Minister has condemned the actions of Colonel Ghaddafi's troops in quashing what he, as the leader of the country views as an uprising and has allegedly threatened the use of force in Libya. David Cameron has condemned the Libyan governments actions and called their actions 'untolerable'. He went further to say that 'brutality and intimidation will not be tolerated'.

Oh really Mr Cameron?

So how do you justify the actions of the police force in Britain during the student protests of 2010? Beatings, hospitalizations, intimidation were all used against student protestors, and yet no charge was brought against any police officer.

Where was the threat of NATO forces in Rwanda? Did they go into Egypt recently? Tunisia perhaps? Or were they dissuaded from action in these countries due to the lack of oil reserves to be found there?

There may be human rights abuses taking place in Libya, but no more so than those that take place in Israel every day. Has NATO invaded Jerusalem? Far from it. And what about UN sanctions imposed on Israel because of their actions? Well yes, there are some, but they have been flaunted and disregarded but unlike with Iraq, there has been no international invasion and regime change.

But then there was no oil at stake.

Tony Blair, is an man of evil actions even if his intentions are good. What is that old adage, 'The path to hell is often paved with good intentions'? Blair supported and facilitated the invasion of Iraq with at best questionable information, and now that he is currently functioning in the role of a Middle East Peace Envoy, he is actually proving to be a harbinger of doom.

They say don't shoot the messenger, but in future, Arab leaders may find it just that bit safer to do so.

Cleanin out my closet

IN my wardrobe hangs a waistcoat. I haven't worn it in years, although I would like to. I sometimes look at it and think maybe I would like to put it on and wear it. Roll back the years. But the truth is, I have probably outgrown it, and no matter how much I might look back on it wistfully wishing I could once again slip into it... the truth is I am highly unlikely to do so.

And still, no matter how many times I clear out my wardrobe, this waist coast remains. I move house, this waist coat remains. I have realised somethings in life, no matter what happens you will never let go, and will always remain in your possession.

And so it is with people in life.

Shades of Gray

This week there has been a lot of talk about Andy Gray and Richard Keys, and the sexist comments they have made. I think I should add my two pence to the argument.

Andy Gray was wrong to say that Miss Massey did not know the offside rule, although the sentiment that most women do not know the offside rule is true. It is highly unlikely that she would have made it to her postion as linesma.... Sorry 'Assistant Referee', if she is not aware of the rules. That said, Howard Webb made it to his position as a referee and he doesn't seem to be aware of any other rule other than Man U must win.

However, Andy Gray's clip on camera where he makes sexual innuendo's which are totally inappropriate to a female colleage are enough to get him sacked on their own, and it was right that he was fired. He lacked the class to walk on his own accord, which would have been the honorable thing to do, and it is only right that he is left with what he counts as a 'reputation' in tatters.

I have heard mutterings from people that women say far more demeaning stuff about men and yet they are not forced to resign from their positions, and although this is not true, let us suppose for a minute it is; is this really that much different from servants talking behind the back of unjust masters?

Yes. I did go there. No matter how we wish to look at it, women are still disadvantaged in the work place when compared to their male counterparts. Women are still disadvantaged in many areas of society when it comes to their male counterparts. Women are still in many ways disadvantaged in the home when it comes to their male counterparts. And this is by no means to say that the law has everything right, because the complete opposite is true when it comes to children and paternal custody, but even this is steeped in the idea that women are better as homemakers than bread winners, and in some ways disadvantages them further.

I do not believe that this whole episode is a matter of political correctness gone wrong, but political correctness at its best.

Andy Gray and Richard Keys speak their opinions, no matter how idiotic (and they almost always are idiotic) to millions of people every week who for some reason take what they say as the gospel truth. Regardless of the fact that they thought they were making these remarks privately, in a studion anything can happen, and they should have been aware of this. They should also be aware of the impact of their opinions on the people that tune in to watch football but fail to mute their TV's. It sends out a negative message to women, it reinforces negative stereotypes of women in men, and it perpetuates the cycle.

I for one am glad to see women officials at mens sporting venues.

I look forward to the day when women also compete in the same sporting event and earn the same amount of money.

If only so I can here them complain that its not fair and the men are stronger, faster and more aggressive than they are.

You can't have your cake and eat it love...

Now run along and bring us a cuppa

The Pursuit of Happiness

Ask me what I want to be in life, and the answer you will invariably get back is, "To be happy!". It is my standard response, and the answer I believe to be the most accurate and truthful I can give, but I am now beginning to wonder if it is truly attainable, and if so, at what cost?

It is natural in life that we all want things, whether it be a nice house or a good job; to travel the world or settle down with a family. None of these things are wrong or bad, but what I am realising is that not all of the things I want in life are compatible with each other. It seems that with each dream comes a responsibility or worse still, consequences that will impact on other targets you have set in life. As a result, sometimes we just have to accept that we just can't have it all.

As things go, I think I am a pretty straight forward, simple and easy person to please, but as I sat down and thought about some of things I wanted in life, I realised that they were not always compatible with each other. For example, how does my love to travel marry to the fact that I have always wanted to have children and a family? For clarification, travel to me is not defined as a two week holiday lying on a beach somewhere. It requires a backpack, and sometimes taking the off beaten tracks; going where few people go and getting at the heart of the community and culture of a place. It requires immersion in the local community and culture and as such takes time. Such excursions are not suitable for young children. In the pursuit of my happiness do I just leave and do it? Or do I consider the happiness of others; a son who will miss his father, a wife who will miss her husband, a mother who will miss her son?

There are many other contradictory dreams that I have. I even have some dreams that are not contradictory but I do not pursue just because I know the impact that they will have on others. This realisation has forced me to rethink the concept of happiness and the pursuit of it.

Happiness is not hedonism.

Ones pleasures in life will almost always come at the cost of someone else. The promotion at work, the courtside tickets, the lottery win, even right down to the woman/man that you love, will come at the cost of someone elses ambitions, hopes, dreams or desires. With this in mind, the concept of happiness originating from what I personally gain slowly drops away, and the more I find happiness in what others gain.

That does not mean I stop wanting or dreaming for things, but it does mean that when I get the things that I truly want, I understand that the true value of them is not simply measured by what I have gained, it also measured by what others have lost.