[no denying] that there's denial and denial

Two primitive fishermen with spears step through the water and wait for the sand to resettle and for the water to become clear again. They're looking for flatfish.

A rainbow fish appears instead and one of the two doesn't want that fish touched. What's the most effective method of preventing it being caught?

I'd say it would be to accidentally on purpose muddy the waters and then the fish can't be seen. Not only that, it would now be tipped off and may well swim away out of range.

Maybe it's not the greatest analogy but you'll soon see where this is going. Maybe, as Lucia Flecha da Lima claimed:

"Paul Burrell was perfectly capable of imitating Princess Diana's handwriting."

Maybe so. Maybe not. A whole host of thoughts crowd into the mind, to be filtered through predispositions and prejudices and please don't claim you're unbiased or looking only at the facts. You might be trying to do that and so am I but we're restricted by our experiences, by our foreknowledge.

This woman won't accept that Diana felt that she was going to be killed. It doesn't gel with her experience. There are obviously those who would place great store on da Lima being "one of the princess's closest confidantes" and therefore this being an appeal to authoritativeness, in order to conclude the letter's a fake.

But we don't actually know.

On the other hand, if it is true, then very powerful personages wish it to be the accepted view that the letter's a fake. It's only logical that no stone will be left unturned. Against that, it's only one letter and only one peron rejecting it, long after the fact. To appeal to numbers who believe in it or not is pointless.

Hand in hand with this is the necessity to vilify the opponent and the standard subterfuge is to label anyone accepting the letter as a conspiracy theorist. End of story. No need to pursue it further.

Against that, there is the view that a certain type of researcher always leans towards the conspiratorial explanation and this clouds his judgement when it comes to something which can be explained away more plausibly, by less sensational means.

This is serial rationality and the rationalist always has the advantage over the passionate ferret in that he appears ... well ... rational. A prime example is Cheney who always sounds plausible, even though he's not saying anything which stands the test. He draws on a few stock phrases which appeal to the no-nonsense conservative and that's accepted as truth.

On the other hand, the rationalist could well be right. I've read some quite cogent arguments for the "single bullet theory" with JFK, now that the hysteria's died away. The claim to "likelihood", witnesses' testimony and the relatively clear view from the building behind JFK, let alone the grassy knoll, is powerful but it might, after all, be wrong.

To claim Oswald couldn't have made it down those steps and be drinking a coke is a straw man, as is the ludicrous diagram of relative body positions in the limo, used to disprove the single bullet theory. And the vehemence with which both sides stick to their entrenched positions precludes debate. Actually, I believe it was an ordered hit but that's neither here nor there.

So, this letter. It exists. It's Exhibit A. To not admit it as evidence, you'd have to prove Burrell could have forged it so well it got past the handwriting experts. And who's to say Burrell forged it anyway?

Finally, the murky muddying of entrenched interests who'll either pay or kill. Well, what can one do about them?

Does it matter? I think it does. If it's a forgery - why was it done? And who did it? Burrell, to revenge himself on the slights he felt by the princess and the boys? Maybe.

One thing I do know though is that the "water-muddiers", the flat deniers, the "everything must be a conspiracy" advocates - none of them have any place in this process of finding the most likely scenario.

Most likely scenario because I don't think anyone's going to uncover the truth.

[carla bruni] and sarkozy?

Stranger things have happened ... haven't they?

Vigilance (for Freedom), Even During Christmas Break

Indianapolos

One thing I really enjoy is waking up and finding that one of the "team members" on this blog has posted and this is an open invitation to some of my other guests to post as well.

Today it is Matt, of Buckeye Thoughts, his blog sadly no more. Matt is a young American now stationed in Indianapolos and attending [or did] Purdue University, West Lafayette. And yet his blog dealt with the Buckeye State.

As you'll see from this guest post, his interests are wide and yet he and his friends over in the States have been getting more than a little worried of late by what they're seeing:

Seeing as how it is Christmas Break (I've been on it since 4:15 p.m. EST last Saturday), you all would think I could relax. I have been but at the same time have still been very preoccupied. The primaries for the two parties nominations of presidential candidates start in a few weeks. As a political science major, you'd think I'd care.

I do, deeply. Yet I don't care about either party. Yes, that's shocking to say that for the first time in my 20 years of life on this Earth, I don't care about either party. I've strongly identified with one since a young age (at first because of my parents, naturally, but later on because it held the values I held dear), but won't say which one. Both, to me, in this upcoming election are poised to sell my country outright to highest bidder.

On the one hand, this was announced. I'm sure you all remember James writing several posts on the SPP and how it threatened American sovereignty. Don't start to pop the champagne just yet. That announcement seemed very suspicious to me; I was right to be suspicious. Contrary to what some of you may think, I don't buy into conspiracy theories. When I first heard of this whole concept of the Security and Prosperity Partnership, I thought it was a joke, a conspiracy theory. After reading and doing research, I realized it was very, very real.

I even wrote a letter to my school's newspaper a while back about it, taking aim at a person who denied it (not an ad-hominem attack, but attacking his view that it didn't exist). He wrote me back, saying that upon closer inspection, the whole thing (the SPP/the plan to create the NAU) was simply just a dialog. I wish I could be as blissfully ignorant as him but I can't.

It seems every time I go abroad something happens. When I leave in January, something will be happening in March. In March, the Supreme Court will be hearing arguments made by the District of Columbia, which is trying to uphold its ban on the 2nd Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens in the district. The Court's ruling will be judicial precedent to a) repeal anti-carry laws nationwide or b) give precedent to the ability of where to carry (and the eventual confiscation) of firearms.

I should be happy; I'm on break. I am and yet I am very worried. This coming year could be the taking back of the US from those who would sell us out: the SPP and those who would oppose 2nd Amendment rights for law-abiding citizens. Make no mistake, I am not some whacko. I have said, many times, the Bill of Rights must be respected in its entirety (all 10 Amendments) or not at all. By the same token, 2008 could be the beginning of the end for my country. Regardless of what happens in March (the decision will be passed down, supposedly, in June), November will decide the future of my country. I hope someone comes in who is willing to stop the madness before it's too late. I hope...

[sex predator] allegedly at it again

Sex predator Debra Lefave

I know I'm late to the party on this but:

Why on earth didn't I have her as my teacher at 14? I can't think of one of the guys who wouldn't have been into it with her. We were all looking about for likely girls at that time and would have welcomed a bit of "lewd and lascivious battery".

Don't understand the "battery" part. We'd have been the ones doing the battery.

Not now of course - you don't know who's been in there and at what level of hygiene. Besides, she doesn't seem to be so much into the immature man.

It appears she's now at it again. Wonder what her problem is? Perhaps she was raped as a young girl, perhaps she enjoys undersized, under-aged equipment. She might even be a victim, visiting her victimhood on others. Can you feel any pity for her?

Either way she's in trouble and could be put away for 15 years. Do you feel it's as bad for a woman to be doing it with boys as for a man with girls?

I didn't ask if you "thought" it was as bad - I know you'd say yes to that but the question was - do you "feel" it's as bad?

Actually, if you look at the official file, she looks remarkably like someone I briefly knew and who was also not noted for her chastity.

Doesn't thrill.

[commercialmas] fractal landscapes and escape

More than one girlfriend has concluded I'm s-o-o-o-o passive. One perspicacious wife said I was impossible to live with. Good - I like being impossible.

The high energy, high output level you see on this blog is no illusion but it's fragmented. The other 30% of the time I wish to do nothing and see nobody. I detest shopping of any kind and my mate's birthday/Christmas double is filling me with foreboding. And his woman wants me to come round there for a meal because she likes me and I know that means presents buying, whatever they say to the contrary.

Why would they want to bother with me?

There's a "fabulous" three level department store complex not 300 metres from me but I can't bring myself to enter that Palace of Glitz. I know I have to, to buy the gillette products we traditionally give one another but it's pressing on the brain.

Buying them is no problem. Entering that monstrosity is.

I put that down to my last girlfriend who forced me into every shop and boutique in the city more or less all day, every day. Nice negotiating those perfect breasts in boutique cubicles all day, every day but we could do that better at home. I detest shopping. And dancing. Sometimes dancing is good, in some cafe in the evening where there's a small floor and just her but the imperious dancefloor where everyone has to find a jostled piece of floor to face one another like Wyatt Earp at High Noon, wiggling one's appendages and pretending it's fun?

Where can I run to?

Enforcement is the problem. Well, in Higham's case, it's very real and it's getting worse. I have to go to Uni today - ugggh. I have to go to the Min. When I eventually get to both it'll no doubt be fine and we'll make the most of it but I don't want to.

Commercialmas is the pits and office parties are the direst of all - fine for young people who can only deal in externals, as someone famous said but well nigh soul destroying for someone with half a brain. And not only for the young. Was trapped some years back, tricked in fact, into something I'll never forgive that girlfriend for.

She knew about these things and insisted I come to the Big Do at her parent's place which would have been bearable if she'd been there but where was she when I punctually arrived and no one else was there?

She was in the city doing the rounds of parties, wasn't she?

Guests from the outlying reaches of the extended family [hers, not mine] started awkwardly arriving with their enforced smalltalk and after the first few vodkas, the direness really began. When the first tipsy pair of middle-aged shriekers got up to sway to the television music, that was the signal to leave.

About 22:30 she arrived. I glared, made my excuses to her mother and left. Enforcement and trickery. Two things I detest.

Yesterday the water didn't arrive. There were supposed to be two 19 litre bottles delivered and they didn't. Someone phoned mid-afternoon but wouldn't announce him or herself so I didn't speak on the other end. Happens all the time. So, no water. Did I phone to enquire? To complain? Not Higham - it happened, so it happened.

Now it appears they're terribly sorry and can they make it up to me today? The van broke down in traffic and the man could only get here outside the appointed time range. Could they deliver it today? No. I'm too busy. I'm working. My Wednesday girls want to come earlier tonight [I have two girls visit me every Wednesday evening for a few hours] but I'm going to phone and tell them I can't.

This is going to surprise those of you still reading this but I detest December 21st to 23rd, the winter solstice. Three things I detest. You know why? Because the days get longer after that and I love short days of five to six hours. I adore December 21st to 23rd for that reason. This is my time of year now and it's disappearing fast.

The snow fell yesterday and fell and fell. I adore it. Two things I adore, apart from the Holy Infant [had to get that in somehow] and a girl in my arms. Four things I adore. And nice food. Ach, I need a woman. But I can't go near one. If I do, the arms will be lovely and the lips a delight but she'll drag me round to parties and want to go last minute shopping and want to talk, talk, talk the whole time and introduce me to people.

All I want to do is to hold her and take her for a meal and spring pleasant surprises on her and get the urge to dance with only her and then to snuggle up while the snow falls outside and watch some video we've seen 200 times.

But she won't. She'll want to DO things, achieve things and complain about my passivity and buy huge amounts of pointless food [and shoes] but she can't get one ingredient she needs at this shop so we trawl all the shops in the city until I'm keeling over with weariness and she'll make us waste what little end of year money there is on irrelevancies. For guests we're never going to see again till next Commercialmas.

So, if I can't have a woman to keep warm [one of my specialities in the night] because of all the other baggage which goes with it, the only alternative is to shut off all the lights and telephone and hide. Everyone who invites me for a drink I'll profusely apologize and promise to see them in the New Year, which I shall.

Around January 7th, up will pop the Higham and he'll be raring to go, even to shop a little. [Well, on reflection - not to shop.] Uggh, it's all so depressing this season. Tell you what I really must do and I'm going to get off my butt and do it today or next week - I really must buy the wood at the Stroy-Mart [DIY] and build that little feed table for the birdies. The little dears have been visiting everyday, pecking about and hoping for a winter feed and I've done nothing about it yet. I feel s-o-o-o guilty. What delight that will be through the winter for all of us.

So, enjoy all your parties and bonhomie - I wouldn't wish to take it away from you for one second. Don't let me be a wet blanket in the back of your mind - think of it as a catalyst to determinedly party even harder and enjoy every minute of the Palaces of Glitz and clubs and the swirling mass of crowds you have to negotiate.

Why are there no available women who just like a quiet Christmas at home without presents of any note? Just one Gillette deodorant will do for me. Why can't I just go downstairs, not 300 away, find a nice pot plant to give her and why can't she be satisfied with that? [Well of course I'd no doubt add a number of other little things I'd know she'd love.] Why does it have to be The Expensive Present? The gold ring or some such? Isn't there a non-acquisitive woman anywhere on this deteriorating planet of ours? Are they all on the take? All the ones who come near me are. But there have to be some honeys somewhere. Why can't we just spend a set amount of Christmas money on each other instead of wasting it on acquaintances and going into hock? Why can't we just make love for a week and only go out to walk in the forest and across the square to the opera house in the falling snow to see Swan Lake or the Nutcracker and to pick up champagne and supplies and then pop our heads up above the snowscape on January 3rd?

With genetic engineering, we might be able to create such a woman. I think the model would sell like hotcakes, particularly to impossible men such as myself.

[unexpected pleasures] moment of truth

There'll be no strings to bind your hands
Not if my love can't bind your heart.
And there's no need to take a stand
For it was I who chose to start.
I see no need to take me home,
I'm old enough to face the dawn.

Just call me angel of the morning Angel
Just touch my cheek before you leave me, baby.
Just call me angel of the morning Angel
Then slowly turn away from me.

Maybe the sun's light will be dim
And it won't matter anyhow.
If morning's echo says we ve sinned,
Well, it was what I wanted now.
And if we're the victims of the night,
I won't be blinded by light.

Just call me angel of the morning Angel
Just touch my cheek before you leave me, baby.
Just call me angel of the morning Angel
Then slowly turn away,
I won't beg you to stay with me
Through the tears of the day,
Of the years, baby baby baby.

Just call me angel of the morning Angel
Just touch my cheek before you leave me, baby.