[the metal tub test] who would survive

There is a storm in the South Pacific and a cruise ship goes down. You rush to the kitchen to grab food to stuff in your pockets and you suddenly see two metal tubs, each capable of supporting the weight of either a man or a woman and baby. You take them and rush up on deck. To your horror, only two people are left there, so you throw one of the tubs to them.

Time is running out but you see a crying baby. You also see a dead officer and he has a gun. Thinking quickly, you put his gun in your belt then, scooping up the baby, you clamber into the tub, it slides into the water and you quickly find yourself and the baby a short distance from the ship.

You see the two people left on the deck fighting over who will take the tub and you know you can use the gun to ensure the more worthy of them gets to escape in that metal tub.

Who do you save if the two people were:

1. Gordon Brown and a little child;

2. Jonathan Ross and a BBC producer;

3. A banker and a lawyer;

4. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton;

5. Polly Toynbee and a garbage collector;

6. A war veteran and Paris Hilton;

7. Posh Beckham and a lap dancer.

[strange saturday] gorillas in the mist

It’s one thing to blog on Britain from Russia and another from Sicily but today I think I came up to speed on the real Britain again – some of it was nostalgically great and some was fairly ordinary.

About eleven we went to the forest and wandered about, avoiding hurtling dogs and getting half lost off the beaten track. There was a thickish fog off the sea and it made the forest look spooky and Tolkien-like.

My friend had his kid with him and she lost her doll somewhere along the way so we had to backtrack and after I put in a little prayer, guess what? Yep – there it was, to the side of the track, lying face down in the mud.

So, everyone happy, we went and had a bite to eat, then I asked if he gets Sky 2. No. Not to worry. At 2:25, it was across the road at the forest pub and an interesting conversation took place.

Barboy [18 or so]: Wot you having, mate?

Me [glancing at the big screen and noticing a minor football game on]: That depends – you running the England game today?

Barboy: When’s it on?

Me: Five minutes. I’ll have a Carlings if you’re running the game.

Barboy: Well, it’s rugby like, i’n it?

Me: No, it’s England. You know. You remember the country?

Barboy: Yeah right. OK, I’ll put it on but if anyone objects, like ...”

Me: Right.

So it began, the anthems, the haka and so on. England really took it up to them but were let down by sheer indiscipline. I don’t remember an English team with less discipline and they gave away penalty after penalty but at least, for a while, Dan Carter’s [NZ] kicking boot was letting him down too.

Looked a bit moist down on the pitch and hard going. England were showing a ton of grit and were harrying the All Blacks into errors all over the place and then, just before half time, they let loose with a massive assault but … you guessed it … indisciplined errors again.

In the second half, the All Blacks racked up the pressure a notch and scored but their second try was just extraordinary. To their credit, England stuck in there and had one or two chances but you know – they never looked dangerous once. Grit is excellent but brooding danger is what it’s all about and these gentlemen lacked it.

What was happening though was that they were being sent off to the sin bin too many times. Even at the end of the grim affair, NZ was still attacking. I went for an absorbing game, a stirring affair and by and large – we got it. Anyway, I left the pub in the dark and some girl started chatting about it being chilly and I’d best do up my jacket. It was chilly, too.

Hands in pockets and muffled up, I headed back to the hosue, reflecting on the Stepford Drinkers and wondering if everyone was so robotic these days. Er ... people? Did anyone see any national pride anywhere? Funny - must have lost it under a rock.

On the road proper, it was dead still, the yellow street lamps emitted their diffused light through the gloom and I realized I was back in Britain. Strange day, nice in a way, apart from the result, of course.

[rugby] why the all blacks are to be admired

ENGLAND v NEW ZEALAND Venue: Twickenham Date: Saturday, 29 November Kick-off: 1430 GMT Coverage: Sky Sports; live commentary on BBC Radio 5 Live, live text commentary online


This is one reason why I admire New Zealand, whilst supporting England:

New Zealand face an England side under siege since suffering a record loss on home soil to world champions South Africa at Twickenham on Saturday.

The magnitude of the 42-6 defeat has prompted a wave of despair in the English press but the All Blacks, publicly at least, have not bought into the doom and gloom enveloping Martin Johnson's new era.

After dispatching Scotland, Ireland and Wales without conceding a try - nor a point in the second half of each Test - All Blacks management and staff are wary of underestimating last year's World Cup runners-up.

Solely from the perspective of my roots, I have no reason to say anything good about the New Zealand team. Whether it be my English father and Irish mother, whether it be my long time in Australia, NZ does not come into that at all, except as the eternal adversary.

However, there is a spirit in the rugby world which is not always present in the wider world - respect. Respect for a foe who is both noble and organized. NZ were once accused of being brash, uncultured, arrogant in victory and moaning in defeat ... or words to that effect. Wayne Shelford and the team were up in arms about that and held a press conference. He said that the one thing which had stung them was the accusation of arrogance.

"New Zealanders are far too self-effacing for that."

The All Blacks are very wary of a wounded lion, whilst quietly confident of their own ability. Too many teams have taken England for granted, only to end up with egg on their face. It is to ignore history to take your eyes off the ball when England are in there. Yes, they can put up woeful performances and leave the field with downcast eyes. Yes, they go through periods of infighting.

Then comes a challenge, like knocking Australia off its perch and the result is one of the greatest world cup finals ever. A Russian friend of mine had it right - whenever someone spoke disparagingly of England [and you can be sure I did not, as my refusal to do so now with Russia testifies] he would point out the empire they were able to create and even the wariness of Hitler in WW2.

The All Blacks are a great team with an impeccable pedigree. This particular team are not as technically excellent and they came here with question marks over them but the spirit of the All Blacks has so far shone through.

In the rugby world, we can admire that.

We can admire a team who gives no quarter, who takes the rules to the very edge and who shows indominatable spirit. It doesn't mean we won't go out there to knock them off, to grind them into the mud. We do. They do. It's just that, afterwards, you know you have been in a real battle with a dangerous but noble foe.

I've been there myself, in a lesser arena, playing a maori team on a wet, cold day, on a pitch under two inches of water, winded and face down in the mud after being hammered in an unaccustomed role as fly half. After the game, over a drink, the maori who had hit me [and who was billeted with me] said: "You played well. Hard to catch."

"Er ... thanks," I replied, still nursing my sensitive stomach.

That's my experience of the New Zealanders. They'll watch out for the Dunkirk spirit, the Battle of Britain grit. Should be a good game.

[the whistleblowers a special kind of mind

Andrei Sakharov, Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Damien Green, Jeffrey Wigand, Frederic Whitehurst, Paul van Buitenen, EU Serf, Peter Wright, Craig Murray, Marta Andreasen, Terry Battersby, Oskar Schindler, David Kelly and Daniel Ellsberg all had certain things in common:

1. They blew the whistle on clear misbehaviour and scandalous conduct of organizations;

2. They put up with vilification, stalking, character assassination, threats, ostracism; they lost a lot of goodwill which had been built up over a long period of time. Each was faced by monolithic stupidity, the automatic attempt to cover-up and maintain lies - exactly the opposite approach to the efficacious one and the heavier the pressure, the more they dug in;

They were told many times to let it go, that no one was interested, [which was true, e.g. with Watergate], they were told that the destruction to themselves would outweigh any benefits, they saw that it was a near impossible task ... and still they kept going because they knew there had been grave injustice done. That takes a special type of mind;

4. None stood to gain personally from it. There was no money in it, they were never going to be accepted again, there was zero percentage, personally ... and yet they continued, on autopilot, to the bitter end. They put their careers on the line over a prolonged period of time;

5. In the end they were vindicated. Sooner or later [usually later], truth will out.

A whistleblower, despite what detractors try to sheet home, is not an egoist - there is nothing in it for him personally, except eventual vindication. He is not after revenge but justice and it does dirt on these men and women to suggest that it is ego which motivates them. It is the bloodhound mentality, the sleuth's, the Sherlock Holmes's, the bit between the teeth which drives them on.

You could no more tell Poirot to just leave it and "move on" , that "no-one's interested", than you could Eliot Ness. You could no more tell a political blogger not to fisk as you could a cat not to chase a piece of string. To fisk, to expose, this is the stuff of life to a political blogger. When he comes across a wrong and it is clearly in the interest of the community for it to be righted, he thinks hard for some time and then, if there is clearly no choice, in all conscience, he tries to set it right.

To paraphrase Damian Green: "It's my duty; it's what I must do."

Here is an earlier article on the issue with a slightly different slant.

[odd one out] and why

Who is the odd one out and why? Answer here.

[private eye] in this edition

I don't know when Private Eye actually hits the news stands but I usually pick up my copy every second Friday. In this edition, the bit I liked best was Just Fancy That!

Drivers who challenge speeding fines should have to pay their legal costs, even if they win. So says Justice Minister Lord Bach, likening people who hire lawyers in lower courts to 'parents who pay for private education'. [Lord Bach is an alumnus of Westminster School.]

Glancing over the Hislop story, these were amusing:

In 1986, when Ingrams declared that Hislop would succeed him, there was apoplexy. Nigel Dempster, who wrote gossip items, said: "I don't think people like midgets, especially pushy midgets." Did Hislop finally earn his critics' respect? "No," he says simply. "I sacked most of them." Piers Morgan famously [once] denounced him as a "moon-faced little midget".

The other side of him:

When there are no cameras around, Ian Hislop wears black-rimmed glasses rather than contact lenses. And in between series of Have I Got News For You he sometimes grows a full-set beard – Naval in style and grey in colour. There is a difference, then, between his public and private identity.

To get the measure of Ian Hislop, you need look no further than the magazine he edits: part funny, part serious, highly judgmental and quite moralistic. For his own part he describes himself as "easily bored".