Hard of Understanding

READ THIS! (it's the news story relating to this btw)

I'm gonna live forever!

erm, anyone got a spare liver?

About their prices?
About the sheer middle class snobbery that drives it?
About past practices inolving unethical labour?

Nope.

About their new Christmas ad! The "Christmas wouldn't be Christmas without......" one.

The Advertising Standards (ASA) have received a number of complaints branding the advert "sexist" for including DCI Gene Hunt (Philip Glenister) who as part of his character said, "that girl prancing about in her underwear."

I though it was pretty funny, but then again I got the humour. About a dozen others didn't!

I sincerely hope this gets kicked swiftly into touch by the ASA, if not then there'll be no more Gene Hunt!

We've all heard about Calendar Girls. The story based on the WI (i think) who made risqué calendars to help keep their branch afloat.

Some of you may know it as a film. Well it's become a play in the West End as well. With Kelly Brook being the face of the show in the posters advertising it.

At least she was until the people who run trains under London's streets decided to censor them. See here for story

"Leaves too little for the imagination." was the charge levelled at the producers. Not exactly objective to begin with then. I mean, how exactly do you decide on how much of her breasts are on view say, compared with a shower gel or bikini advert?

In that context does that then mean that there's too much on show?

Er, gimme a few more minutes whilst I examine it!

The People's Republic (China, not the Isle of Wight) have eased a drought in Beijing in a way that they hadn't expected.

Concerned about the lack of rain affecting a wheat crop, they sent out chemists to "seed" clouds with silver iodide to induce precipitation.

Which it did.

Unfortunately a cold weather front came along and swiftly turned this precipitation into snow which caused havoc with transport etc. I'd be over the moon if it snowed though (I'm a kid at heart.)

I just hope with all the good intentions that the snow hasn't damaged the wheat crop as it could conversely have more negative effects for those on the bread line (I'm sorry I couldn't think of a better phrase!)

So, Prof. Nutt, the guy who spoke out about how drugs should be classified, has been sacked.

Do I agree? Not sure. Whilst on one hand I can see why he said what he said, I can also understand the Home Secretary's response. Put it this way, if you employed a mechanic to fix your car and they messed with your insurance cover you'd quickly get rid.

Whilst the good professor's intentions may well have been honourable, we still elect our representatives to make such decisions as those that he has been attempting to influence through popular media.

If he were just a professor (I'm not getting into the details here) his comments would not have been received in the same way that they have as "advisor to the government." Fact. So, he has crossed a line and used his position (intentionally or not) to influence the debate.

What's got me though is the way that other members of the committee have reacted. It has taken nearly a full weekend AFTER his sacking for one resign, and then nearly a day later another has decided to resign. There are still more "considering their positions."

Aw bless, the science guys are making a stand! Right, enough of the patronising and onto the bollocking. And this is for the other advisors.

You've spent so long faffing trying to decide your allegiance and where you stand that your resignations, IF they come, are now far too late and limp wristed. If you wanted an "all out" then Friday afternoon was the time (as a union man I know this), and that boat has now sailed.

The apathy that you have shown in the meantime speaks volumes to me and many thousands of others. And as you are supposed to advise the government on drugs policy, surely that cannot be a positive thing?

So, if you are still agonising over where you stand, then do us all a favour and disappear. In a role like your's we need people with the courage of their convictions to stand up and speak out sooner rather than later about the facts to hand. In UK drugs policy there is no middle ground or room for faffing.