Monday 28 November 2005

I wear lipstick

Dope testing at the gym
Before you begin to think this is some gender-bending hobby for a weekend on the Rocky-Horror Show, there is a lot to this than meets the eye.
There are a number of automatic payments that leave my account either monthly or yearly for services I have not really utilised as well as I could.
The yearly extraction pertains to a backup Internet Service Provider which I took out over 5 years ago to augment my cable connection through a plain old telephone system land line which I probably used only twice.
The other is a gym subscription which I took out a few months ago and I have sporadically attended expecting to see radical change after just 30 minutes of easy cross-training.
The other day, I stepped out of the gym to be accosted by the doping squad from the national sports body that had come unannounced to check if our athletic prowess had been enhanced through banned substances like nandralone, EPO and the lot.
The quest for muscle tone that rivals the guy that modelled for Michelangelo’s David is a determined exercise especially if you cannot afford the aggrandisement of a tummy tuck.
So, after submitting a number of fluids for analysis, the results were conclusively inconclusive that we ended up with an E sample, because out-of-competition testing for non-professional athletes who are just casual gym goers has to be taken really seriously.
The fabric of society depends on this abject waste of time and purported idea of some Dutch minister which thankfully has been consigned to the bin.
That drug-testing for ordinary gym users ever got discussed in any serious parliamentary forum can only indicate that a government has patently run out of ideas – unfortunately!
Live to excess then cut it out
Now for the tummy tuck, a man-of-the people governor from Nigeria took a 120-day sabbatical from his governorship activities to undertake cosmetic surgery in Germany; a growing past-time of the Nigerian elite which by happenstance and circumstance lead to death of the president’s wife only last month, by misadventure.
As things transpired, on his way back from Germany, he took a detour through London where he was nabbed for money laundering offences and committed to prison. He then hired a team of lawyers of Nigerian origin which included a Queen’s Counsel professor at law who got him out of jail with a number of conditions that included not approaching any ports on the mainland whilst his case was pending.
One unfortunate situation arose when he sacked that legal team for an “all-white” team on the premise that English law would be more justly dispensed on the basis of race representation; an interesting malaise of colonial bondage that cannot be overcome by privilege or acquisition of riches.
Being under guard and house arrest with his travel documents confiscated and under bail to the tune of half a million pounds, an absurd situation that included arguing the Nigerian constitution in a British court arose to determine if a governor of Nigeria has sovereign immunity from prosecution in another sovereign state.
Well, that only really applies to the president, the governor only has immunity within Nigeria, but that was an interesting legal fishing expedition.
The first lady governor in Nigeria
Last Monday, the governor walked into the governor’s house in his home state, having jumped bail from England disguised as a woman with lipstick and all. The circumstances of his escape from pending justice which included his losing faith in the British system of justice would make interesting reading.
These people with dubious provenance and privilege cause no end of embarrassment just as one other governor did the year before.
Whilst he has been expelled from his party and impeachment proceedings have commenced, his supporters have gathered to welcome the hero of corruption who is now a fugitive of British justice.
This is one case in point for the Nigerian government to address even if it includes sending him back to face the music; we need to deal with these scoundrels who make it difficult for honest Nigerians to appear as decent gentlemen on their own recognisance.
Lipstick etymology
Meanwhile, whilst I defer to the fact that my by-line is hardly original but the motto of a young lady in a discussion forum, I can only concur that in many ways; “We all wear lipstick on our foreheads to make up our minds”, just as one wonders why a manicure has anything to do with women.

Friday 18 November 2005

Insincerity of a non-purpose

A cause without a rebel
As one comes to the end of another project, one is in a quandary about how much has been achieved in the last few months.
My suspicions of the sincerity of purpose linger without respite.
As one was hired to help introduce a best practice methodology for a scheme that was implemented by personnel whose knowledge and experiences of an earlier version beclouded their ability to see the new features of the later.
That is excusable until the pressure of usage reveals tell-tale signs a sophisticated old version or a poorly implemented new version.
That management had identified part of the problem was significant and laudable, at least that is why one was hired.
Sacred cows for roast beef
However, once the job started of analysis and recommendation, endless meetings of consensus seeking validation stifled progress mostly through the resistance of the earlier implementers whose sacred cows were about to be massacred.
My candid opinion was that the system as it was could be improved upon and there was no need for a radical overhaul and design.
Others were hell-bent on a complete redesign, whilst the incumbents had the agenda of trying to revalidate their failing implementation time and time again by bringing in the vendor to vet all documents.
In the end, we have a repository of position documents, logged hours of debate and analysis but changed not one single thing – 5 months down the line.
Just talking the talk ONLY!
My questioning of the sincerity of purpose stems from the fact that a rationalisation is already happening without having put anything in place.
It looks like management is seeking to have some modicum of due-diligence done but have no intention of implementing any change.
Meanwhile, the lessons one has learnt would go far and can be codified into the following lessons.
  • Never offer your organisation up to be an early-adopter of any technology; you end up having to do it all over again 18 months down the line.
  • Master the technology at hand before implementing alternatives, other experts might wonder at your lack of fundamental knowledge.
  • Just because you are good at an automation process does not mean it would work for all applications.
  • The debate about implementing technologies once concluded at management level in terms of strategy and financing should be left to experts to carry forward.
  • Once a technology is adopted, decisions should have expert delivery not democratic consensus.
Documentation is not completion
There are more lessons to learn in terms of the pace of change, but there is a delusion that documentation is fulfilment rather than it being the first part of an agreed process.
It is very likely that this time next year, the same old issues would still be the issues being discussed.

Sunday 13 November 2005

Does gay marriage affect your marriage?

Spoof interviews
The spoof news programme called the Daily Show – Global Edition relayed on CNN International in the weekends sometimes brings an interesting light-hearted perspective to current affairs.
One such instance was the spoof interviewer tackling serious issues with the main proponents of their vested agenda.
Gay marriage happens to be one of the hot-button issues in along with abortion rights and stem cell research; however, putting gay marriage on the ballots along with the presidential election in 11 swing states was part of what clinched the second term for Dubbiyew.
The Democrats should have addressed the issue better and had it moved out of focus, but then there are more problems with being labelled a liberal than being a conservative, but then if a coin ever had two sides in, one side always seems to be bigger and wider than the other minor side – go figure!
The question
Anyway, the clincher question in the interview was – Does gay marriage affect the relationship between you and your wife? – The interviewee did not think that was a serious question.
In my mind, that is probably the most important question on this gay marriage issue and the activism that it entails. Exactly, how does one Adam and Steve couple stop the other Adam from getting on with Eve in another relationship?
In these modern times, whilst procreation is probably now the nominal consummation of a marriage, companionship and partnership seems to have gained ascendancy too.
Marriage as it stands
The whole furore about marriage really boils down to having ways of recognising an enduring partnership from which partnership rights by law should and must accrue if there is any justice in this world.
Any long term relationship social, business or nominal should eventually have some sort of acknowledgement, even so it could be legal and made legally binding – marriage in a general sense should be no exception.
Back to the question, if everyone has the right to partner with whomever they desire and the attraction amongst or between sexes leads to some fulfilment, then everyone should have the let to confirm their relationship without a majority trampling over the yearnings of a minority.
Other statistics
In this case, the minority is not the group having the highest divorce rates or involved in the abortion fracas, to blame the societal ills of failed and dysfunctional heterosexual partnerships on the advent of alternative partnerships is disingenuous to say the least if not downright dishonest.
The sanctity of marriage is between the primary partners, it is not a communal sectarian diktat to be imposed on everyone and withdrawn from those who happen to be different in their choices which are neither criminal nor offensive to the level-headed and reasonable public.
When you are confronted with the gay marriage issue again, just wonder how that business really does impact on your own particular affairs, if it does not, then let sleeping dogs lie. What does not affect your relationship does not affect your relationship, if you can accept that as truth.

Saturday 12 November 2005

Dancing on their warm graves

Another week of events are consummated in this posting having lost the work-time link to the sudden uneasiness of some malevolent who found that a useful service to external consultants was just a too good thing to have.
Somehow, the Bayesian filters on the firewall links this blog site to a sexuality issue and hence gets blocks.
How it arrived at that conclusion escapes me, but there goes when you offer what should characteristically be within human judgment to some sophisticated software robot.
Aping your politicians
However, what has been nagging me all week is the commemoration of the 11 victims of a fire blaze in an Immigrant detention centre at the Amsterdam Schiphol Airport.
As the story goes, a fire started with the responsible personnel adopting the hard-line indifferent stance of the hard-talking politicians of ignoring a critical issue till it had moved beyond desperate.
Well, before the inquiry set had submitted their report on what went wrong, both the Justice and Interior ministers had commended the staff for having acted adequately and appropriately.
The loss of human life be that criminal or victim had paled into insignificance for intemperate analysis and the hardening of resolve in terms of the actions rather than the actors.
This in the light of the fact that it was revealed that the alarm systems were faulty in some parts, switched off in others and too sensitive at the fire doors that they were not opened when people needed to get out of danger.
As the poor “criminals” raised alarm, their cries were probably ignored by idling guards swilling you know what and smoking what you may not desire and the “criminals” perished such that the prevailing intemperance in this rather so tolerant country concurred that criminal life might just be of no value.
Just as the bodies were released to the families of victims who in the majority were ethnic European, a service of remembrance took place with the Justice and Interior ministers crying crocodile tears of compassion and concern.
Before their graves were dug, they already had the indignity of someone dancing on their graves, it is just so despicable.
Being your public
Just as that nasty chapter closed, another minister who had approved more early aircraft activity in a nether region which involved deafening fighter aircraft flyovers got woken up at 5:00AM with the sound of such aircraft relayed to her well-appointed home far away from her disconnected approval.
My heart bled with empathy when she first expressed shock at the noise and that it could happen near her home at all. No! Never!
Well, if that does not inform everyone of the fact that politicians are beginning to come out of a gene pool of people who are not everyday people then what else?
The problem nowadays is about people who make decisions so remote from the realities of what and who would be affected on some objective premise as if human consideration does not matter.
Similarly, last year, my neighbourhood had 5 bus services withdrawn in anticipation of a tram service that was to start in over 6 months after the service was withdrawn.
The computer model might have been fine, but the reality was 40,000 people deprived of a useful service just like that. They probably consulted the neighbourhood before making the decision, but what use would that have been if the consulted rode bicycles or drive cars?
Over the last few weeks, the Interior minister has been spat at in the main street and had a projectile thrown through her office window, not that I condone any of this activity, but frankly, the mean streets of our nation are beginning to arrive at the doorsteps of the people who should be preventing the mean streets from becoming our ultimate destination socially and politically.
As someone commented in my last posting, the police are measured on the wrong set of parameters such that more time is spend issuing fines on spitting spatters and protesters over noise injustices than fight real crime.
These politicians have the police at their beck and call, well, hopefully, somewhere along the line the police would realise that they have a public duty of protecting the majority without privilege than the cocooned minority who are far from reality, purpose and ideas.

Monday 7 November 2005

Solve the crime and stop the idle talk

The spate of killings that pervaded the Netherlands underworld did not go unnoticed last week.
Whilst many may say, it was some sort of score settling between rival fiefdoms of ill repute, the killing happened in our streets and one in far off Thailand within days of each other.
The public in general might have been in grave danger with one of the killing happening quite near a school, thankfully, we were spared that greater horror.
Even so, we all have the right to be very concerned and probably even fearful that such lawlessness could be on our streets with the police just given to speculation rather than crime-solving.
That statement might be considered unfair, but not in the light of the absurd bureaucracy which classes general crimes along with crimes against the person.
One would contend that reporting a crime like a theft or burglary should be made in the appropriate police district, however, when one has suffered actual bodily harm that has resulted in visiting the nearest first aid/emergency clinic which happens to be outside the police district where the crime happened, the police station nearest to the clinic should be more obliging.
In this case, that police station is just opposite the door to the emergency clinic, and when they refused to take the report, the crime went unreported.
In the light of the killings, the deputy police chief has attributed the events to a criminal investigation which got some hoodlums scared to the point of liquidating those who might talk.
Then the police have offered a sop to other likely targets of safety if they would talk too – absurd does not begin to describe the logic behind this, my vested interest is in the fact that the police have always excelled in losing the respect of their public with such crass analysis.
There is a long caseload of unsolved gangland killings stretching over 15 years and this does not augur well for anybody. However, you are more likely to see the police nabbing fare defaulters on the Metro than actually seeing to real public safety.
Ones candid advice is to get down to the job of real crime solving, especially those intractable ones even if it involves getting a few smarter guys to run the investigations.
As for the police chief’s comments, I have heard quite a few excuses in my time but this one is just too lame to warrant any quality of stipend.
For now the sorry state of affairs lies with the hapless activity of speculation and inaction.