Friday, 11th January, 2002

When Real Life Overtakes Fiction
The Theatre That Is The Beautiful Game
Will Tony Blair Become The First Ambassador To The World?

When Real Life Overtakes Fiction

The Equally Evil Or Insane

Presumably to most people the flesh eating, Hannibal Lecter is a one-off fictional character. A hungry Hannibal particularly enjoyed dining on human liver with a glass of Chianti wine.

Fictional he most certainly was, but in no way is he a one-off. In real life there are numerous people who kill their victims, and eat their flesh, not I hasten to add, always with a glass of Chianti.

Their crimes are ghastly and defy reasoning. Some are caught. Probably many remain at large.

For those who need to know, more than one cannibal said that human flesh tastes like sweet pork. It was not mentioned if applesauce should be served with the 'sweet pork'.


This week Channel 4 repeated the programme Cannibal, which highlights the murderous crimes, and flesh eating of four well-known diners on human flesh.

One was a diminutive Japanese, Issei Sagawa, the son of a wealthy Tokyo industrialist, who while studying at that famous seat of learning the Sorbonne in Paris, France shot and killed a girl student friend so that he could eat her flesh.

After being declared unfit to plead due to a form of insanity Sagawa served 15 months in jail, and was then deported to Japan.

With the help of his family's powerful influence, and the deportation order failing to state that he should remain in prison, plus the fact that Japanese psychiatrists were unable to certify him as insane, he had to be freed.

He is now a media celebrity, and appears regularly on TV, magazines and newspapers.

The second was the Russian mass murderer Andrei Chikalito a serial killer who repeatedly killed young people, and ate selected parts of their flesh, including the genitals of some of his victims.

The third was Arthur Shawcross.

Shawcross is a Vietnam veteran who, it is said, first satisfied his taste for human flesh when he ate a piece of a child that he said had been wired to a landmine by the Vietcong, and blown-up.

According to Shawcross the heartless Vietcong wired young children to landmines, and when USA soldiers rescued the children and picked them up the mines would detonate.

When Shawcross returned to the USA he continued to satisfy his taste for human flesh by murdering his victims, and then eating them.

He ate part of the genitals of women.

The fourth was the well-publicised Jeffrey Dahmer.

Dahmer was the homosexual serial killer who, it was said, killed his young male victims because he loved them, and needed to posses them.

When police raided his home the fridge, and freezer, was well stocked with human remains. There were also bleached bones and skulls that Dahmer had carefully preserved.

A psychiatrist was astonished that Sagawa was walking the streets a free man, and expressed his doubts that Sagawa would forever stifle his hunger pains for human flesh.

Shawcross will never be released from top security incarceration.

Chikalito was hanged.

Dahmer was murdered in a shower room in prison three years after being sentenced to life without parole.

There are a number of other cannibals who failed to make it on the Channel 4 programme, and whose bizarre crimes are too gruesome to unnecessarily repeat.


In my view the only obvious madman in the Channel 4 programme was Chikalito. You did not need a degree in psychiatry to know he was mentally unhinged. His eyes told the full story.

If Shawcross opened the curtains covering a window and told me at 10 o'clock in the morning that it was daylight outside, I would need the result of a lie detector before I would believe him.

Nevertheless his account of children being wired to land mines by the Vietcong may be true.


An inescapable fact was that the noticeable serious decline in the physical and mental state of Chikalito from the time of his arrest, and trial, a period for which he was kept in the inhumane, brutal and totally unacceptable prison regime in Russia, was revealed for all to see.

This obvious example proved beyond all reasonable doubt that those who advocate the return to the horrific bad old days of the British penal system, when a prisoner was treated as if he was a member of the vermin species, are terribly wrong.

It is unbelievable that a civilised country like Russia continues to incarcerate people in torturous prison conditions that have stood still for hundreds of years.

Russia is not alone in having a brutal and archaic prison system that is a disgrace to civilisation.

Even reasonably wealthy countries like Thailand, Turkey, Indonesia, and China are no better.

Very similar conditions are rife in Third World countries. India, Pakistan, and many others are all guilty of degrading vicious and merciless criminal Human Rights abuse. Gaols in Jamaica, Zimbabwe and other African countries are particularly horrendous.


With the benefit of vast experience I am able to say without fear of contradiction that there isn't one sane former prisoner that suffered intolerable hardship and indignity under the revolting British old penal system regime, who will not say that his brutal treatment only gave him more experience, and an education, in crime. It also made him more determined to avoid detection.

Character reforming, training to become a craftsman in a worthwhile profession, the revelation that there is a life without crime, and general after-care for a person released from prison to enable he/she to go straight, has to be the way forward.

However, this does not mean that a sharp early lesson carefully thought-out would not be correct for youngsters, especially those guilty of nasty crimes, or foolish behaviour that could disrupt their future prospects.

There is also no reason why this sharp lesson should not be an available alternative for youngsters who while on training courses in prison abuse the opportunity made available to them.

The reason that the 'flog 'em and hang 'em' brigade is so terribly wrong is that no sane person attempts a crime knowing he is going to be caught. I always believed I would not be caught, and if I was caught prison did not have any fear for me. It was the price that I accepted had to be paid.


It would be morally dishonest of me to pretend that a reform programme would have guaranteed that I would have led an honest and industrious life. It is likely I would have been one of the failures.

In the best of systems involving human beings there are bound to be failures. In my view the failures should not be counted because they are unimportant. It is only the successes that really matter.

The failures would have likely to have happened under any regime - good or horrific.

I strongly believe based upon my experience that there is hope for everyone under a humane system.

Cannibals waste human lives to satisfy their lust for the flesh of their victims. Those that destruct human lives to satisfy a sadistic lust for revenge are as equally evil or insane, and none has a place in a civilised free society.

The Theatre That Is The Beautiful Game

Breathtaking Drama At Villa Park

Football is called the 'Beautiful Game', and when Manchester United beat Aston Villa in a third round FA Cup tie on Sunday, the 7th of January, the drama was so intense that it left football fans breathless.

The past master of suspense Alfred Hitchcock would have been proud to write the script.

When Manchester United turned a 2-0 deficit into a 3-2 win in the dying minutes of the game the excitement far exceeded the kind usually reserved for the theatre and the movie screen. Only world championship boxing could compete.

The rush of blood of blood to the head was like a surge of the White Rapids.

I am a fervent Arsenal fan, but the excitement generated by Manchester United won me over, and although it could not dent my deep passion for Arsenal, I was mesmerised by the superb performance of the magnificent Manchester team.

People have asked me why is it that while other teams fade away when defeat seems to be inevitable Manchester United will never-say-die, and their courage and tenacity makes them incredibly dangerous to the end.

My answer to the questioners lies in two words: Alex Ferguson, the Manchester United manager.

His players have so much respect and admiration for their boss that they will never surrender because they know that he too is a man who will never give up.


Sir Alex Ferguson, to give him his full title, is a giant among football managers past and present. He is everything a great manager should be. Sadly, he retires at the end of this season but I am sure we have not heard the last of Sir Alex in football.

The Manchester United players are worthy of having such an icon as their manager, and no matter which team you may support you have to be won over by the determination in abundance that is repeatedly shown by the MU star footballers.

However, I have to say that when the MU players signed for the club they made an error. They should have signed for Arsenal. Now, don't look so surprised!


By signing for the North London club they would have still been able to wear a red shirt. It would have caused overcrowding in the already overcrowded cabinets reserved for championship and cup trophies within the hallowed temple of Arsenal FC, but somehow the space would have been found.

The consolation for these players is that even superstars are able to make a mistake, especially off the field.

To be serious, it has to be admitted, even by Spurs fans, that Arsene Wenger and his Arsenal superstars are not doing badly.


There is talk that John Gregory, the Aston Villa manager, may be forced to walk the plank, and join the ranks of unemployed managers. If this happens the Villa fans should revolt.

With limited talent resources Mr. Gregory's team plan was first class. He knew there was no way that he could match the enormous football talent at the disposal of Sir Alex so he designed a match plan to negate his opponent's vastly superior talent - and it worked for 70 minutes; against any team other than Manchester United, (or Arsenal), the plan would have lasted-out for 90 minute.

Doug Ellis the chairman of Aston Villa is a multi millionaire businessman. By making millions in business it is reasonable to presume he is a competent businessman.

If this is a true presumption, and he was responsible for making his money, then why does he not apply the business methods that made him millions of pounds to the business of Aston Villa FC.

There is no known reason why Villa should not be able to compete in the transfer market with MU.

This club has a devoted following of supporters that rival MU, and any other club; it has a ground capacity of 40,000. In addition there are other necessary ingredients to make Aston Villa one of the very best teams in the country. It only needs the business potential to be exploited to its full, and money made available for John Gregory.

Manager Gregory desperately needs funds to buy players to strengthen his team. If Doug Ellis is such a good businessman then he will make available these funds.

Had the Villa team been suitably strengthened before meeting MU in the Cup-tie, then it is almost certain that MU would be out of this year's FA Cup, and Aston Villa supporters would be celebrating instead of having to drown their sorrow in tears of disappointment.

The supporters, and manager John Gregory, deserve better.

Will Tony Blair Become The First Ambassador To The World?

Britain's Loss Would Be The World's Gain

Is Tony Blair grooming himself to become the Ambassador of the World?

The extremely capable Prime Minister of Great Britain is the ideal candidate for such a much needed ambassadorial role.

With the full backing of the mighty United States, Europe, perhaps Russia, and other high-powered countries he would have the authority to negotiate the ending of any feuding and fighting in serious trouble spots throughout the world.

His proven diplomacy at world level qualifies him for the role, and he would be an enormous asset to world politics.

He would also be in a position to put together a coalition team of people drawn from the countries that support him that would be daunting to any country intent on causing serious world turmoil that could jeopardise world peace.

The United States alone are unable to play this role because there are too many political factions in that country, which make impartial decisions extremely difficult, often impossible, to be made.


The comatose United Nations is a waste of time, and good money.

Even the name 'United Nations' is a contradiction in terms because if nations were united they would not need an organisation to resolve disputes.

Very recently Mr Kofie A. Annan, the Secretary-General of this very expensive organisation, shared the Nobel Peace Prize for efforts in world peace. This was worth a considerable sum of money to Mr Kofie. He shared his prize with the United Nations organisation.

Last year 8.5 millions Swedish Kroner was shared among the Nobel five prize sections.

Mr Annan has been with the United Nations for most of his working life, and is well paid for his 'work'.

There were some joke awards last year, but these two Nobel Peace prize-winners won by a distance. I would like to have explained to me where the efforts of the United Nations and Mr. Kofie averted a breach of the peace between any two countries, and where their efforts saved any lives being lost in the initial conflict between countries?


Alfred Nobel left his substantial fortune, derived from the invention of dynamite, to fund the Nobel Prizes from the interest earned on the Nobel fortune investments.

Peace is one of the five prize areas mentioned in Alfred Nobel's will. The will was, however, partly incomplete. Benefactor Nobel simply stated that prizes be given to those who, during the preceding year, "shall have conferred the greatest benefit on mankind" and that one part be given to the person who "shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses."

With Alfred Nobel's wishes obviously indicated how on earth does the hindsight dependent organisation, United Nations, and its Secretary-General qualify as winners?


At best the intervention by the United Nations appears always to be with hindsight, and always after terrible atrocities have already been committed, usually on innocent people.

At the present time India and Pakistan are spending very substantial amounts of money preparing for war, and are exchanging costly bullets across their borders.

For these two countries that are forever pleading poverty, and have millions of people within their countries starving to death, to spend money preparing for war, and to spend further massive amounts of money going to war against each other is a shameful outrage, and a gross indecency.

How is it possible for Western governments to convince their taxpayers to allow them to give generous aid to these countries, when so much money is being spent on weapons of war?

What is the purpose of young emotional people rioting, and placing their lives at risk, because the World bankers seek interest on loans made to countries that claim when the interest on the loans has to be paid that they have no money to meet their debts, and yet everyone of these countries has spent millions of pounds on armaments?

The reason that so many debtor countries are forced to renege on their repayments is mainly caused by corrupt dictators and government officials plundering the treasury of their country.

It should also be taken into consideration that the money loaned to these countries would have earned greater interest on the money markets of the reasonably well-governed countries, and this extra income would have been available to ease the plight of the people in countries that are not ruled by evil dictators, and totally corrupt government officials.

Perhaps those emotional young people should consider turning their controlled anger, in a peaceful manner, on the crooked politicians responsible for allowing the citizens of their countries to be plagued by widespread hunger while vast sums of money are squandered on weapons of death.


If the United Nations was an effective organisation they would have sent a detachment of high-powered UN members to the sabre rattling leaders of these two countries with instructions to immediately stop wasting money that is badly needed to feed people, and they would have ordered those responsible for the warmongering to sit together at a table in a locked room, and force them to stay there until they come to an agreement to settle the dispute within a fixed period of time.

The warmongers should then be advised that in the event that their arrogance is so determined, and they refuse to come to a peaceful agreement then the matter would be referred for adjudication to a high-powered international panel of impartial and esteemed people under the presidency of a highly respected Judge.

The judgement of this august panel should be binding on all parties.

Failure to honour this judgement by any party should mean the imposing of sanctions and any other means of exposing the warmongers, and thereby bring to an end their evil power in their own countries, and outside.

At the slightest excuse, and on a regular basis, well-meaning members of the media saturate the newspapers and TV with heart-rending pictures of innocent children, and adults, showing them suffering dreadful hardship because there is no money to feed them.

Why don't these kind hearts repeat these pictures, alongside, to begin with, pictures of the Indian and Pakistan warmongers, and give similar enormous publicity to expose to the world the amount of money the Indian and Pakistan warmongers, and any other who is anxious to wage war in any place of the world, are wasting on guns, bullets and bombs that is desperately needed for spending on food for their people?

Warmongers throughout the world that are responsible for this travesty should be arrested, and charged with crimes against humanity, and appear in the dock of the war crimes court in The Hague.

Maybe the defendants would put forward a defence that they could not take their dispute to the United Nations because this organisation is merely a front for incompetence.

With good lawyers protesting this defence, the criminal politicians who order bullets to be fired that are paid for with money that should be used to feed immense numbers of their starving citizens, may well be acquitted.

There is a place for the United Nations in the modern world, and that is a burial spot under Mount Everest.


The loss of Tony Blair to his country would leave an immense void, but as the leader of Great Britain the enormous task facing him to resolve the many ills that that afflict this country of ours is far beyond the capabilities of any one person.

It would require, at least, a high-powered team of extremely competent people to resolve the many countrywide problems. Sadly, such a team does not exist in the UK political arena.

The Prime Minister has been criticised for spending so much time on foreign business, but no critic seems to have made the point that the reason he has to do the work himself is because there is no member of his cabinet that he could send with confidence to do the job properly.

Jack Straw, a failed Home Officer minister, is the Foreign Minister. Need any more be said?

Tony Blair would be wise to consider becoming the Ambassador of the World. He is a natural winner. If he stays too long in British politics he is likely to eventually become a loser, if only because the essential team support is unavailable.