Crisps

Okay, this is a serious matter. A very serious matter. It has to do with lifestyle.

For decades now, Scottish people have been buying packets, bags and multi-packs of crisps. And for decades the contents have got worse and worse.

And yet, we are told we have a bigger and better range of crisps.

'Handmade' crisps are terrible. I've got a mouth full of cosmetic dental work so I'm fussy what I eat. I never buy these handmade doodahs, because they are - what can I call them - chunky? over-cooked? Whatever they are, they're nothing like the crisps I ate when I was young.

Even the cat won't touch them. And she'll eat anything.

Then there's Golden Wonder. And Smith's. I suspect both manufacturers have been bought over by Walker's because they taste just like Walker's - and I've never liked Walker's crisps.

The closest you'll get to a decent crisp in the UK is the pack the Morrison's cafe sell at lunchtime - good value, by the way:a decent coffee + a multi pack of sandwiches and a wee bag of crisps - for £3.75.

The Morrison's crisps are not too salty. And they are very light. And there are just enough of them to let you enjoy the experience. Just like French crisps...But no, I can't go down that road....

Happy April Fools' Day!

Which of the following stories do you not believe?

Yulia Skripal, said to be at death's door after being poisoned in Salisbury by the Russians with a nerve agent at the start of last week, has recovered consciousness and looks likely to make a good recovery. The police officer involved in the 'attack' has already left hospital but there's no news of her father's condition.

Jeremy Corbyn, one of the rebel old boys of the Labour Party, is revealed to be an anti-semite, despite never having expressed any anti-semitic views over the last - oh, I dunno - 40 years. And a few of his allies are having to resign from jobs as a result.

Theresa May and co are doing a grand job of steering the UK through Brexit. Business people don't agree but hey, what do they know?

Meghan Markle is a useful addition to the Royal Family and won't cost the tax payer a penny.

Ant and Dec are great entertainers. Poor Ant (or is it Dec) is to be pitied, given how ill he is.

A few comments:
1 Bread and circuses to keep the plebs happy: that would be the Meghan Markle and Ant and Dec stories. Harry and Meghan's security bill for the tax payers comes to about 30million quid so far.
2 Distraction: there are local elections coming up in England, so a Corbyn story that puts him in a bad light is excellent. He can't be electable on this basis, even if it's all a lie.
3 Brexit is a disaster, so let's get something else going. That allows the media to run the Skripal story for days and days and days...and lets Theresa May get EU, US and Commonwealth governments to pile in, thus showing the power and influence of the UK.

So which story do I not believe? Well, I don't believe any of them. Especially after listening to a Sky News Review on Saturday night which described 2,000 people defending Corbyn and concluded with 'And there's an anti-semitic trope right there.'

Calanais

One of our library clients has a son in law from Harris and my library buddy Alex quick as a flash dobbed me in as someone who knows the islands. I always find this a bit tricky. A lot of Scottish people are totally ignorant about anywhere outside Glasgow and Edinburgh (and maybe Dundee and Aberdeen but definitely not Inverness or anywhere north or west of there).

Still, I'm happy to admit to knowing a bit about the islands. I've visited quite a few bits of Lewis and Harris but it is a vast island - at least compared to places I know in Argyll and Bute. Heavenssake, Stornoway has traffic lights! An island with traffic lights - how amazing is that!...Islay once had traffic lights when there were roadworks. We all went out and took photos.

But that's really all it took: a wee bit of a chat and I was off on a journey back in time. I used to go to meetings in places like Aberdeen, Inverness and Stornoway. I got fed up with people telling me how far away these places were (only if you live in the Central Belt), how difficult they were to get to (what, 45 minutes on a plane from Glasgow or Edinburgh?). It was like people imagined the earth was flat and you'd drop off the edge if you crossed the Minch.

The big word was 'remote.' I've grown to hate that word. When families of Syrian refugees went to live on Bute, UK media were beside themselves: It's so remote! Aye: 30 minutes on the boat and 30 minutes on the train and you're in Glasgow. How remote is that!

But Lewis and Harris, that's different. All the time I was flying up and down attending meetings, I knew I wasn't seeing much outside Stornoway and South Lochs - although I love them both and could easily see myself living in either place. So one time I booked myself a few days leave, hired a car and after my meetings were over I set off first to see the stones at Calanais.

I have to say I've seen lots of sites of historical interest: the priory at Oronsay (though I would spell it Oransay), the Kildalton Cross, Cladville at Portnahaven on Islay, Kilnaughton Chapel, Kilmartin Glen. I could go on.

But Calanais blew me away. There's a visitor centre, with a gift shop full of paintings and craft work and a cafe. Just as you would expect these days. But nothing prepares you for the Calanais Stones. It's like you've walked into someone's back garden and a prehistoric monument has been set up there for your enjoyment. It is magnificent. Partly it's the setting: there are houses all around, so it seems as if the Stones are just part of the village. But there's also the quiet, the views of water and hills and the absolute peace. All of it makes you wonder why the Stones are here. What purpose did they serve in their time? Do they still fulfill a purpose?

I would like everyone to enjoy a few hours at Calanais or at a similar site. And ask: Where did these people come from? What did they want to tell us? Because every group wants to tell the coming generations something.

But above all, just accept what a wonderful country Scotland is. Who knows how old? Just look and enjoy - and respect.

If you're not into DIY

And I'm not. I'm a mechanical, electrical, practical idiot. As my mother would have put it: Plenty brains, jist nae common sense...

So here are my current household nightmares:

I found this in the plastic rim of my washing machine. The machine is about 2 years old. Yes, it's still working fine. No funny burning smell. No odd noises. Should I ignore it and assume this 'nut' (if that's what it is) came from somewhere else and somehow found its way into the washing machine? Where from, I wonder?

Then there's this:

I found it underneath my chair. It's a very old revolving office chair. Maybe dating from the 1920s. I've had it renovated but sadly it no longer revolves. I've looked at the mechanism that holds it together but I can't see where this wee screw could have come from. The chair seems quite solid still. No squeaking. No tilting. I'm sitting on it right now. Can I safely ignore the screw? 

Are these mystery objects breeding in my wee flat? What will I find next? Is this some kind of torture? If it is, it's not going to work.  

It's amazing the things I can ignore if I have to. I once bought a phone that was meant to be attached to the kitchen wall. I followed the instructions and then discovered, no matter what I did, the phone fell off its wall mount. I stood it on the kitchen counter where it stayed for about 8 years until I changed my phone system, and then I threw it out, having never worked out why it didn't stay on the wall. 

I suppose being a practical eejit, I have to disagree with the saying: If it ain't broke, don't fix it. My motto would be: If it's broke but you can live with it, ignore it. This approach bothers other people more than me: after my birthday party, my retired joiner friend brought stuff up from the lounge for me. Instantly, he was bothered by the hasp (is that the word?) on my front door. It's a bit loose which can make it hard to turn the key. But I've found if I lean on it, the door locks no bother. He offered to come out of retirement to fix it. 

Looking at all this, I come up with two other words to describe my approach to life: laziness and procrastination. In fact, the Scottish expression Ah canny be ersed comes to mind. Works for me. 

Boris Johnson - again

My sleep pattern is shot to hell since the clocks went forward, so since I'm awake I might as well post something.

What is Boris Johnson's role in the current Westminster Tory government?

Yeah, I know he's the Foreign Secretary (I would say allegedly) but he's obviously out of his depth in that role. Just have a look at his performance dealing with Emily Thornberry (Shadow Foreign Secretary) in Westminster, when he addresses her by her husband's name as 'Baroness someone', and has to be called to order by the Speaker.

Johnson's been around politics and Westminster long enough to know which way is up, so this was definitely intended as a put-down. That would be because Emily Thornberry has had a good run for the last few months, making Johnson look like what he is: an idiot. Now he looks like a patronising, sexist idiot.

He's not employed for his skill as a diplomat as far as I can see, although I heard last night he managed to phone a few people around the world in Theresa May's search for backing in the Salisbury Affair and avoided making a complete arse of himself. Major triumph for Johnson.

But I repeat: what is his role? In my opinion, he started off as that awfully popular chap off Have I Got News For You, the former mayor of London who didn't mind making a fool of himself on zip-wires and in river clean-ups. Despite his campaign to build a new airport on the Thames and a bridge with a garden along its length, and despite being sacked in his early days for dishonesty by a Fleet Street newspaper (now there's a novelty), he was capable of making a run for the job of prime minister. Good Ole Boris. What a laugh.

But he's not so popular now. And yet, he's still there.

He is now, I think, in a very special category: he's Theresa May's clown.  He probably still thinks he's in the running to be prime minister, but I suspect Theresa and her 'people' have long since got the measure of him and are happy to hang him out to dry. Theresa May, who is a 'better' (that is, a craftier) politician than many of us give her credit for will trot out Johnson to explain what's happening with the Russians, just as David Davies is trotted out to explain what's happening with the EU. Neither is convincing and for the same reason: neither of them is able to think on their feet.

But that won't matter because the longer plan is to make sure the Tories stay in power, getting the UK out of the EU, enforcing austerity, etc.

And if you think the current anti-semitism charge against Jeremy Corbyn is suspect, you're right. And it isn't a coincidence that the charge is aimed only at Jeremy Corbyn - to prove he's unfit for government - or that it emerged right now, as the Salisbury Affair is dying down.

So what is Boris Johnson? A dupe of Conservative Central Office, like many others before him.

Facebook

The first news I saw about the arrest of Carles Puigdemont under a European Arrest Warrant was on Facebook. The first pictures I saw of demonstrations in Spain against the arrest of Puigdemont were also on Facebook. Sky News Review had a little video footage of a demo on its 10.30pm edition. Its news website, like the BBC news website, did not carry any news of this. Clara Ponsati's decision to hand herself in was on the BBC Scotland website at teatime. The Sky News at 11pm had a short interview with her lawyer, Aamer Anwar. I don't watch BBC news any more so it may be they also featured these events.

I'm sure twitter was alight with comments but I don't use that.

The newspapers will catch up - at least partly - in the morning.

But the entire weekend, I've been reading about Facebook - mainly the evils of Facebook: how they set out to dupe us, how they work in cahoots with companies like Cambridge Analytica, how irresponsible they are, how they need to be curbed, etc. (I even read that Facebook needs to be controlled in the same way the BBC is controlled and my first thought was: Yes, that's working well, isn't it?)

I think I'd like to put the record straight: if you want a true assessment of what and how Facebook and other media forums are doing, you won't get it from newspapers or TV stations. Facebook etc are the principal enemies of MSM (mainstream media). MSM hate these Johnny-come-latelies. These online chappies, with their instant responses and up to the minute news, are responsible for newspapers closing, journalists losing their jobs and - above all else - a lot of the public asking awkward questions, like: Why did the BBC's Newsnight programme put up a picture of Jeremy Corbyn wearing a Russian hat against a Soviet backdrop? What message were we all supposed to take from that?

The way people in MSM talk about online entities like Facebook and twitter sounds to me exactly like how newspaper people used to talk about TV when it first got started in the UK. You may not remember - but I do - TV was blamed for everything: kids not working hard at school, not playing outside, having no respect for their elders, aping every fad and fashion from the USA (and later from Australia). Interestingly, my hairdresser (aged 30) liked the TV programme Gogglebox but had never heard the word and thought we were all talking about Googlebox. When I think that the gogglebox was what my elderly relations called the TV in an attempt to stop us watching it. (Didn't work, of course).

The anti-TV stuff died down when video games appeared. Now these 'violent' games get the blame for lawlessness or at the very least bad behaviour.

The fact is, the kids don't care about this MSM stuff any more now than they did 40 years ago. They still don't read newspapers. They never watch TV news. They may catch on to something on twitter that's 'trending' but there's a good chance they're not even interested in that. It's their phones they're into. Texts especially. Their mates, girlfriends and boyfriends. Facebook is mainly for the middle-aged and elderly.

It's worth remembering that the internet only went live in 1991. Facebook only started in 2004. Twitter in 2006. Facebook and twitter are, in human terms, adolescents and you know what that means: they've got a lot of growing up still to do, with a bit of sulking (as Zuckerberg showed this week) and the odd tantrum, but they're bright kids - they'll come through in the end.

They both need direction from wiser heads: get the trolling under control, not to mention the anti-semitism, the fascism and the jihadi publicity. Invest some of the money you're coining in making your bit of the internet safer for users. Because if you don't, you'll lose your audience.

Not me. I'm staying on Facebook. I use it to keep up with friends all over the world. I'm aware that there's no such thing as a free lunch and I keep an eye out for traps. I'm not interested in signing up for personality tests that allow a data grab to take place. I don't worry about my privacy. Seriously, as I already said to someone this week: if you're worried about your privacy, don't go on Facebook.

Boris

I was going to write a bit about the problem with the Tories who are in power right now and why they hate the EU. My own theory is that none of them have ever lived anywhere else but England - in fact, most of them have never lived outside the south-east of England and that little bubble of middle class life that the wealth of that region can offer.

For most Tory politicians in Westminster, the idea that there are places in the UK that are closer to Norway or to Ireland than they are to London, or that there are quite a few languages spoken in these islands that are not English but are still definitely 'native' languages probably comes as a shock. Witness the confusion of MPs in Westminster faced with the constituency of Na h-Eilanan an Iar in a recent debate on refugees. A bit like the amazement some Tories experience when they find out real people live in the Highlands - as against tourists and land owners.

But then I googled Boris Johnson and lighted on his wikipedia page. On paper, Boris had a wonderful international early life: born in New York, attended a range of exclusive schools like the European School of Brussels and Eton College. Parents very well off. Ancestry Circassian-Turkish, German, French and English. His name is in fact Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson. He chose to be called Boris when he went to Eton.

But honestly, he's a poor soul.

With a father who was an aspiring academic (for a long time) and a mother with mental health problems, he and his siblings were mostly brought up by au pairs or in boarding school. They moved constantly between England and the USA, till they settled 'in the family farm' near Cheltenham and then in London and then Brussels. Boris also had health issues. When he went to Eton on a scholarship, reports complained about his idleness, complacency, and lateness. Given his background, I'm surprised he could function at all. In fact, if his family wasn't so posh, the Social Workers would have been in.

He went to Oxford and studied Classics. I wonder if that included any part of Roman or Greek history or philosophy that could equip him for his current job as Foreign Secretary. Doesn't look like it.

So in answer to my original question to myself that started this post off: would travel have broadened the minds of the Tories currently in power? The answer has to be:  you can only get out of the bubble if you leave the bubble behind you. Poor Boris and family obviously never did.