FURTHER UPDATES

Now, I am well aware that one of the traditional symptoms of delusion is "They're all referring to me - TV, press, everything" but isn't it hilarious that they actually are and that I've turned everyone else a little bit insane! The world's gone mad. Perhaps it's only natural. There's an invincible, total genius out there who can do anything. He's run rings round everyone and then put his feet up, and everything's in tatters. I said I'd do it and I've done it, and in fact it's only downhill for you from here. Let me state now that every day that you don't tell the public does irreparable harm to this country. You'll see that later on, but remember how many times I told you so. I've made history and defined the times, and I'm all that's going to be remembered. Schoolchildren will study everything I've written. Can you imagine where that puts you? You in the media, in government, you celebrities and people in positions; you will all be the bogey-people! (Much better in these times to have had an honest profession, using your hands, or farming, nursing, teaching. Anything's better than feeling empty and worthless, sitting around in a newsroom or studio or giving a celebrity interview with your hand up by the side of your chin.)

At the heart of it all, of course, is jealousy. Extreme jealousy. Jealousy so intense that it's actually manifesting into solid matter! A new chemical element, J, materializing out of nowhere in homes and offices, and rising up into the atmosphere all around the world. That's what's probably behind Google last week suddenly cutting down my internet ads for this website by 80%. They just got too jealous! I'd done what I wanted with internet advertising, anyway. I'd got 180,000 clicks onto this site from my internet ads in the UK over the last eight months. If I decide to advertise some time in the future I'll use mainstream mass media instead. But what were Google trying to do? They'd forced all their existing advertising customers to sign up to a new agreement by June 3rd, one which absolved them of any duty to provide standards of service; and then whoosh! Most of my ads were gone! What a creepy bunch of losers. Censoring this website shows up how worthless Google and the internet really are.

No doubt jealousy is also at the root of Live8. It's an amusing thought that because a young singer from Devon thought Geldof was Gandalf some people get helped in Africa, and I think that did have something to do with it, but it's more probably straight jealousy. "He didn't mention aid, the starving... we'll do something positive and show him!"

Look. If anyone really cared about the starving, they'd get the genius to sort it out. That's what genius is for. But, then, could you stomach that? Suddenly the starving don't seem quite so urgent to you! Why doesn't that loud Irish voice demand "*%$*£%* sort it with that genius NOW!" and bang his fist down on the table, "Let out the big secret, man. There's this incredible person out there who can do anything." Isn't that what rebellious rockers are supposed to do? Swear, put their feet on the table, and tell it like it is? No, I guess not. Not when they're Sir Rebellious Rocker. In that case why doesn't he cut out the swearing, stop ruffling his hair and let it settle neatly, and wear ordinary clothes instead of poorly designed expensive ones?

The London Mayor was recently asking the public for solutions to the stifling summer heat on the underground. I thought of a simple, low tech solution in a flash, but much more important is the chronic overcrowding. Doesn't anyone care at all about these poor people? They work all day for no thanks, and then have to pay dearly to have nowhere to stand on the train. They don't ask for much - just to be able to commute to work in dignity. I was on the Central Line during the evening rush hour the other day and I really felt sorry for them. At St Pauls it isn't possible to squeeze on at all, train after train. Now I'm not saying that I could solve it all in ten minutes. I am saying that I can draw simple, practical, economic solutions to both problems on the back of an envelope - in two minutes! In fact, I just have. The secret service bug my house so they know all my ideas, but I'll keep this envelope in case anyone wants to see it. I'm not bluffing; the envelope's right here.

What a shame this concert is. These pop acts are born show-offs who love performing. Because the last Live Aid concert turned out to be such a high profile event everybody now knows how lucrative taking part will be. And fame is something that money can't buy; now their fame will be vastly extended to the population as a whole rather than their normal, much smaller audience. Most people don't watch recordings of pop concerts on late night TV when they would normally be on, or watch TV during the day on a Saturday when they actually will be on. But everyone will watch this because of the hype.

The concert is also a very exciting day for the performers; a great, fun day; they're looking forward to it as a highlight in their year. Flying in, lots of "Hiya", lots of hugs, kisses, meeting up and catching up with people, and being the very centre of attention while enjoying five star hospitality. Geldof says that the performers are offering their services free. Wow! Giving up their Saturday for this. Makes you weep. (Meanwhile the crowd are penned in like cattle, in a huge mass a long way from the stage.)

There's nothing wrong with corporate hospitality; £1200 champagne breakfasts or whatever. But people are making a lot of money staging the shows - which is why it costs so much to put on. They're not offering their services for free. Why shouldn't Joe Public sell his tickets on Ebay? He isn't rich like Geldof and everybody else who's involved.

Charity on its own or pop concerts on their own don't make the news. Why should the combination of the two be so explosive? So many people give their lives to charity and voluntary work. Why should a pampered celebrity giving up a Saturday for a fun day mean anything? To 'raise awareness'? Is Bob Geldof saying that he has to put on a large pop concert as the only way to get the attention of the media? Are the media some race of cavemen that cannot be reasoned with, but only understand 'pop concert'? Why not broadcast the plight of Africa, perhaps in bite sized chunks over several weeks, or why not the performers interrogate Western governments, or go out and interrogate African governments, or even perform out there - anything - anything but that lucrative funday. What has pop to do with the plight of Africa? If it has to be entertaining or people will switch off, what does that say? That the public aren't interested in the starving, just pop that's been hyped up in the name of the starving? Maybe they are interested in the starving, and want their governments to sort it out, but just don't want to watch pictures of Africa for any great length on TV. In that case Geldof just wants the large, lengthy global entertainment event to draw attention and plaudits onto himself. Isn't that cosy? "We need all the media and public attention on ourselves to help them. It's tough and we're giving our services free, but someone's got to do it." (We even get you to pay for the aid, and we get the credit.)

Relieving African countries of their debt is the worst possible course of action. African corruption puts British corruption in the shade. These officials would starve their people just to pocket one penny in every pound of aid denied. They'll massage and fiddle the figures and deceive gullible civil servants into believing all the money is going on worthy projects, and Western politicians will receive lots of kickbacks. The West don't pressure African governments because they're scared their own dodgy dealings will come to light. So Africa will continue to buy arms and fight wars. The people will continue to suffer.

Twenty years ago Live Aid did more harm than good. No mention was made of the fact that war had created the famine. Aid went to governments and perpetuated the whole situation. (It all started with that awful but well intentioned Band Aid single. But a gathering together of dodgy haircuts and jumpers in a studio for a day hardly makes history. By the way, I can genuinely compose a hit melody to order - something else no one can do.) Things go on in Africa that are difficult to describe. Never shown on the news. Decade after decade it goes on. Famines are just the by-product.

First of all, Bob Geldof and cronies, make sure your own house is in order before going elsewhere. I walk into a quiet Oxfam bookshop and within five minutes it's crowded. The large military-looking man now next to me feels awkward and out of place and the book he's browsing is upside down. Just look at Britain. It's a police state. We've murdered 60,000 innocent civilians and the Princess of Wales. No fists banging down on tables about any of that. (Just because they don't mention thirty civilians dead here or two American soldiers dead there doesn't mean it's going away. Saddam Hussain should be allowed to speak freely at his 'trial'. It should be broadcast live and we should hear every word. Afghanistan is falling apart and the drug trade is spiralling out of control and all we get for weeks is 'Europe'. [He didn't mention Europe etc. etc.] News for anoraks. Anyway, I've been watching Celebrity Love Island, and if you then switched to Love Island Aftersun you could bypass all the news programmes altogether.)

And then, you have to take a step back. Just because the authorities are too stupid, or too corrupt, to collar you for your crimes, or just because the authorities don't even exist, doesn't mean you get away with a single thing. Not every mishap is due to an earlier misdeed, but every misdeed leads to a mishap. The tradesman overcharges the old lady and someday he'll crash his van or lose his wallet. You build a racist nation and you get 1960. Murder a woman, and someday, somewhere you'll starve.

The United Nations have to agree to tackle Africa once and for all. (NOT through debt relief.) The UN must tell African nations that billions have been poured into Africa and nothing has changed and that Western populations are distressed at the continual suffering of African people, and that now the following declaration is being made for the special case of Africa:

This was a beautiful, peaceful, prosperous country. London was civilized. What was there is now spoilt forever. You shouldn't ask of your citizens to put themselves at risk in this way. That risk now tarnishes everything. These people had no say in anything anyway, but now they aren't even safe. No say because of the political process being so corrupt - MPs and media all being of one voice, which is how we went into this disgraceful war, and why mentioning that that's now the sole cause of these London bombings is taboo. You silly people! This really shows how rotten the British media are; not just like a parasitic bundle of worms that can be scraped off the bottom, but rather a terminally cancerous growth that's killed its host.

Before Iraq and Afghanistan Britain wasn't at risk. Britain was respected in the Middle East and understood those countries. Had we said no to war, we would have been even more respected. (Especially by America!) People in Iraq say that life was good but the government was bad and now it's the other way round. The situation then was the most that could be expected in that part of the world. And the weapons inspectors were doing their job. What was it all for? Does the media cover any of this? Do they ask who started the training camps in Afghanistan in the first place? Ask why the security services rubber stamped the war, why MPs voted for it? Instead, hundreds of useless TV reports 'from the streets of the bombers', and asking 'Why? WHY?', and newspapers filled with drivel by columnists who supported the war and now should be looking for another job, writing about the curse of 'multiculturalism'. Yes! Lets force young muslims to conform with us and remove their rights; then they won't be angry and bomb us! Lets really vent our true racist feelings! "Enoch Powell has been proved right," I read today in the Daily Mail. It's open season!

You don't leave the key in the ignition when you park your car. When it's stolen see if the police sympathize with you, let alone curse the thieves as having no respect for law and the rights of others. Of course theft is very wrong, and criminals have to be caught and severely punished. BUT DON'T LEAVE THE CAR UNLOCKED AND THE KEYS IN THE IGNITION! Everyone who was pretending it was outrageous to even suggest the war caused the bombings (and that is everyone) has been caught out. Why was the London Mayor in tears and refusing to blame the war? (I know he's jealous and fighting me like everyone else! I've got the tube solution, by the way, don't forget, Mr Mayor.) Because it's so evil to kill fifty innocent civilians? But they're dying like this every day in Iraq, so it must be because they're Londoners and it's close to home and he's Mayor and feels responsible etc. So blame the war, you silly man. Now's not the time to go into the evils of terrorism. You should have done that before if it concerned you so much. Do you even care about the suffering? Because this was preventable. The London victims suffered, their relatives are suffering. Future London victims will suffer, future relatives will suffer. London is totally spoilt. Blame the bombers and blame the war.

If you want to survive as a nation, tackle your endemic racism. Racism is the fuel that powers Britain. Such pains have been taken recently for fear of the pilot light going out that there's been an undignified scramble to keep it alight. What's wrong with an Indian accent or the smell of foreign cooking or the sound emanating from a local mosque or the sight of women wearing saris in your high street? If you would have started to really tackle racism thirty years ago it would have gone by today. Which is what you were scared of. Long ago, you should have told the working class that no form of racism was going to be tolerated at all. Instead there have been such careful and strenuous efforts over the years to keep Asians in their place, which is why they are so unwanted and life is so intolerable for them in Britain today. If the racist abuse had stopped in the street thirty years ago, by today young Asians would be greeted with the same warm smile that greets white youngsters.

Instead of Asians in popular culture we have newspapers filled with racism. These journalists reply "but of course we think racist abuse is disgraceful" etc, knowing full well that Asians will be abused in the street, and then "Well, perhaps they should try and blend in more; they are in England, after all." What's wrong with these people? Where do they think 1960 came from? Even with knowledge of me, and of 1960, they're still typing such rubbish into their keyboards. Maybe they're psychotic. While Melanie Phillips or Simon Heffer are typing away, I walk in and mention one word, "1960". They stop typing and slowly look up, but I can't see their eyes - just reflections of window daylight in their spectacles. They've been turned insane!

You media stink. Why have you forced such a genius to have to stoop down and have to write this lecture. You should have been taught right from wrong when you were five years old. Weren't you properly brought up? And why aren't you reporting on the genius? You're actually breaking the law. Don't print another word, don't stick your face in front of another news bulletin. Beethoven was such a genius, but with rotten people like you around him, all in a daze, stunned by his ability, yet saying to yourselves, 'Why make a thing of it? Why mention it to anyone? How will it help me?' No proper records remain of anything.

In the panic on the morning of the bombings, troops appeared all around the Palace. Like a startled miser reaching for his secret hoard at the threat of fire. If they love the country they rule, why didn't they speak out when it mattered, and refuse to go to war? It was so obvious at the time that Iraq posed no threat, that Britain would be ruined by suicide bombers and race relations spoilt. Why didn't the Queen or Charles speak out against racism over the years? What they haven't done to this day they should have done thirty years ago: "I do not want racism in this country. No racists should celebrate me or fly the flag - they only bring dishonour and shame. I want to see faces of all races and creeds in all positions and wherever I go, and for you to speak against racism whenever you come across it. It is unBritish." Instead, if it all goes downhill, I think they just want to retire up to Scotland with all the money they've salted away.

Two weeks after the bombings, when so much was made of the bus cameras not working and when the whole of the underground was on extreme, extreme alert after the further bombing attempts the previous day, I would not have believed that even a single camera was not working anywhere. Tube Lines, the maintenance company, insist that all the cameras were working. That most of the cameras weren't working is just so ridiculous that it seems someone is fed up with the stench of whitewashes and cover-ups and wants to make it obvious to almost admit to it all and give themselves up.

The catalogue of police lies about this was astonishing. Nothing they initially said was true. He wasn't wearing a heavy coat, didn't jump the barrier but used his pass, and he walked down to the platform. This order to hide the CCTV footage came from the top. All these people are now disgraced public figures and should spend a lot longer in jail than Jeffrey Archer did. A pack of liars told a pack of lies. They've forfeited their authority to enforce the law, let alone their right to carry arms. We need totally new, honest law enforcement agencies.

The police were telling lies back at the time of my police complaint three years ago. That's all they seem to do. Then when evidence is actually caught on camera THEY STEAL IT! We need a proper police complaints authority that isn't corrupt like this one is. And the time has come for the authorities to stop avoiding searching questions by hiding behind the risk of prejudicing official enquiries; competent people can assemble all the relevant hard facts and witness statements within 48 hours and give it to the public without prejudicing anything. That's essential in such a matter of public importance and much more honest than any whitewash enquiry will be, failing to uncover anything months later when everyone's hopefully forgotten about it. 14 August 2005

Is it funny or is it alarming, the country being run from my laptop? At any rate, it's boring and so I'm not going to do it for much longer - I can't be bothered. But I must say how silly the British press and media are. I'M RUNNING THE WHOLE SHOW! It's really made silly by the fact that I'm total taboo! I don't exist! No one breathes a word about me or this website anywhere, yet everyone who's anyone throughout the world logs on, and government agencies actually watch each word appear on their screens as I type it in, as well as bugging the house, and then they immediately dive into taking the appropriate action.

I'd barely finished typing in the July 16th update blaming the war for the bombings, let alone put it live onto the website, and immediately the wheels of the state were rumbling, and Chatham House comes out with its little piece also blaming the war, which is plugged into the press so they all lead with it on the Monday - now officially making it acceptable, and sane, to link the risk of terrorism with the war. Then I send in the email, and get the admission of the Brazilian's innocence, and then I put out the August 14th update and get the leak. Why have a government or any media when I'm doing it all single handed (and only in my spare time and then only when I can be bothered)?

On the day of the shooting it was decided to 'get' one of the bombers if possible, and this red mist clouded their correctly identifying the suspect. The motive was to murder him. There was no way ANYONE that day thought the suspect was carrying explosives. They wanted to get him onto the train so they could shoot him and get away with it. (And nobody was urinating.) Why do I always have to sort everything out? The police put out wrong information because the issue was hot and they never imagined CCTV pictures would ever be released by the IPCC. The IPCC's plan was to let months pass, gauge the mood of the public and media, and then release the most minimal documents and information and watered down conclusions, with no one on the outside ever finding out. Over the weekend they were testing the waters, gauging reaction to the idea that most of the CCTV footage was missing to see whether they could get away with it. This corrupt organization cannot be trusted with anything. Let them release EVERY document and EVERY piece of evidence so that we can decide if we agree with their judgement. Even with the leak, look how they're trying to spread responsibility around, and on faulty communication between lots of officers rather than blame on any individual.

Why didn't the media probe the police and find where the information about 'missing CCTV' came from? What else are they good for? Their whole working day, every minute and down to every last man, is geared towards fighting me. They're totally useless at investigating anything and have to be handed leaked information on a plate. All the police misinformation must be carefully gone over with a fine-toothed comb. This is worse than Watergate. Met Chief Blair must lose his job. Not only is he to blame for a ridiculous 'execution style' shoot to kill policy, but then he continued the policy and told a load of ridiculous lies, and CCTV footage exists for all of it so he had no excuse. He knew every last tiny detail of the latest information within minutes.

He must learn that the liberty and freedom of the many can ONLY be guaranteed by safeguarding the liberty and freedom of the individual. In the name of 'the risk to the many' all manner of crimes are being justified. This is NOT an excuse. 'The marksman thought he was a suicide bomber ' was the pre-prepared cover for the shooting. He actually thought nothing of the kind. A lax media, and lax civil rights groups, allowed this false sense of being able to get away with murder.

This isn't a jury trial; only professionals are involved. Yet this is a matter of extreme, urgent public importance - why is there such a misconception here about 'prejudicing enquiries'? What are the rules by which armed police are operating? How effective, how safe is this policy? How honest have senior police been? Do the IPCC have all the CCTV? Can the public have confidence in the police? Has there been a cover up? These are all questions that need to be answered in hours, not months. But the answer to one of those questions must be 'Yes'; the IPCC must have ALL the CCTV pictures. The answer cannot be no.

The purpose of recording CCTV pictures is to take them out and look at them. It's only designed for that purpose. The discs are cheap. When you take a disc out to look at it you put a blank one in at the same time. Nobody will ever believe police procedure could possibly allow otherwise. In the previous two weeks police had been checking thousands of hours of CCTV pictures throughout the Underground. The capital Underground system was on the most extreme alert and they obviously immediately replaced any removed discs or tapes in those two weeks. So on July 22nd, with the Stockwell bombers still on the loose locally and everyone in panic mode, any discs would have immediately been replaced; that they weren't would have been such gross criminal negligence that it's just not credible. These discs exist somewhere.