Oil.
The subject of oil has generated a heated debate on the Hendon Mob forum recently. It all started when someone named 'Big Brother' posted a message titled 'Wooohooo The Green Party'. It read:

Just Listening to Sky News where they were talking to a Spokeswoman for the Green Party.

Interviewer: "What would you do about the taxation on oil?"

Spokeswoman: "We would increase the taxation on oil and introduce a package of measures to get people to make better use of the public transport system"

Perfect! just what we wanted to hear. We're not getting ripped off enough! Has this bitch ever used the "public transport system" on any kind of semi-regular basis?

A poster named 'Brad' replied:

In 20-30 years from now when basic commodities like paints, plastics, medicines and packaging, are priced beyond most peoples means, and we've contributed to catastrophic climate change (assuming by then it hasn't already happened), we may wish that governments had acted sooner to control the crazy burning of oil.

and on another occasion he wrote:

If government including the US started taking a long term view instead of stealing from future generations (with cheap oil and a massive national debt), then we wouldn't now be facing an impending energy crisis and higher interest rates. Personally I feel that oil should be regarded as a global resource, should be taxed at a global level not a national level, and at least some of the proceeds reinvested into finding alternative energy sources.

Personally I'm sceptical about whether anything needs to be done for many years to come. I believe that normal market mechanisms are sufficient to ensure that alternative energy sources are explored. I certainly don't believe that oil should be taxed in order to prevent it being stolen from 'future generations'. Why is it theirs any more than it is ours?

So I wrote back in a post with the intentionally sarcastic title 'What have future generations ever done for us?', in which, among other points, I said:

It's true that the supply of oil is finite. but we don't know how much of it there is and past attempts to quantify how much remains have been laughably off track. I recall being worried when I was a child that it was going to run out a few years after 2000. That seemed to be a common worry. Since then more has been discovered and we are warned that it will run out in 30 years time, just like I was being told as a child! Here are some examples of past false warnings:

In 1914 US Bureau of Mines estimated reserves at 10 years.
In 1939 Department of the Interior gave a 13 year projection.
In 1972 "The Limits to Growth" predicted we'd be out of oil in 20 years.
In 1987 Paul Erlich (best-selling environmentalist) said the oil shock would come in the '90s.

and I ended with saying:

I want to attack the ridiculous idea that we are stealing from our children's future.... Human inventiveness will see us through the challenges of the future and our best policy is to trust the free-market mechanisms that we have to tell us when to reduce consumption, increase production, switch to alternatives or otherwise innovate. There is certainly no point in reducing living standards now out of fear.

Regular readers of the Hendon Mob will know that Brad was unlikely to leave this unanswered. He replied in a long post from which I post the following extracts:

Taxing energy helps counter the massively wasteful trend of more and bigger SUVs. And now the latest fashionable trend is patio heaters each of which are said to consume as much energy as a speeding truck!

Free markets, David, are not a panacea for everything as you seem to think. Free markets serve the "as long as I'm alright Jack" culture very well, and I'm generalling in favour of a non-interventionist approach. But what is in the best interest of the individual is not necessarily always in the best interests of society, the environment or the human race. The wasteful consumption of oil being a perfect example.

Economists have a term for the kind of situation that Brad describes where one person's consumption or production of something affects another person. They call these losses and benefits 'Externalities'. An obvious example of an externality is pollution. Another might be passive smoking. Legislation exists to make the polluter pay for the cost of his pollution, which would not otherwise be factored into his profit and loss statement. Cigarette smoking is being banned in public places, because otherwise the lung damage that cigarettes cause would not be purely confined to the person who chose to smoke.

But oil consumption does not merit such intervention. It's not a case of 'Externalities'. It ridiculous to say that my consumption of something that is finite in supply is harmful to those yet unborn. Why should it be reserved for them, when their use would rob their descendents?

Brad posed the question: Don't you think it would be better for them to use their "human inventiveness" to work out ways to save energy now - rather than when it's forced upon them?

This response assumes that only government intervention could prevent such a catastrophe. This isn't true. If production were to fall as demand stayed stable or rose, people would examine other sources of energy, especially renewable ones. Why panic now however when oil is still affordable? Investing resources and scientific research to this problem comes at the cost of the money invested and the potential benefits to accrue from the same scientists working on another more pressing problem. The end of oil is several decades away and scientific knowledge could change so much between now and then that our investment could be pointless.

I wrote back: What good would it have done people in the 1930s to try and guess the future direction of the telephone business? Would they have guessed that they should be installing fibre optics instead of copper? Never! It's completely pointess. Oil producers are prepared to sell at current prices. Either buyers pay those prices or they don't. Introducing artificial incentives is completely pointless. In short, let's wait until the problem is forced on us because that is the first time we need to worry about it.

I began to feel that it might be pointless to reason Brad out of something that he wasn't reasoned into. Everyone has their own degree of natural optimism or pessimism. For some the glass is half-full. For others it's half-empty. So I said:

Many debates end up being a split between Roundheads (puritans) and Cavaliers. You are a puritan. Deep down you fear that happiness in the present leads to misery later.

I was getting irritated because he mentioned SUVs (Sports Utility Vehicles). They are the bete noire of environmentalists and other puritans. They are said to guzzle gas and worse still, they are pleasurable to own and drive - something guaranteed to annoy the 'There'll be hell to pay for this later' crowd.

Brad was in fine form with his next reply:

... maybe people should think twice about making lots of long distance leisure trips. Maybe it's not a bad idea for them to consider videoconferencing or other alternatives sometimes instead. Maybe it's a good idea for people to be encouraged to live closer to family, and closer to work? Maybe that would help conserve the planet's resources.

Why stop there? Maybe we should all quit what we are doing and invent a pill for all known diseases. I love Brad's idea about videoconferencing as a replacement for long-distance leisure trips. Why bother taking the kids to Alton Towers or Disneyland when you can videoconference the rollercoasters in their bedrooms? A hologram of Mickey Mouse is sure to please them just as much as a visit to the real thing.

He nails his colours to the mast with:

...bingeing today likely will lead to discomfort in the future. I believe that discomfort will be felt by a sudden and damaging shock increase in oil prices to high levels. Governments have the power to graduate that shock and prepare the world for it gradually, and at the same time invest in high-tech enterprise, and alternative energies.

And here's where it gets interesting, because if he believes that oil will be much dearer in the future and that governments are not doing enough about it now then there is a profit opportunity. At the time at which this debate was taking place, oil was trading at roughly $40 per barrel. If you think that it will be $100 in 10 years time then don't just sit there reading this, do something! Buy all the barrels you can get your hands on. How else will you get a return of 150 per cent over 10 years? It's not an option at the building society and none of the Post Office's National Savings products can deliver this. Get cracking!

To be fair to Brad, he is doing this in a manner of speaking. He tells us I'm long Jul Nymex Light Crude at #2 a point, but sadly neglects to mention the price at which he went long. This is a short term position but he can roll this over when the contract expires and keep doing this for years if he wants. It's easier and cheaper than buying the oil itself and paying for its storage for a decade. I have no idea how long he intends to hold this position. At present all he's really doing is betting on Al-Qaeda, as without the fear of terrorist attacking Saudi refineries, the price would be $4 to $8 per barrel cheaper (source: The Economist, May 22nd, Page 11).

And if he's long at $40 or higher, he's also doing his nuts at the time of writing this, as this graph will demonstrate:

Click here

Pokerstars takes action in under a day!
Got another email from Lee Jones today:

Hi David -

I can't promise you we'll always be as quick to respond to your suggestions in the future, but you and a couple of other folks mentioned the $15-30 thing in the last 2-3 days, and somehow that pushed the team over the edge. You'll see a $15-30 hold'em game available right now.

Thank you for the suggestions and keep them coming.

Best regards,
Lee Jones

PokerStars Poker Room Manager

Correspondence with Pokerstars.
I wrote to PokerStars yesterday, prompted by a visit to my table by Lee Jones, the site's Poker Manager.

I attach the correspondence:

From me to Lee

Hi Lee, great to be able to chat with you during a game

I think that PS is making some very serious mistakes:

1) It hasn't got any limit hold'em between $10\20 and $30\60.

This is a huge chasm. Also, $10\20 is always a horrible game. I recommend getting rid of it and replacing it with $8\16, then introducing $15\30 (with the critical $10 small blind, which generates so much action). The limit games on PS are the tightest anywhere and I refuse ever to play them. I think that my suggestions might loosen things up.


2) Get rid of the $3\6 PLO game.

Poker players are macho and hate to admit that they can't play in the biggest game. A lot of people will rather risk going broke than be seen not playing in the biggest game. I think that the $3\6 has done a lot of damage.

And most important from my point of view:

3) You have far too many levels for the Sit N Gos.

The result is that instead of getting a game started quickly, you end up with players scattered across lots of tables and nothing starting for ages. Some of the levels should be eliminated. In order to retain choice, I would avoid duplication between the one-table and two-table games. Therefore, for example, keep the $30 one table SNG but eliminate the two table $30 and stagger the limits across the 1 and 2 tables, in the same way that the Mirage and the Bellagio stagger limits. This would get things started much quicker. Most people are 'hitters'. They want to see "8 out of 9" and click for the last seat. It is impossible to do that now and the result is that people have drifted over to Party.

David Young

P.S. Also, the tournament menu is far too cluttered. Too many options.

Lee wrote back to say:

Hi David -

Your suggestions make a lot of sense. I don't know exactly what we'll do, but I really appreciate the input. In fact, we're seriously looking at some kind of mid-limit game (15-30 or 20-40). We're hesitant to remove a game that we've already started spreading (and obviously people want to play).

That's not to say I disagree with you about poker players being macho and not willing to admit they can't compete in the biggest game. I think you might be right, but we have to walk a careful balance between protecting the players and giving them what (they think) they want.

But you've obviously given this some careful thought, and we will give it the review and consideration it deserves.

Thank you so much for taking the time to write me.

Best regards,

Lee Jones

Greetings from Las Vegas
As many of you will know, I'm in Las Vegas for the World Series of Poker. I'm writing about my experiences on Gutshot and you can see my diary at www.gutshot.co.uk by clicking on the text next to the photo of me in the left hand panel.

Wish you were here!

Prisoner abuse in focus.
Over at Armchair Angst, brought back by popular (?) demand after a brief flirtation with 'The Good Life', James Butler writes with his usual lack of perspective:

'A dark day for the west. Looking at pictures of UK and US troops maltreating Iraqi people does nothing for my pessimism. When Rome's enemies looked at their comrades crucified by the roadside it spurred them on to finally sack Rome. Thousands more disaffected Muslims will pour into Iraq to take their revenge.'

I am of course disappointed by the behaviour of some US troops and baffled by their decision to photograph their actions, but I don't share James' pessimistic conclusions.

The pictures that I saw on the BBC included:

1) A man wearing a hood and standing on a box connected to wires. He was falsely told that if he stepped off the box he would be electrocuted. He was in no danger, but since he believed he was, this does constitute an assault, as he was in fear of his life.

2) A pile of naked and half-naked Iraqi males with a grinning US female soldier on top of them and a male soldier standing behind her.

Both are repellent, but they are not as revolting as the footage of victims of the Hussein regime being fed to wild animals and other tortures, tapes of which were circulating in Iraq soon after the fall of Saddam. Iraqi people might well think 'Is that it?' when given the chance to see the pictures of the maltreatment. I also don't see how the pictures of American abuse can make a lot of difference to the number of jihadi coming to Iraq either. Al-Jazeera and some of the other Arab TV networks have been pumping out ludicrous anti-US propaganda for over a year now. Ironically, it's only because of the US-backed invasion that Iraqis are free to erect the satellites dishes that beam the channel to their homes!

I don't believe that Americans are incapable of cruelty or perversion. What I do know is that America has a free press that is able to broadcast pictures of their excesses and that soldiers who do such things can and will be held to account.

That is what the US must bring to the middle-east: accountability of those in power to the governed. In pre-war Iraq, those who committed atrocites had no fear of exposure or punishment.

But you're still alive.
I had a parallel universe moment last week when I caught the headlines on ITV news. It was on the day when Bush expressed approval of Ariel Sharon's plan to withdraw Jewish settlers from the Gaza strip. Despite the fact that Israel is actually promising to withdraw from some of the occupied territories, the news of course was bad for Palestinians, as the US had supported the idea that some Jewish settlements, which have been in place for decades by the way, could be allowed to stay.

For most of us, this would seem to be a mere acknowledgement of reality, but of course, reality has few friends in the mixed-up world of middle-east politics. Just as the bad news was explained, Trevor McDonald gravely intoned that there were fears that it would derail the peace process. As he said that, my screen showed a scene of Palestinian men wearing balaclavas marching down a street carrying guns and rocket launchers.

I had to laugh my lungs out but was eerily aware that ITV had not intended that this be ironic. Because in MediaNewsLand, anything that Israel does other than roll over and slit its own throat is a provocation that could push the Palestinian terrorist organisations to a greater level of violence.

Where does this idea come from that they are ever holding back? There is no evidence for it. The media likes to talk about the 'Cycle of Violence' but it's not a cycle because that expression implies that if either side were to stop its attacks, the other would stop also. It isn't true. Israel could decide to do nothing in retaliation to bombings and that wouldn't make Hamas cool off. They are committed to attacking as often as they can, regardless of how much or how little the Israelis do in return.

After the latest assassination of the new Hamas leader, there were scenes of Palestinians expressing their outrage at the loss of their beloved leader, a man whose message was that they should be prepared to blow themselves up as martyrs to attack Israel. You shouldn't have to be Alanis Morissette* to spot the flaw in this scene: If they loved him and his message so much, how come they're still alive?

Several days have passed since then and despite the promises of immediate retaliation, nothing has happened. It's all nonsense. Only the USA saw sense and declined to condemn this targeted killing. Hamas is going to find it harder to arrange killings if item one on the agenda at every weekly meeting is the appointment of a new leader. Item two (How to kill more Jews) may have to get held over. And that's as good as we can hope for.

* "Does she know how you told me you'd hold me until you died, 'til you died, But you're still alive." You oughta know, Jagged Little Pill.

Understanding Al-Qaeda and the War on Terror.
Recently Mo Mowlem has suggested that talks should be held with Al-Qaeda to diffuse tension. She also said that the US action in Iraq was making matters worse and would lead to more support for terrorism in the Middle East.

I believe that she is completely wrong. In fact, so incredibly wrong that it's hard to believe that this is the same woman who championed Winston Churchill as the `Greatest Briton'. I don't ever recall Churchill seeking talks with Hitler and I don't think he suggested that the RAF should restrain itself from attacking the Luftwaffe on the grounds that it would only encourage more disaffected young Germans to become pilots.

Her remarks betray a complete ignorance of what is at stake. Nothing that George W. Bush does can make matters worse, for one simple reason: Al-Qaeda declared war on the United States in August 1996, long before Bush came into office. You can read the declaration of war at:

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/international/fatwa_1996.html

It's rather long and takes up 17 pages of A4, but is worth reading in the original nonetheless. It was published in the London based Arabic newspaper Al Quds al Arabi.

The first three paragraphs just contain a general introduction and passages from the Koran but in paragraph four the real business begins:

"The horrifying pictures of the massacre of Qana, in Lebanon, are still fresh in our memory. Massacres in Tajikistan, Burma, Kashmir, Assam, Philippine, Fatani, Ogadin, Somalia, Eritria, Chechnya and in Bosnia and Herzegovina took place, massacres that send shivers through the body and shake the conscience. All of this the world watched and heard, yet not only didn't respond to these atrocities, but also, with a clear conspiracy between the USA and its allies and under the cover of the iniquitous United Nations, the dispossessed people were even prevented from obtaining arms to defend themselves."

A few things should stand out from this. The first is that many of these injustices have nothing to do with the United States at all. The US does not control what happens in Kashmir, Burma, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Chechnya, Tajikistan and several others on the list. In addition, it's clear that he hates the United Nations also because it did nothing to help the oppressed people of these places to fight back. Those who argue that Iraq should be turned over to the UN have to realise that it's no panacea at all. This is especially true as since this declaration was written, Al-Qaeda's hate for the UN has grown due to the latter's creation of East Timor; a Christian nation taken from the mostly Muslim Indonesia.

In the next paragraph we learn why he singles out the US for his venom:

'The latest and the greatest of these aggressions, the greatest incurred by the Muslims since the death of the Prophet (ALLAH'S BLESSING AND SALUTATIONS ON HIM) is the occupation of the land of the two Holy Places, the foundation of the House of Islam, the place of the revelation, the source of the message and the place of the noble Kaa'ba, the Qiblah of all Muslims, by the armies of the American Crusaders and their allies. We bemoan this and can only say: "No strength and no power acquired except through Allah".'

The arrival of US troops into Saudi Arabia, which he calls `the land of the two Holy Places' after Mecca and Medina, was to protect the country from aggression from Iraq and not as a colonisation. That distinction is lost however on those who see American soldiers as second-rate citizens. He goes on to blame the US for the arrest of some Islamic scholars and for his own forced exile. Helpfully he gives his address in Afghanistan `But by the Grace of Allah, a safe base is now available in the high Hindukush mountains in Khurasan, where - by the Grace of Allah - the largest infidel military force of the world was destroyed. And the myth of the super power was withered in front of the Mujahideen cries of Allahu Akbar (God is greatest).'

The phrase 'No strength and no power acquired except through Allah' is repeated many times. How does a secular or non-Muslim democratic society, where power is given to those who win elections, conform to this? It can't, so those who cherish the freedom to think outside the strictures of the Koran should realise that Al-Qaeda has them in the crosshairs too, whether they support the US in Iraq or not.

Bin Laden next goes on to discuss the economic conditions of life in Saudi Arabia. He writes:

'People are fully concerned about their everyday living; everybody talks about the deterioration of the economy, inflation, ever-increasing debts, and jails full of prisoners. Government employees with limited income talk about debts of ten of thousands and hundred of thousands of Saudi Riyals. They complain that the value of the Riyal is greatly and continuously deteriorating among most of the main currencies.

Great merchants and contractors speak about hundreds and thousands of millions of Riyals owed to them by the government. More than three hundred forty billion Riyals is owed by the government to the people in addition to the daily accumulated interest, let alone the foreign debt. People wonder, are we the largest oil exporting country? They even believe that this situation is a curse put on them by Allah for not objecting to the oppressive and illegitimate behaviour and measures of the ruling regime: Ignoring the divine Shari'ah law; depriving people of their legitimate rights; allowing the American to occupy the land of the two Holy Places; imprisonment, unjustly, of the sincere scholars.'

This is crucial. The Saudi royal family (over 6,000 princes at the latest count) has bled the country dry with its extravagance. The standard of living for those without royal connections has been in decline for decades. The combination of this with a high birth rate makes for an explosive combination. Bin Laden seeks to attract Saudis to his cause by appealing to their sense of being exploited.

Much later in the declaration, bin Laden shows his conviction that the US is weak. He relates how the Clinton administration's Defence Secretary, William Perry, said after the bombing of the Khobar Towers that it has taught him the lesson that he should not withdraw when attacked by cowadly terrorists. Bin Laden writes mockingly:

'We say to the Defence Secretary that his talk could induce a grieving mother to laughter! And it shows the fears that have enveloped you all. Where was this courage of yours when the explosion in Beirut took place in 1983 CE (1403 A.H). You were transformed into scattered bits and pieces; 241 soldiers were killed, most of them Marines. And where was this courage of yours when two explosions made you to leave Aden in less than twenty-four hours!

But your most disgraceful case was in Somalia; where, after vigorous propaganda about the power of the USA and its post-cold war leadership of the new world order, you moved tens of thousands of international forces, including twenty-eight thousand American solders, into Somalia. However, when tens of your solders were killed in minor battles and one American Pilot was dragged in the streets of Mogadishu, you left the area in disappointment, humiliation, and defeat, carrying your dead with you.

Clinton appeared in front of the whole world threatening and promising revenge, but these threats were merely a preparation for withdrawal. You had been disgraced by Allah and you withdrew; the extent of your impotence and weaknesses became very clear. It was a pleasure for the heart of every Muslim and a remedy to the chests of believing nations to see you defeated in the three Islamic cities of Beirut, Aden, and Mogadishu.'

It's abundantly clear from this that it is US weakness and not strength that inspires Al-Qaeda. He descibes how young muslims will fight the US and explains: `To liberate the sanctuaries is the greatest of issues concerning all Muslims; it is the duty of every Muslim in this world. I say to you, William (Defence Secretary), that: These youths love death as you love life.'

Just in case you don't get the message the first time, he goes on to say: `Those youths will not ask you (William Perry) for explanations. They will tell you, singing, there is nothing between us that needs to be explained, there is only killing and neck-smiting.'

How does Mo Mowlam plan to talk to them then?

So far, you may have noticed that he has said nothing about Iraq, but it does get a small mention towards the end: `More than 600,000 Iraqi children have died due to lack of food and medicine and as a result of the unjustifiable aggression (sanctions) imposed on Iraq and its people.'

The figure of 600,000 is an overstatement, but is widely accepted due to Madelaine Albright's disastrous non-denial when asked to comment on claims of over half a million deaths of Iraqi children. However there were many deaths caused after the imposition of UN sanctions. Remarkably, bin Laden doesn't seem to think of blaming Saddam Hussein for any of this, despite the latter being worth between $4bn and $7bn at the time of his downfall.

So what of Iraq and the `War on Terror', then? I hope that I have shown the futility of seeking talks with bin Laden, who in any case I suspect, has been dead for some time now. There is nothing to discuss with someone who says that his followers love death as much as we love life. What is the middle ground?

What the US has done is to try to address some of the causes of the hostility. US troops are out of Saudi Arabia and the US is getting less and less friendly with its former friends in the Saudi government whose lack of accountability has radicalised the Saudi people.

By toppling Saddam, the sanctions against Iraq can be ended and the economy will grow very fast. The introduction of democracy to a region that has never had it will show the Arab people how to diffuse tensions before they reach the crisis point.

Supporters of terrorism have been put on warning that the US is prepared to take action. The US has shown strength, which is crucial in dealing with religious fanatics who believe that US weakness is an indication that their god is on their side.

In a few years time, there is the very real possibility that Iraq will be peaceful and prosperous, with its people enjoying more freedom than exists anywhere else in the Arab world. The lesson will not be lost on the people of the neighbouring countries who will see that there is an alternative to despotism and religious fanaticism.

Those who wish that the Arab people remain oppressed and discontented are fighting against the US now. Those who would like to see freedom and peace flourish should support the US endeavour.

The wonderful world of work.
Apologies for the lack of recent updates. I've been spending a lot of time playing on Corals (i.e. Party) $15/30. The games are fantastic and I love the fact that you can get your money out in sterling as a credit to your bank account. No more waiting for cheques that arrive in dollars.

I think that anyone who wants to make easy money now should be hammering away at these games. I don't think it will ever get any easier than it is now. I know far too many people who are trying to make a living online playing tournaments, or pot-limit hold'em and omaha. Being British, it's all they know. You have to try to learn the limit game. It's where so much of the money moves hands.

To be successful at poker you have to treat it like work to some degree. The beauty of it for me is that it doesn't feel like work. I knew this when I first went to Vienna to play in January 1997 and played for 30 hours non-stop in one sitting. There is no office job I could do for so long.

And now a story about the wonderful world of paid employment.

When I was at university I joined the Industrial Society in the final year. The key benefit of this was the chance to go on factory tours. One day we went to the Rowntree's factory in York. It makes all kind of sweets - Polo Mints, Smarties and various chocolates.

Towards the end of the tour we were shown the making of the 'Dairy Box'. I saw a line of women in front of conveyor belts. One belt moved from right to left and brought the plastic infill layers into which the chocolates are placed. The other belts moved towards each woman and contained a different type of chocolate. Each woman picked up two chocolates and placed them in the respective slot. That's why there are two of every kind on each layer.

Just as I was starting to realise that I had hitherto been aware of just how boring some people's working lives were, I heard the tour guide say without a trace of irony: 'We've got a job rotation scheme here so that it doesn't get too repetitive. One day you could be doing the Lime Creams and another day you do the Hazlenut Clusters.'

Another headline missed.
The Evening Standard covers the news that London's fleet of 120 'bendy' buses has been withdrawn after four separate incidents in which they have burst into flames. The front page bears a picture of one such bus in flames on Park Lane.

And what does the headline writer come up with? 'Bendy Buses halted over blaze fears'. Pathetic.

What's wrong with 'Passengers Alight'?

What happens to your teenage love?
I was 16 about to turn 17 when I went to America on a school exchange trip in the spring of 1986. I was a student at an all-male school in England, so I knew very few girls of my own age and found them maddening difficult to talk to.

At my temporary home in Connecticut, I was the guest of a family who were exceedingly friendly and generous. One weekend they invited me to join them at a country club in upstate New York in what was once called the Borsch Belt. I had little idea of what to expect but I had brought swimming trunks to make sure that I got some excercise.

And there, in the pool, I met her. She was so unlike anyone else - She approached me and told me how to swim better. Ah what a breath of fresh air! I was quickly smitten and leaving her was heartbreaking. The next day back at that Connecticut high school was my 17th birthday but I struggle to smile.

I returned to Britain and was instanly depressed. For years I dreamed of finding her house in Staten Island but it was four years before I went back to the US. We did meet again and of course we got on fine.

We corresponded from time to time with the occasional letter. We met up a few times during the 1990s and on one trip went skiing in Colorado. Over time my feeling changed from one of adolescent infatuation to one of close friendship and so I was delighted when she told me that she had gotten engaged. I went to the wedding in 2002.

And now that there is instant messenger we can still keep in touch. Her husband writes to me too. I am happy for them both.

Recently she's downloaded Party Poker and sends me nail-biting reports on her progress in 1,000-runner $30 tournaments.

The girl who broke my heart when I was 16, whose separation from me by thousands of miles of ocean left me in a state of depression for four years, is now texting me her bad beat stories. Such is the weird path of life and I wouldn't have it any other way.

Paradise to get a sterling account.
I believe I have breaking news for British online poker players here. I wrote to Paradise today about cashing out some money and asked in passing whether the company had any plans to get a sterling bank account in order to pay British customers.

In reply I was told: 'We do plan to offer cashouts in pounds in the near future, possibly a few months away'. If so, this is excellent news.

You heard it first here!

Irish History lesson
I didn't have anything to say about St Patrick's Day yesterday, so I advise readers to check out James Butler's blog for his perspective from Kerry (Click here).

I have only been to Ireland twice. The last time was in July 2002 with my sister. When I returned to England and went to the Vic, I told people about my visit and mentioned how much I had enjoyed an educational visit to the Waterford Historical Museum. I told players at the table that according to the museum, Waterford was the oldest town in Ireland.

One of the players at the table, Rory Liffey (no prizes for guessing his nationality) wasn't having any of this and said 'That's what they all say. They're just gambling that you don't go to another museum in some other town'.

Priceless!

The anti-war crowd insult the people of Iraq.
This page from the BBC news site's 'Have your say' (click here) has given me much pleasure.

The public were invited to comment on a recent opinion poll taken in Iraq that shows most people reporting that their lives are better than one year ago and that most expect their lives to get even better next year.

If you look at it, you'll see that all the people who have written in from Iraq and all the Iraqi exiles who express an opinion agree with the positive findings while many who have written from western Europe, other arab countries and some from the USA disagree!

How can it be that ordinary Iraqis' lives are better? That's not what the Guardian and the Independent's Robert Fisk are telling us. Why does the Iraqi public deviate from the script?

It proves too much for Hamza in Iraq who says "...How dare foreigners tell us we are not better off? Do you think we are children who can't see what's around us?"

Yes, Hamza, that's exactly what the fashionable anti-war poseurs do think! In the postmodern world, it's the cynics who are the most gullible.

France discovers that there is no 'Get out of terrorism free' card.
France has received threats of terrorist retaliation for its ban on religious symbols in schools. Click here.

I'm puzzled why this story was prominent on ITV's news website but took a great deal of effort to track down on the BBC.

Paella-eating surrender monkeys.
Congratulations are due to Al-Qaeda for its victory in the Spanish election. From now on there is only one party in power in Spain: the Terrorist Party. What does it matter what a conservative or a socialist politician thinks any more? As soon as they say something that Al-Qaeda doesn't like, the country will be bombed until the electorate replaces them with the person most likely to wave the white flag. It would not surprise me if in 10 years time, Iraq has no terrorism problem and Spain still does.