DOKTOR TRIVAGO

Hey, fellow Russians! My advice to any of you who wish to travel abroad is always simple! Consult Doktor Trivago before you go! You don’t want to pay more than you have to for a room do you? After all, your Roubles are worth absolutely nothing! So why waste all those dollars you have gathered by selling secrets to the West or your children to Syria paying $100 for a room in, for example, Salisbury, England, when you can get a bunk-bed room in a stinking part of East London for next to nothing?

Doktor Trivago has thousands of rooms on his website, and can advise you on a) How to get a false passport, b) How to avoid contamination by nerve gas and c) What type of prostitute you can bring with you on your next trip so as to avoid being called “gay” by nasty Western Europeans who do not understand why two gentlemen tourists like looking at cathedral spires.

Doktor Trivago has answers to all of your questions about your travel plans, and even about your plans when you return home and discover that Mr “Ras” Putin, the head of state, has poisoned your dogs, demoted you from your position as a Colonel of the GRU and is keeping you in chains in the basement of his presidential palace in Red Square! Even there you will discover that there are different options of rooms at different prices, depending on how many fingernails you are prepared to have pulled out!

FUN WITH LETTERS

POPULAR AMERICAN COMEDIAN BORIS JOHNSON is once again in the news, and although I had more or less decided to abandon writing on this blog there are events which have a mysterious ability to attract me to the keyboard as long as I have time.

THE LAST TIME SUCH an event took place was when equally popular American television entertainer Donald Trump cleared dandruff from bemused French president Macron's shoulder, but this time it is the kerfuffle surrounding what Boris Johnson wrote in the British newspaper The Telegraph. Even this morning, the 19th of August, people are still arguing in television debates over whether Johnson should be punished for something he wrote two weeks ago.

JOHNSON IS FAR TOO FLY to "state" rather than infer his views, and an intelligent readership should judge on what is in fact written, something which none of the commentators I have read or heard have done; as if, in fact, they have not read the column.

JOHNSON criticises Denmark for joining France, Switzerland, Germany, Austria, Chechnya, Belgium, Chad, Cameroon, Congo and Niger in banning burkas and niqabs. He quite correctly states that, in his opinion, women should not be told what to wear.

HERE IS WHERE I THINK many of the flea-brained leftie politicians have misunderstood the intelligence of Johnson's writing: I would perhaps be prepared to suggest that a good many young women -- one of them was interviewed yesterday on the BBC -- do not wish to wear the burka, but are forced to do so by their fathers and are often punished cruelly for not obeying the male members of the family. That is, of course, that many women who wear the burka have been told what to wear and what not to wear -- due to the obscure and unfounded religious beliefs of the men in their families.

Mr Johnson´s "joke" about letter boxes is obviously tongue-in-cheek. And he does not say that Muslim women look like letter boxes, merely that it is ridiculous for someone to "choose to look like a letter box" and that if a female student turned up for a lecture looking like a bank robber this would cause alarm. As a lecturer I must agree with him.

(My photographs show a letter box -- not a post box -- a bank robber and Boris Johnson with Donald Trump, in order to aid clarity on the issue.)

MAKING A STAND

DESPITE OUR TECHNOLOGY TODAY, it occasionally occurs to me that we have progressed very little since our more primitive days as Neanderthals. We are still both delighted and plagued by sensory memories of the days back when men and women lived in caves in fear of starvation, freezing to death and slaughter by animals. We take great pleasure in the sound of rapid running water in a nearby stream; we bizarrely feel comfort in the flames and sounds of a cracking good open fire; we take delight whenever we feel able to eat outdoors in a warm shade while the sun beats down; and some men still get a hard on and can behave aggressively whenever they see a fruity female flashing the flesh.

THUS WE STILL TODAY witness disgusting cases of harassment of women by men in high places of power and influence, as shown since the Harvey Weinstein case by dozens of accusations against top people in film, theatre, television and politics, particularly in the USA and the UK, where the media feel they have the freedom to report on these issues without fear of being clapped in irons.

IT IS THUS GOOD NEWS to see the beginning of the "Times Up" campaign, which has been set up by a group of prominent American and British actresses in order to raise awareness about how women are exploited and often harassed by producers, executives, directors, casting directors and indeed other actors.

FOR FAR TOO LONG NOW those involved in the media have seen serious actress as nothing more than flesh and -- no doubt puzzled at why some men think that women are "available" in exchange for a part in a movie or a promotion -- these brave actresses have come forward to make a stand.

FOR MY PART, I SAY hat's off to Eva Longoria,

 Emma Stone,

Natalie Portman,

Kerry Washington,

and Rashida Jones

for launching this brave initiative that will no doubt be another step on the way to seeing female actresses achieve the same respect as their male counterparts.

BUT SERIOUSLY, HAVING WORKED AS A DIRECTOR, casting director and occasional producer of both plays and films in the late eighties and early nineties, and in various capacities in the cinema since then, I propose a further move that will help to clear up this mess. Someone should form a similar association or launch a similar campaign through which honest men could denounce and expose actresses (or women in any other capacity for that matter) who offer sex or sexual acts to men in exchange for a part. I know from personal experience that this happens. Shouldn't these women be exposed?

My photographs are taken from various magazine shoots or publicity handouts that these actresses were no doubt forced to undertake.

I WANNA MARRY HARRY

THE END OF ANY YEAR is always a good time for us to look back at previous events and consider what effect the past may have on our future. In the past -- and today in some -- it is considered that only by "exorcising our demons" from the past may we push forward and become better human beings from now on.

I OF COURSE SUBSCRIBE to this view of life, and I am pleased to see that young Prince Harry Windsor has now decided to put his own past chasing women behind him and settle down with a wholesome lady who has the ability to make him happy, to complete him as a man and to act as a friend to Duchess Catherine when her workload becomes heavier than it is now.

THAT, I BELIEVE, IS THE GENERAL position taken by the English press, and nowhere have I read of snide remarks likening their engagement to the vulgar American television game show in which aspiring young actresses fought each other in what the children today call a "structured reality vote-off" in order to become engaged to a young man they believed to be British royalty. Some evil people would say that the producers of the show, involving these women having sex with the pretender "to see who he liked best" are now sitting on a goldmine, even though the show was considered controversial and "far-fetched" at the time.

YET MY CHRISTIAN CHARITY towards others means that I believe it impossible that anyone would do such underhand things for financial gain. I am convinced that these producers will never allow the show to be seen again, and will instruct the owners of something called the "Youtube" to "take it down" as my youngest terms it.

AT THE TIME OF THE SHOW, the Royal Family, as usual, made no comment.

My pictures show the winning contestant (top picture) and Harry with Meghan (bottom picture, second from left) with her future ladies-in-waiting.

ANOTHER KETTLE OF FISH

FANS OF THE GREAT LAUREL AND HARDY will remember the famous line spoken by Oliver Hardy after the unfortunate end to another particularly distressing comic episode during which the duo would have managed to mess up whatever task they had set themselves at the beginning of their marvellous, short knockabout routines.

"ANOTHER FINE KETTLE OF FISH you have pickled me in," Hardy would say, while Stan Laurel would look distraught and scratch at his dishevelled hair.

WHILE THERE HAVE BEEN many comedy duos over the years who have tried to emulate these two masters, it has been apparent that when they retired they seem to have broken the mould; hardly anyone, as humorous as many may be, has come close to achieving their dizzy heights of comedy.

UNTIL YESTERDAY THAT IS, when Boris Johnson met Sergei Lavrov for talks about the relationship between Russia and the United Kingdom at a "high level" encounter intended to "clear the air" and have a one-on-one talk about the issues that are bothering the British government.

SOME PEOPLE MAY BE OF THE OPINION that it is not a good idea to entrust such a mission to Mr Johnson, particularly given the fact that he gives HRH the Prince Philip Duke of Edinburgh a run for his offshore assets in terms of insulting foreigners, but I was confident that he would come up with the goods.

THE COMEDY BEGAN WHEN Johnson stated with delight that economic relations between the two countries were excellent after news that Russia had increased its purchases of Kettle Crisps and had bought 300 Bentleys, although he did leave it open as to whether they were all intended for Russian government officials.

LAVROV WAS NOT TO BE LEFT behind in the comic stakes: when asked whether the Russian government was involved in espionage activity against the United Kingdom, he stated that they had only spent "a few Kopecks" on Internet interference activity -- which is good to know.

THE FINAL GAG BY THE DUO was when gathered journalists asked Mr Johnson whether he trusted Mr Lavrov. "I did hand him my coat when I came in," he stated. To which Lavrov replied, bringing the house down, "Yes, but there was nothing in the pockets!"

LIKE SLAPSTICK OR NOT, it is diplomacy of this character that in the end will manage to create good relations between countries which could so easily be at war; and the sombre, humbug-loving antiquated grey-suited politicians of the past may well scoff at a generation of Putins, Lavrovs, Berlusconis, Johnsons and Trumps, but we all know that whatever will happen will happen, and we might as well have a little fun while we watch it happening.

My top photo shows the two great diplomats in action, with the famous comedy duo on stage in the middle snap.

PRETTY VACANT

WHEN I DECIDED SOME TIME AGO that I would stop writing this chronicle it was mainly due to the fact that I considered that international politics were in good hands. With Donald Trump as the president of the USA and Boris Johnson on the cusp of taking over the United Kingdom, political commentary would be at best redundant.

THE ROLE OF THE POLITICAL analyst is that of pointing out what is wrong in the activities of our leaders, and as I increasingly saw that Trump, Johnson and even the schoolmarmish Theresa May were doing what they were supposed to be doing it seemed to be churlish to comment on detail and foolish to approve.

EVEN WHEN TRUMP went to France to meet Macron and, on returning, stated "They showed us a deal. We'll have a look at it and if we like it we'll do it. If not we'll get back in touch" I thought that I would refrain from commenting on this perfect piece of proper common sense politics. Trump's liberal, horn-rimmed glasses critics will never understand what this language means to people who are scraping out a living in a difficult America, and so I have to put up with their smarmy, smug, sneaky and snide comments against someone who will probably go down in history as at least a game-changer.

SO WHEN DONALD TRUMP STATED yesterday that the USA gives "millions, and sometimes billions" of taxpayers' dollars to countries around the world and then they vote against the USA at the UN Assembly I thought he had come to some kind of laudable pinnacle. "We'll be watching those votes," he said. "Vote against us, and we'll save money. We don't care."

IT IS THIS "WE DON'T CARE" that ought to send shivers down the spines of the corrupt, heartless, evil despots and nabobs who run the third world. But it doesn't, of course, because they don't care about their own people either.

My photo shows Johnny Rotten of the Sex Pistols, at the time of singing "Pretty Vacant", heavily criticised by the establishment for lyrics stating "We don't care".

WE'LL ALWAYS HAVE PARIS

(Cast of Casablanca: l-r, a waiter, Ilsa Lund, Rick, Victor Laszlo, Captain Louis Renault)

TRUMP BASHERS ARE ONCE AGAIN merrily finding ways to point the finger at the President of the USA for being true to his word. The decision to refuse to advance any further for the moment into the rather curious Paris Accord on Global Warming is seen by some as the equivalent to him personally blowing up the planet and forcing future generations to live in a world where the average temperature will increase by nearly 2º Centigrade every hundred years.

NOT WISHING IMMEDIATELY to put forward any view of my own on why this might not actually be a bad idea, given the savings on the use of heating devices in the colder northern hemisphere it will imply, I would nonetheless wish to point out that there still remains no hard evidence whatsoever that these measures will do any more than modify whatever changes are taking place in the world's climate, a factor that has been a constant over time.

WE HAVE REPEATEDLY BEEN TOLD that 195 countries have signed and/or ratified the agreement, but a look at the numbers will tell a slightly different tale. About 180 of these countries do not exactly produce even a fifth of 1 percent of the overall emissions, and were perfectly happy to sign up to an agreement that basically limits car ownership to one per household and calls for restrictions on 24-hour use of air conditioning in offices. Four things which a large percentage of them do not possess anyway.

OF COURSE, DELEGATIONS FROM ALL of these countries have been flying back and forth between United Nations' meetings in New York, Durban, Kyoto, Copenhagen and Paris (and next year Marrakesh) in order to discuss these grave issues, probably making a larger carbon footprint than their entire populations would normally do in a lifetime.

OF THE 'BIG FOUR' POLLUTERS, the USA, China, Russia and India, three of them have solemnly sworn to keep to the agreement's terms and even go further, thus doing their bit to help produce a better world for everyone in the future, and thus having rich praise heaped upon them by some young ladies from one of the "green" parties on television yesterday evening. I do hope, however, that whatever "better world" India, Russia and China might manage to cobble together as the standard for the future of planet earth involves not only the clean air they are promising, but the ability for all to breathe it.

AS FOR THE MOMENT AT LEAST, in the America that these green ladies hate it is still possible to protest on the streets, still possible to be a Christian without being put in prison and tortured, possible to paint and write without censorship, possible for widows to mourn their husbands without fear of being burnt alive, for women to walk in the streets without fear of gang rape simply because no man is with them and possible to live a childhood without later finding out your father sold you to your uncle as a bride or to a businessman as a slave.

SOME MAY EVEN REACT WITH DOUBTS about whether Russia, China and India are actually telling us the truth about how they are reducing their emissions, particularly as even in the so-called "second division" of polluters, headed by Germany, with its strict laws on motor vehicle emissions, it has come to light that the good people at Volkswagen actually lied about the testing of their cars, making the whole statistical analysis issue little more than a joke.

WHAT THE POLITICAL WORLD and its media friends really do not like about Donald Trump's position is that it is real and honest. There is actually no point in doing any of this if it just serves to send politicians around the world for freebies for a few nights in expensive hotels, signing agreements that mean nothing to most of the people who sign them, and having people promise things that they not only are incapable of doing but have no intention of doing anyway. 

BUSINESSMEN LIKE TRUMP MUST SEE this as a massive waste of time. And, as they sometimes say, time is money. Like the $10 billion of United Nations money raised for the "Green Climate Fund". The final destination of which has yet to be defined.