Suburbs - from urban blight to global mess

In an article for the London Observer (19.07.09), Tristram Hunt posited that " Suburbs are derided by snobs, yet they are the best hope for our future."
In this, he completely missed the point. Hatred of suburbia is not snob-driven. It is in our nature to live in high-density surroundings, from the nest to villages to industrial cities. This is how animals function. We are happiest and least stressed when everything and everyone we need to make our life complete are within touching distance, and cities work because the citizens are able to come out of their homes, assemble and exchange ideas.

Suburbs, the enormous swathes of miniature manor houses, which largely grew with the spread of private car ownership, are the antithesis of human nature, and are only attractive to those who actively court alienation, a life spent zooming between work and the telly with no danger of connecting to society.
The current vogue for second houses (and even first ones) in the countryside for city workers shapes up as the vanguard of Antisociety. Try taking a walk along any 'quiet' country road in England and parts of Wales, but especially in the so-called Home Counties, and you will be overwhelmed by the new country people, roaring back and forth in their tin boxes between their little hidden homes and town work, the pub or a supermarket. This pattern of life is repeated in suburbia.
But easily the worst aspect of suburbia is that unlike the Great Mistake of the Sixties, the high-rise blocks (many now being thankfully dynamited), these interminable rows of little castles with their lovingly tended little gardens are 'facts on the ground'- the castles are places, no matter how cut off from their neighbours and society, which resemble real homes. Prefabricated boxes in the sky weren't able to exert such a sense of proprietorial belonging.

Unlike the natural high-density growth of villages and cities, suburbs swallow up huge chunks of greenery, too. As the glaciers retreat, the suburbs advance.

The most disturbing, and saddening, tendency in urban planning now is for cities to raze their ancient terraces, the infrastructure of community; and high streets with homes, shops, pubs, businesses, cafes all rubbing shoulders, to replace them with randomly scattered low-density inner-city suburbia. Often living streets, part of the 'internet' of the city, have been replaced with the town planning equivalent of the apple-pie bed: tiny, worming cul-de-sacs. Someone must have thought this would redress the balance after the high-rise Sixties; but the truth is that those old schemes or estates had so much empty space between the blocks, space with no pubs, shops, cinemas, or shelter of any kind, that in effect this is a repeat of the old disaster. Leave your car behind, if you have one, and go for a walk through suburbia. You will see how vast and bleak it is. This has nothing to do with snobbery.

Control order causes suicide risk

Mahmoud Abu Rideh, Palestinian refugee, who has been imprisoned in the UK for 71/2 years unlawfully without trial before being placed under a 'control order', while his wife and children left to move to Jordan, has three times attempted suicide in despair that he may never see his family again.

His mental and physical health have been severely damaged through his treatment by British authorities; he is confined to a wheelchair.

Under the terms of the order, he has to remain inside his home for 12 hours per day and to phone a monitoring company three times a day. Any visitors must first be approved by the Home Office and he is not allowed to use the internet.

Any breach of these restrictions is considered a criminal offence.

On 10th June, 2009, the Law Lords ruled unanimously that we have the right to know the information used against us to impose control orders. They said that if such information is kept secret, we are unable to challenge the allegations against us.

Write to Home Secretary Alan Johnson, calling on him to lift the control order on Mahmoud Abu Rideh and ensure he continues to receive any medical attention he needs.
www.amnesty.org.uk/aburideh

3rd July update: The Home Office has deigned to allow Mahmoud an exit visa.
Amnesty International UK counter-terrorism campaigner Sara Macneice said:
'It is very welcome news that Mahmoud Abu Rideh will now be able to leave the UK and seek entry to a safe country, and will no longer be subjected to the repressive measures of his Control Order, which have driven him to utter desperation.
'I have spoken to Mr Abu Rideh and this decision has given him real hope that he may now be reunited with his wife and children, and be able to rebuild his life.
'Amnesty is supporting Mahmoud Abu Rideh's application for a UN travel document, to which he should be entitled as a refugee. However he seems willing to apply for an inferior document in order to leave the UK as soon as possible. The Home Office should issue this document to him promptly, rather than subjecting him to yet more delays.
'This is a minor victory for one man, but the pernicious system of Control Orders, which has driven him and his family out of the UK, remains in place. Amnesty continues to call for an end to the Control Order regime and its replacement with measures which respect people's basic human rights.'

Is Obama weaseling out of his commitment on Guantanamo?

As we hear yet more news items suggesting that Barack Obama's declared intention to close that obscenity, the Guantanamo Prison, by 2010, may be delayed, and with still no mention of reparations for the innocent victims who were banged up there or tortured in other countries as part of the same systematic terrorist scheme, less still of any prosecution of those grunts who carried out the tortures, and their superiors (up to G W Bush and his wee pal Tony) who told them to do it, this short film made by the BBC is worth a look.
[unspeak alert:] Note that even here, the 'impartial' BBC voice-over refers to "dangerous detainees" as being a greater problem when it comes to deciding how to set them free. As if untried, uncharged citizens abducted at random may be in any way described as dangerous. If ever there were a prime example of begging the question, this is it.

A former prosecutor, a true believer, wised up fast when he saw Guantanamo for himself:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/7762430.stm

After 7/7: more liberties lost

That excellent and vital documentary, Taking Liberties, unfortunately unseen by most of its target audience as its UK distribution deal restricted it to out-of-town multiplexes and the ungrateful popcorn masses, has a worthy successor in 'Ludicrous Diversion', a new 20 minute film, which you can see at:
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-4943675105275097719

Although it's basically about the London Bombings, it goes on to cover the moves made by the State and police using 7/7 as an excuse for yet more incursions into our liberties.
The self-interested behaviour of the police is documented back to the torture of the Birmingham Six, Guildford Four and others, to extract false confessions on the basis of which they were imprisoned for the most precious years of their lives, and the list of new police powers is examined in depth. One particularly interesting point is that officers are now permitted to arrest you only to ascertain your name.

I should add that I write as a witness to the fabrication by police officers of a spurious 'lost' CCTV recording, which appeared to exonerate an 'interested party' from criminal activity. I have also watched as officers committed acts of daring, nay, death-defying acts of perjury. There is hardly any need for further comment from me; the film says it all quite succinctly.

When aliens stalked Bournemouth

In 1985, Bournemouth became the first UK town to be invaded by CCTV. Shortly afterwards, the cameras picked up an unidentified foreigner...