I don't know whether anyone else saw the Christmas Shrek episode last night, but it was great - the best quote of the episode was that 'it's not Christmas until someone cries'. Actually typing it makes me realize it sounds terrible, but it was all about Shrek kicking out all his mates when they destroyed his house on Christmas Eve. Then he missed them, and invited them all back. Makes a lot of sense, and it made us laugh after a crazy but great day yesterday.

After six years of living in Bristol, I've finally given in and got on a bike. Moving house has prompted it, being in Brislington means it would be too far to walk to work, and I'm too tight to pay for the bus. Now Lucy is in Cambodia, I'm borrowing her bike. This morning, I made it up to St. Paul's Road in about 15 minutes, despite having to get off to get up Park Street. One of these days I might make it right to the top before having to give in. So far I can make it to being level with Mastershoe.And it's so lovely cycling in, it's really refreshing, and it's so great to have that extra twenty minutes in the morning.

I have already witnessed my first incident of bike rage though, although not against me. I saw a walker on Pero's Bridge kick the back wheel of a cyclist who cut him up. A bit of posturing ensued, but nothing too serious. And now I'm feeling like a real mechanic, as I managed to fix the bike when the chain came off. Twice.

You've got to love Gok Wan. There's something really great that actually, there's nothing major going on here - some new clothes, a couple of stunts, but a really whopping confidence boost, and absolutely NO surgery. One in the eye for Harley Street.

There have been so many column inches - blog, print etc - on Nick Griffin's appearance on the BBC's question time last night, that I don't really feel like there's much I can add. However, having been trapped in Broadcasting House in Bristol last night while a bunch of protesters yelled slogans at the front of the building, I think the BBC were totally right to have him on. He's an elected representative of the British people, x amount of Brits have voted for him, and he raises an ugly mirror to the current government; if their policies are so good, why is the number of BNP members expanding?

It was a shame that Jack Straw obviously didn't want to answer that one. The issue of Labour's immigration policies was pretty much the only decent question of the whole night. While I can't deny that seeing someone like Mr. Griffin taking a pasting on national television does give some level of satisfaction, it was also slightly uncomfortable watching the mainstream parties get such an easy ride. I'd have liked to have seen a few more questions and a few less comments.

Now this I really struggle with.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/oct/15/texas-bible-jury-death-sentence

Well actually, that's not true. I cannot agree with any Biblical basis for the taking of another human life, whether that's through murder by an individual, or the killing of someone sanctioned by the state. Justice, yes, but surely also grace?

But equally, just because someone uses the Bible to influence their opinion, is that inherently wrong? Can anyone claim that strongly held beliefs of theirs would not affect their judgement in a case like this? Today I heard someone I'm worked with say that all paedophiles should be chemically castrated, or that government should re-introduce the death penalty. I don't think this guy's a big Bible-reader, but his views on it are certainly stronger than mine.

We've just been watching 'The Leader, his Driver and the Driver's Wife', Nick Broomfield's film made in 1991 about the final push of the white supremacist movement in South Africa and Eugene Terre'blanche in particular. Braodcast just before Mandela was released, it feels almost a relief to watch a doc which is big on the characters, not worried too much about traffic noise, about people being in shot, and fundamentally that Nick Broomfield wasn't exactly getting the interview he wanted. I really like programme-making that acknowledges the existence of the crew in the making of the film and the impact that has on how people are behaving.

I was quite excited when the US (and now apparently the UK) started to show signs of nuclear de-commissioning; what with Obama cancelling the missile defence shield and now Mr. Brown saying he's probably going to ditch one of the Trident subs, I felt like perhaps there really has been a sea change along with the administration change in the States.

Until my housemate pointed out that it's still only really going to take one missile to trigger a crisis. What's the point of getting rid of only a single submarine? While it's good on the one hand (I guess a few thousand/million less people will be killed/injured should the 'necessity' for a strike arise), it proves the point that nuclear weapons are still seen as a useful deterrent. It seems the British government are only dropping the fourth Trident to try and fill in part of the hole blasted in the budget by the bailout of the banks.

But it's obviously not a deterrent; Israel having the bomb hasn't stopped suicide bombers. America and the UK are still terrified of home-grown terrorists. Surely nuclear weapons are redundant now that old-style cold war battle scenarios are past? No single man with home made explosives strapped to his chest is going to be put off by the threat of a nuclear missile.

Can't the government do something a bit more constructive with the cash - think how many nurses' pay could be hiked, how many youth schemes could be funded, how the train network could be finally sorted and all those high speed train links commissioned. If we're going to make it about the money rather than the moral high ground, then surely as a deterrent, it's just not economically efficient; it doesn't do the job.

I'm currently out of work, which means I have the time and the will to get extremely annoyed about the NHS-bashing which seems to be going on across the pond. Chuck Grassley in particular seems to have it in for our health system, suggesting Edward Kennedy would not be treated for a brain tumour over here. There's also a rumour flying around that anyone over 59 is not eligable for treatment. Apparently our system is socialist and Orwellian. Up the workers if it leads to free health care irrespective of insurance or income...

It looks like Germany is about to hold its last war crimes trial. John Demjanjuk, who has lived in the US since the 50s, has finally been taken back to Germany to face charges of being an accessory to the deaths of 29,000 Jews at Sobibor. This is the second time he's stood trial - he was sentenced to death by the state of Israel, who thought he was 'Ivan the Terrible' from the camp at Treblinka.

It feels disconcerting that history is so close.