OP - "Equality Versus Authority"

It’s funny that, so soon after Cameron declared a nonexistent link between paedophilia and homosexuality, paedophilia is once again at the forefront of the media. The Jimmy Savile investigation, encouraging the examination of just how common abuse of power is from popular media figures, has pointed a spotlight directly on to those that were previously untouchable. However, the witch hunt has clearly begun, with the BBC’s Newsnight getting it very wrong in some of the accusations they have been throwing out.

It’s all blown up in a way that nobody quite predicted. Yet another BBC boss has resigned over their truly inept standards of journalism, there’s a whole building of abuse stories somewhere in Wales and, of course, people seem no closer to a sure answer on just what Jimmy Savile is guilty of, given that new things keep popping up over the course of the investigation.

Could we be on the way to true equality? Will the punishment for your average Joe finally start matching up with that of the figure of authority that is somebody known by a fair chunk of people?

No. Of course not.

Cameron is still permitted to accuse homosexuals of a paedophilic tilt. George Entwistle, former head of the BBC, is still being given £450,000 severance and, without a moment of doubt I can safely say that far more people in popular media are surviving without quaking in their boots at the thought of being caught out for any of the things that they might have done.

Reports are still made about women in the media suffering from all kinds of sexual harassment, and those are the ones who didn’t choose to put out in order to advance in whatever company they’re in. People are still killed for that most grievous of sins: being different. Black? Gay? Democratic?

Equality is a long, long way away. I don’t think I’ll ever see it. But maybe, before I die, women will accept that we pick the seat up, so they should put it down. That’s equality.

OP - "200m That India Didn't Need"

I suspect I'm not the only person in the world who had no idea that the UK was still offering foreign aid to India, accounting for 200m of our budget until 2015. (recently reduced from 280m) This is a substantial figure, and it's admirable that Britain should offer countries in need the necessary funding to stay afloat in times of need.

Like Greece.

And Spain.

And Portugal.

But wait a second; India?

India can afford their own space program. Their economic wealth is well on the way to eclipsing ours. Why were we still giving them money? Sure, I can understand the concept when it first started, when India was suffering under lack of export capability and a lack of interest in their national heritage, but things have moved on now. Pranab Mukherjee, current Indian President, referred to the money as "peanuts" for god's sake. It means nothing to them.

I can't be the only person glad to hear that it's ending. Our country doesn't seem to put any focus on self-preservation, and we're suffering massively on being too nice for our own good. Want to survive for free? Come to the UK. We are the proverbial nice guy that finishes last, or so it seems to me.

It's time we learned to look after ourselves a little better. This is a perfect example of a balance attempting to restore itself. Where's my space program? I want to go to Jupiter.

OP - "Cameron On Gays And Children"

This morning, on 'This Morning', British Prime Minister David Cameron had a bit of a horror moment. To be fair, I should say that he added another horror moment to what is already something of a fierce list of personal and political faux pas'. Cameron's time as Prime Minister has been far from cheerful; however, this particular point takes the piss.

Due in part to the open and somewhat aggressive stance that British Journalism has always thankfully taken towards politics, the Prime Minister was put on the spot when offered an internet compiled list of people in the major political parties suspected of being paedophiles - past or present - in power or shadow. This list, due to some terrible television production quality, was briefly revealed on air, but this isn't really about that.

Cameron's first response was admirable. He refused to be drawn into the argument. After all, the people on those lists are people first and foremost, and a person can be destroyed by an accusation that they are a paedophile, whether they are or not. With no evidence, and the people in question accused by people who have not revealed their names, it is a massive risk to start accusing people.

The problem, shortly afterwards, was Cameron's insistence of why he wasn't being drawn into the argument. Avoiding a witch hunt is right. Nobody has the right to accuse another of something so serious without evidence, especially when you consider the nature of mob rule. Nevertheless, claiming that homosexual party members would be at greater risk than other party members was one of the most singularly stupid things anybody can do. This is the guy in charge of our country.

There's no gentle way to put the inference. Cameron is politely stating that homosexuals are more likely to be paedophiles. Whether this is backed up by statistics are not is unimportant. It's like blaming jews for the Holocaust because they were so easy to hate; stupid to say, diseasing to think and entirely missing the point.

I am yet to come up with any possible reasons that he might have come up with something so unnecessary. Does Cameron think that young boys obviously want it? Did he see the list and recognise people who were gay, trapping the word on his tongue? Will he do the decent thing and apologise to the gay community for implying that paedophilia is part of their being?

Whatever the reason, the last thing anybody should be doing, regardless of intent or political position, is saying something intensely derogatory without clear backing in fact, especially when there is absolutely no reason to say it. Sexual orientation was not part of the conversation. It was not subtly woven into the question, or on the mind of everybody in the audience.

Paedophilia doesn't always involve penis Mr. Cameron. Think before you foot in mouth.