you have answered my point perfectly - only in 1950 was the consent matter passed, which a mentally ill person would be allowed to have someone make their decision for them, hence by-passing that legislation. A clear loop-hole. My comment about your ignorance was also not a general comment, just regarding the eugenics aspect. Censorship of the media and education system comes in many shapes and forms - non-discussion being just as much a form of censorship as altering facts (as Stalin was famous for doing in Russia). In Britain we also allow and even advance the cause of the 'urban myth', eg teaching in schools that before Christopher Columbus, people believed that the planet was flat not a spherical obloid, yet Copernicus, the Phoenicians, the ancient Greeks etc were all perfectly aware that the planet was a ball. This was due to religious influence.

As you watch the BBC daily, you will also be aware that our House of Copmmons debates are televised live daily, all proceedings being detailed verbatim in Hansard. Nowhere in Hansard does it mention the UK selling Israel nuclear fusion technology and equipment, but our government did during the early 1960s! Also, as politicians can't answer a straight question, be completely honest or avoid using 'spin', this is completely useless. They hide behind "lies, damn lies and statistics" (the Duke of Wellington). Personally, I'm with Berthold Brecht - the government sould meet every five years and elect a new public.

No country is politically unimportant, especially on domestic issues. Who would think that a small bankrupt country such as North korea would consume so much time in other countries?

Of course we get foreign news in the UK, French and German news channels are available (at a cost) and, as you will have noticed when watching the BBC, it is headline news in Britain if an American farts. The BBC is more obsessed with America, where it still has viewers, than with the UK. Strangely, for an Anglican Lutheran state, three of the last five heads of the BBC have been Jewish and the current one is supposedly Christian but has a Jewish wife, and the BBC refused to anger its Israeli and American followers and would not show a DEC Oxfam appeal for the Palestinians.

I do not believe, nor have I suggested, that you are an ignorant person. It is clearly apparent that you are not. I only suggested that such a well educated person as yourself being unaware of the evil and vile eugenics carried out within your own country reflected that some things are still hidden. Ergo, your media and school system is not completely beyond censorship, or you would have known of these matters without having to research them. It is entirely the fact that you are not an ignorant person that so clearly depicts my point about censorship across the globe.

In the West it is often easy to criticise other countries whilst not holding our own systems and establishments to the same high standards that we criticise others for.

I readily agree that I am not as conversant in Finnish affairs and history as I am with other countries. It is difficult to know of every nation (189 active UN member states, plus observer status for the Knights Templar and Hospitalliers) and over 6,000 years each - an impossible task. At the moment I am researching the Euskardi peoples of Spain and France. One day Scandanavia will come under my remit, but until then I will have to limit myself to several authors and composers from Finland (and, of course, the Eurovision Song Contest).  Long live Lordi!

All the best 

For the last couple of months, one UK daily newspaper has devoted its front page every day to Peter Andre and Kate Price, notably the latter, and the end of their marriage. With such daily insights into Kates self promotion, I fail to see this as either honest reporting (surely she is just manufacturing non-entity stories to keep the paper happy) nor is it really reporting. As I've already discussed with yourself, non reporting of events is just as much a case of censorship as is supplying false or bias information. The worlds media seemed to go mad when Michael Jackson died, and certainly many more important events were overlooked in both the UK and USA, so that space for Jacko speculation could be created. Rather than lying to the UK public, our media now just ignores news and speculates on celebrities instead. I do not believe that the list has taken this into account.

As for Italy, that is no surprise as Silvio Berlusconi owns 70% of the countries media (tv and papers).