The Commission

I've just finished reading 'The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation' by New York Times reporter Philip Shenon. This fascinating book gives a behind the scenes insight into the 9/11 commission's investigation, and provides a context for the well-documented omissions and distortions in the final report that continue to fire the 9/11 conspiracy theories.

The book itself is a gripping read. Many of the chapters read like a novel; particularly in the first chapter which tells the story of how Sandy Berger, former National Security Advisor to President Clinton, stole classified documents from the National Archives.

The main point you get from the book is that because of the bi-partisan make-up of the commission, and the determination of the Commission's Republican Chairman and Democrat Vice-Chairman to produce a report that rises above partisan politics and does not assign blame, some of the significant facts found during the investigation, which would certainly have damaged Bush and his top echelon, were merely assigned to footnotes in the final report.

The chapter that amazed me the most was the one that covered the emergency response to the World Trade Centre attacks in New York and in particular the acts of Rudy Giuliani - the Mayor of New York on Sept 11th 2001.

If you remember, Rudy Giuliani became a local and national hero after 9/11. Seen by the public as the great leader who led New York, and America, through the tragedy of 9/11 while George Bush fled to the skies in the safety of Air Force One.

As it turns out, according to Philip Shenon, Rudy Giuliani's hero status was a fortunate consequence of his own inept actions. In 1998 Mayor Giuliani was building a forty six thousand square foot Emergency Command Centre for himself and his senior staff dubbed "The Bunker". The press at the time had a field day lambasting the project, criticising the cost of the construction as an example of Giuliani's oversized ego. The press also criticised the planned location of "The Bunker". The command centre was going to be built in, of all places, the World Trade Centre complex - the site of a terrorist bombing only 5 years earlier and what was still regarded as top of the list on many terrorist's target lists. The building would be built in WTC building 7 - directly across from the twin towers. Not only that, even though it was dubbed "The Bunker", the command centre was actually to be situated on the 23rd floor, with panoramic views out to lower Manhattan.

So as Philip Shennon points out in the book, what was to happen on September 11th was all too predictable:

"Giuliani never managed to get to the command center in the chaos of the attacks that morning. By about 9:30am, before either of the twin towers collapsed, everyone in the command center was ordered to evacuate to the street because of fears that more hijacked planes were heading for Manhattan. The crisis center was shut down because there was a crisis. In a final bit of irony, it was determined that a fire that later destroyed WTC 7 on September 11 was probably caused by the rupture of the building's special diesel fuel tanks; the tanks that had been installed to provide emergency power the mayor's command center.

On September 11, with the command center shut down, Giuliani and his top aides were left with no obvious place to gather away from City Hall. That left the mayor on the street, resulting in the heroically iconic image of the soot-covered Giuliani leading hundreds of other New Yorkers to safety as he walked north through the gray clouds of debris unleashed by the collapse of the Twin Towers."

On May 19th 2004, the Commission had the opportunity to tackle Giuliani about this in the commission's public hearing which interviewed Giuliani and the chiefs of the emergency services. However, the commissioners wimped out because of what happened the day before. On the 18th May the commissioners interviewed the chiefs of the emergency services and heavily criticised them for the disastrous crisis plan and mis-management on the day of the attacks. The overt criticisms galvanised the press and public, as the hearings were being held in New York, to lambast the Commission. How dare they criticise 'our hero's of 9/11'. So after the scathing attacks back at them, when it came to interviewing Giuliani in the public hearing on May 19th, instead of criticising Giuliani and challenging him, the Commission heaped praise on him for being a great leader.

That response on May 19th was evocative of the entire handling of the investigation and the final report; no one was to be assigned blame.

The area that the book focuses most on though, and the story which I believe has had most criticism since Philip Shenon published this book, is Philip Shenon's portrayal of Philip Zelikow - the Executive Director of the Commission - and his obvious conflicts of interest and his attempts, in Shenon's view, to manipulate the investigation and the final report into avoiding any criticisms of the Bush presidency and his senior staff.

The conflicts of interest are obvious and according to Shenon, it was due to a lack of proper background checks on Zelikow by the Commission's chairman and vice-chairman, that meant his conflicts of interest were unknown to the commission when they appointed him as Executive Director. The conflicts of interest were made even more significant due to the way Zelikow ran the investigation. As much as the 10 commissioner's (5 Republican, 5 Democrat) were the public face of the commission, it was ultimately Zelikow who ran the investigation; deciding who was to be interviewed, what line the investigation would take, and ultimately what was to be included in the final report.

It comes as no surprise then that the final report lacked any criticism of Bush and particularly, Condoleezza Rice, when you learn that not only was Zelikow a close friend of Condoleeza Rice, but he was also on the transition team when Bush took office in the White House, and was the main contributor the to paper that changed America's National Security Strategy, which for the first time introduced the doctrine of pre-emptive attacks. These facts are significant and, according to Shennon, help explain why Zekikow:

• Broke the Commission rules and repeatedly telephoned both Rice and Karl Rove, Bush's chief advisor', behind the back of the commission.
• Attempted to steer the commission into making links between the 9/11 attacks and Saddam Hussein even though there was no evidence to support the links.
• Managed to shield Rice from criticism in the final report even though there was clear evidence that, as Bush's National Security Advisor, Rice received clear warnings from the CIA in the months leading up to 9/11 about an imminent attack by Al Qaeda against America, yet did absolutely nothing to act on those warnings. Including the now famous August 6th PDB (Presidential Daily Briefing) which warned of possible terrorist hijackings of commercial airliners and intelligence that terrorists were carrying out surveillance on buildings in Manhattan.

Other revelations in the book included: the fact that the commission left the investigation of the the NSA's vast archives until the last minute and therefore only managed to read a fraction of the intelligence; how Dick Cheney, as the Vice-President, gave a shoot-down order on the morning of 9/11 which was unconstitutional (Dick Cheney claims that he was acting on behalf of Bush but there was no evidence to corroborate Cheney's assertion); and how the final report failed to fully emphasise the abysmal failings of the FBI largely because the new FBI Director managed to schmooze the commissioners into believing that he could change the FBI for the better and there was no reason to break it up, which was certainly in the minds of the commissioners when they first learned of the FBI's bumblings.

All in all the book is a fascinating read and I highly recommend it if, like me, you're intrigued by everything surrounding 9/11.

Books I've Recently Read

Here's a run down of some books that I've recently read:

The Spin Doctor's Diary: Inside Number 10 with New Labour by Lance Price

This book has been sitting on my to-read shelf for a while as it has been out since 2005.

The main insight I got from this book was the extent to which Tony Blair, in his first terms as PM at least, was obsessed with the media. It seems that everything that was ever written about spin was true. He really did try and control the story, manipulate the media and twist facts to suit 'the official line'. He was also very thin-skinned, obsessed with what journalists were saying about him in the papers. From what I can understand he got over that after a few years as PM but even so it's pretty scary to see the extent to which government policy was, and perhaps still is, led by the media, and Rupert Mordoch (News International Corp owns 42% of the nationals in the UK) in particular.

I've now started reading The Blair Years: Extracts from Alistair Campbell's diaries. All 800 pages of it.

Blind Faith by Ben Elton

This is another excellent satire by Ben Elton. Yet again he really seems to be able to capture the zeitgeist of modern day culture.

Blind Faith is set in a post-apocalyptic London where half the world seems to have flooded due to global warming. It's a society where Christian (of sorts) religious fundamentalism reigns supreme and where privacy is a sin. A world where everyone is virtually naked and obsessed with sex, or at least pretends to be obsessed with sex, because not doing so would be to disrespect the body that 'The Love' i.e. God, has blessed you with, which in turn would be disrespecting 'The Love'.

The story follows Trafford Sewell as he begins to discover what's hidden behind the curtain of the society that he knows and realises that he's not alone - he's not the only one who actually craves a little privacy and has doubts about the religious teachings.

It's a bit like George Orwell's 1984 but with a modern spin. Everyone is required to blog and add entries to their 'face page' (read facebook) about every single aspect of their lives, and being (famous) is more important then doing.

As the blurb on the back of the book says - 'A chilling vision of what's to come? Or something rather closer to what we call reality?

The Ghost by Robert Harris

The Ghost follows the story of a professional ghostwriter who is given the opportunity to ghost the memoirs of Britain's former prime minister. Soon after starting to work on the book he realises that not all's what it seems.

The Ghost is yet another intelligent thriller from the author who penned one of my favourite books - Fatherland. The fictitious former prime minister is clearly Tony Blair - a man who is on the verge of being indicted by the International Criminal Court on war crimes after authorising CIA rendition of British Citizens suspected of being Al Qaeda terrorists.

As well as being an excellent thriller, with twists and turns aplenty, The Ghost is clearly a damning examination of Britain's foreign policy since 2001.

The Utility of Force by Rupert Smith

The Utility of Force is basically a long essay by a very distinguished British General.

The books charts the history of warfare from the rise of Industrial Warfare during the Napoleonic wars to the conflicts of today. Moreover, the book examines the importance of the trinity (the military, the state, and the people) in winning wars and argues that today's western armies have to substantially adapt to face the conflicts of the future.

The book is a tad long and repetitive but he makes some very good points, and his analysis of the relationship between politics and warfare is excellent, particularly when he examines the 'wars-by-proxy' which were the Korean and Vietnam War.

Playing with Fire by Gordon Ramsay

After really enjoying Gordon's first autobiography 'Humble Pie', I couldn't wait to read this follow-up.

Whereas Humble Pie focuses on his early days and his extraordinary culinary skills and successes in the kitchen, Playing with Fire focuses on the business side of Gordon Ramsay Holdings.

Playing with Fire is a fascinating insight into both the 5 star restaurant business but also the commercial life of a celebrity chef.

He's very frank and honest in the book, to the extent that he even discloses the fees he earned and amount he paid for property, and his obsessiveness and determination are clear throughout. There are some excellent lessons in here about business and life in general.

Facing Up by Bear Grylls

Facing Up was first published in 2000 and I didn't even know it existed until I came across it in a book sale a few months ago, which I was surprised about as I'm a big fan of the work of Bear Grylls.

Facing Up is Bear's own account of his successful attempt, at the age of 23, to be the youngest person to reach the summit of Everest.

It is an inspiring account of what it takes to do what still only a relatively small number of extraordinary people in the world have achieved. As well as being a breathtaking read, it was a real eye opener to why climbing Everest is still the ultimate test for man.

Here's a few interesting facts I learnt from this book:

• There have been over 200 deaths on Mount Everest
• It costs roughly $25,000 to climb Everest. A good proportion of the cost is attributed to the permit and the fees for obtaining daily meteorological reports for conditions around the summit.
  
• There's only two periods during the year that an attempt on the summit can be made. This is due to the hurricane-scale winds that swirl around the summit during the monsoon season (the size of Everest means it actually creates its own weather system).
• In the book Bear explains how Everest is one of only a few places still left in the world which can only be reached by human endurance only, as Helicopters can't reach that high because the air is too thin for the blades to grip. This was written before the 2005 helicopter landing by Frenchman Didier Delsalle in a Eurocopter AS 350 B3.

If you're a fan of his TV programmes you'll certainly enjoy this book.

I'm starting an Internet business - Part 2: The Lifestyle 2.0 Model

A few days ago I wrote about how I'd seen the light in terms of work and lifestyle after reading 'The Four-Hour Work Week' by Tim Ferriss.

In part 2, before I go on to describe some of the ways that I can generate passive income - the first step towards achieving the dream lifestyle - I'm going to expand some more on the general concept of going from where I am now (which I'm going to call the Lifestyle 1.0 model) to where I want to be (which I'm going to call the Lifestyle 2.0 model).

I've been using what I've learnt recently to generate my own strategy for achieving my goals. I believe it's important to develop the strategy first, as this will:

• Reduce the likelihood of failing at the first attempt;


• Give me something to refer back to and provide motivation when things don't got as planned; and


• Give me clear milestones that I can use to track progress towards my goals.
  

The strategy that I've started to develop is called my Lifestyle 2.0 model. I can't profess that the model is particularly revolutionary; it is something I've developed based on inspiration from 'The Four-Hour Work Week', as well as other books I've read such as 'Rich Dad, Poor Dad' by Robert Kiosaki. My model takes the best concepts from these books, tunes them slightly to leverage the 'web 2.0' revolution that is happening right now, and also takes into account my experience and knowledge of risk management gained from my career to date in Information Security.

The purpose of my Lifestyle 2.0 model is to show how I'm going to use a few basic business and financial principles, as well as a commitment to taking advantage of the web 2.0 opportunities, to help me achieve my goals of gaining financial freedom and escaping the 9-5 so I can pursue my dreams full-time.

To understand my Lifestyle 2.0 model you first need to understand the Lifestyle 1.0 model. You will easily recognise the Lifestyle 1.0 model because it is what most of us live today. I've split the model into separate sub-models, including a 'cashflow' model and a 'living' model.

Lifestyle 1.0 Cashflow Model

This is a basic diagram that I've created of the Lifestyle 1.0 cashflow model that most of us can relate to:

The Lifestyle 1.0 Cashflow Model is a process flow that determines our financial wealth. The Lifestyle 1.0 Cashflow Model is the model that most of us follow, but also the reason why most of us will never be rich, or at the least will never achieve financial freedom.

Here's how it works:

1. Our sole income is from a salary. The salary comes from being an employee. The salary is dependant upon us providing x amount of effort and x amount of hours per week. The income we receive from our salary is paid after tax has been taken off.
   


2. Most of our income is spent on expenses. Our expenses is made up things such as living costs - bills, groceries, general expenses, etc, - but also payments to discharge our liabilities (debts such as a mortgage, credit cards, loans, etc).
   


3. If we have anything left over after expenses we may put this into a savings account. We can count a savings account as an asset because it is working for us - it is generating interest.

Knowing the difference between an asset and a liability

Here's a quick explanation of these terms, which is fundamental to understanding the model:

Asset: An asset is something that puts money into our pockets. Most of us wrongly consider our house as an asset. In most cases, an house is a liability not an asset because it takes money out of our pockets (mortgage payments, insurance, upkeep, etc). An house is only really an asset if you rent it out to provide an income, or you cash in on any equity that may be in the house, i.e. you sell the house and there's money left over after paying off the mortgage, or you re-mortgage the house to release some equity and you use the released equity to generate income that is greater than the proportion of the expenses inccured from the increase in liability payments (increase in mortgage).

Liability: Conversely, a liability is anything that takes money out of our pockets. One of the biggest liabilities that most of us buy is a car. A car loses value as soon as we get into it and continues to take money out of our pockets for as long as we keep it. A common misconception is that a car, like a house, is an asset. It's not because it's not making us any money. Also, unlike an house, a car will never become a real asset because it won't increase in value. A key principle in the 'Rich Dad, Poor Dad' book is that rich people put their money into assets, wheras the middle class put their money into liabilities which they think are assets.


Lifestyle 2.0 Cashflow Model

This is a basic diagram of the Lifestyle 2.0 Cashflow Model, which I explain in more detail below:

Here's how it works:

1. Our income is derived not a from a salaried job, but from 'income generating assets'.
   


2. As a business owner, we pay tax after we pay ourselves, and after expenses. The beauty of being a business owner, rather than an employee, is that we can claim a proportion of our expenses as a business incurred expense. As an Internet business owner, we work from home, which means we can claim a proportion of our household bills as a business expense. Because we're a business owner, we pay ourselves the minimum wage so as to only pay the minimum amount of income tax. The rest of our income from our business is derived from dividend payments. Of course, we also have to pay corporation tax, but corporation tax is at a lower rate than income tax, and corporation tax only gets paid on profit made after expenses. Although we pay both income tax and corporation tax, our overall tax burden is actually less than a salaried employee in the Lifestyle 1.0 model.
   


3. Most of our income goes back into our assets column. As our assets grow, so does our income, which in turn grows our assets. This cycle continually increases our overall wealth.
   


4. We buy assets and avoid liabilities. If we want a luxury such as an holiday, nice car, etc, we make sure it is paid for by our assets. We must not incur liabilities due to luxuries.
   


5. If we do incur liabilities, it is to buy assets. However, we use risk mitigation strategies to ensure that the income generated from assets financed by liabilities will always be greater than the expense of the liability that paid for the asset.
   


6. Although we do buy traditional assets such as property and shares, most of our money goes into creating new Internet business opportunities - we understand that we have the potential to make more money in the short-term by capitalising on this thing that is being called 'web 2.0', than on traditional assets.

A real asset makes money while I sleep

In my model, an asset is only really an asset if it makes money for me while I sleep. A day job is not an asset because it is dependant upon my contribution, both in time and effort, and once I stop contributing, so does the income. Whereas if done properly, a Lifestyle 2.0 asset will make me money, and then continue to make make me money without requiring any further effort or time on my part - it should be self-generating.

How do you measure wealth?

Am I wealthy if my net worth is $1 million. What about $2 million? In my model, the measure of my wealth is not how much I am worth in the traditional sense. In part 1 I suggested that a man earning $250,000 a year but working 80-hour weeks is actually worse off than a man only earning $50,000 but working a ¼ of the time.

In my Lifestyle 2.0 model my wealth is simply determined by the following calculation:

• If I was to stop working today, how long could I continue with the same standard of living before I would have to work again?

At the moment, because I'm living the Lifestyle 1.0 model and have only just begun the Lifestyle 2.0 model, the answer to my wealth question is only a few weeks. So the success of my Lifestyle 2.0 model will be measured by calculating my wealth in days, weeks, and years, not in dollars.

That's it for part 2, in part 3 I will describe how my Lifestyle 2.0 Cashflow Model will be used to achieve my Lifestyle 2.0 Living Model.

The Road Taken by Michael Buerk

I’ve just finished reading this extraordinary autobiography from Michael Buerk. What a life he has lived! The book was funny, insightful, moving (especially when he is recalling his time in Ethiopia), and also acts as a good historical reference for some of the major events over the last 30 years.

The book opens with him recalling how he cheated death when an ammunition depot exploded in Addis Ababa in June ’91, killing 800 people including a colleague of his, and nearly killed him. This set the tone for the book. From one war-zone to another; in Sri Lanka, El Salvador, South Africa, Zimbabwe, etc, he faced death on nearly a daily basis reporting for the BBC.

Although we know him as the face of the Nine O’clock News on BBC1 throughout the 90’s, it’s funny to read how he despised being a newsreader. He says anybody could do it – “it looks stressful and difficult but news casting is a doddle... little more than reading out aloud,".

The book is a tad too long at 432 pages (in very small print) but it’s worth sticking with. His account of the dynamics and changes within the BBC over the years are particularly interesting, but it’s his insight into South Africa during the last few years of Apartheid, as well as his account of his reporting in Ethiopia during the famine of ‘84/’84 which set off what was perhaps the largest ever international humanitarian effort, that makes the most compelling read.

At the end of the book he revisits some of the places where he’s travelled over the years. On South Africa, where he spent many years as the BBC’s special correspondent for Africa, until he was kicked out by the South African regime for reporting the truth, he talks of the contrast between then and now. His description of South Africa during the apartheid years was just like reading an account of the Nazis during the ‘30’s. Like the Nazis, they institutionalised prejudice and racism by writing it into law, effectively making blacks persona non grata in their own country, even though they made up nearly 80% of the population. Any resistance to the laws, even by foreign journalists trying to report what was going on, was swiftly and brutally dealt with by the vicious army and police.

On returning, he saw two sides to the country. He went to the beaches which 20 years ago were whites only. Now whites, blacks, and Indians happily play side by side. Yet all this has come at a cost. South Africa now has the highest rates for murder and rape in the world. And the country is ravaged with AIDS - it is reckoned that nearly 20% of adults have the disease.

In Ethiopia, the aid over the years has made some difference. The difference being that not as many die of hunger now. They’re still completely dependant upon foreign aid though. As he put it “We seem embarrassed to let them die but incapable of helping them escape this slide into dependence and international beggary”. Ethiopia is the largest recipient of relief aid per head in the world, but gets less development aid than any of the needy countries. The population is growing yet the fertility of the soil is falling; there’s a disturbing symmetry – the population is growing at nearly the exact rate that the topsoil is being washed away off the hillsides, nearly 3% per year. Obviously this is unsustainable and it can’t be long before we see a repeat of the tragedy of 84/85.

This book was published in 2005, before the Live8 concerts and the last couple of years where Africa has been more prominent in the agenda. Yet it seems to me that unless we get major reforms of the World Bank and IMF we’re unlikely to see any real improvement in our generation.

From my review of this book you may think that it’s fairly maudlin and a difficult read. Not so. Yes, he does recall in great detail many accounts of war, death, and destruction. But there’s also many funny stories as well. Like the time he got locked out of his hotel room stark bollock naked!

If I take anything from this book, it’s an even greater admiration of the BBC. At a time when the world is dumbing down, and after the American news networks have all but abandoned reporting on foreign news, it’s good to know that there’s one broadcasting organisation in the world that continues to maintain impartiality and integrity, and report on issues that matter, not just what the ratings analysts think we want to watch.

Random act of cynicism

Last Thursday, while walking down to Tiger Tiger, I was approached by a scruffy looking bloke who asked me if I could spare him 11p. My default reaction was to say 'sorry, I don't have any change'.

Now the reason I bring this up is because I've got to the section within the book 'Join Me' where the reader eventually learns the point of Join Me, which is to make the world a better place by carrying out random acts of kindness (incidentally, the author has only just decided on the point of Join Me a third way in to the book, even though he has already recruited hundreds of members to the 'Collective', and spent lots of money getting leaflets and stickers printed to market Join Me).

Anyway, on retrospect I should have given the scruffy looking bloke 11 pence and not even have thought twice about it. It was 11 pence for god's sake, it wouldn't break the bank. But why was saying No my default reaction?

Well, I didn't actually say No. Instead, I told him I had no change. In fact, I went even further, and told him that I had no money on me whatsoever and was looking for a cash machine. Why I felt the need to elaborate in this way I don't know. Especially when I did have change on me, and wasn't in need of an ATM. The nice chap then proceeded to point me in the direction of a cash machine around the corner. So off I went, around the corner towards a cash machine I didn't need, in the complete opposite direction to where I wanted to travel, just so he wouldn't see through my blatant lies. I even had to wait around the corner for a minute hoping he'd move on before I could turn around and go back in my original direction. How sad!

If I analyse my actions, I guess I could use the excuse that my reaction was automatic 'learned behaviour' after years of living and working in large towns and cities where the police advise everyone not to give money to beggers because they will use it to fund their drug and alcohol addiction.

Now I'm no drug and alcohol expert (although I could be the latter if expertise is based on consumption (in my Navy days, I'm sensible now)) but I'm sure you cannot get much heroin, or even Special Brew for that matter (or is it Buckfast these days?), for 11p.

Looking back, he obviously wasn't even a tramp. He was just some scruffy bloke who was 11 pence short of his bus ride home. He probably wasn't even that scruffy, he just happened to have a beard, looked a bit rough, and was asking for money. So I put two and two together and came up with five.

It's fair to say I feel ashamed of myself, especially after I vowed to say YES more after my epiphany reading 'Yes Man'. I wasn't the only one saying no that day. While I was walking away I heard him ask at least a dozen more people if they could spare 11p, all of whom gave him the brush off. That in no way excuses my actions though.

I'm not halfway through Join Me yet but it seems to me a bit like the film 'Pay it Forward'. The interesting thing about Pay it Forward of course being that the end ultimately brings you back to the point of cynicism because his (Haley Joel Osment's character) final act of kindness - sticking up for his friend - leads to him getting stabbed to death.

I love stupid pointless things

After loving 'Yes Man' by Danny Wallace, I've bought his earlier book 'Join Me' the story of how he started a cult, which I'm finding to be equally as funny and entertaining. I think the reason I like his books so much is because like him, I enjoy stupid pointless things, and believe things which may at first seem to most people like stupid pointless things, can actually turn into life changing, or at least life affirming experiences, as his books show.

When we drove up to the Sunshine Coast while in Oz, we passed an attraction called The Big Pineapple. We never actually stopped to see what this is, but now I know (it's part of the story in 'Yes Man') that The Big Pineapple is one of many 'Big Things' dotted around Australia. Now some people might think how pointless, but I think it's great, and I vow to visit all the Big Things when we move to Australia. Rach is not aware yet of this wonderful adventure I have planned for us but I'm sure she'll have as much enthusiasm for it as me.

There's even a website for the Big Things - http://www.bigthings.com.au/

I was going to post a photo here of The Big Pineapple, one from the many available on the Internet. But then I thought, copyright law aside, I was stupid enough not to stop and take in the wonder of the Big Pineapple when I had chance. So I've no right to do this. The Big Things pictures will commence when the journey begins.

High on life!

I had a night out last night with my mates for the first time since, well actually I think it's the first time this year (how sad is that!). Rach also went out with her mates (the 'school mums') and we met up at the end of the night and came home together. It's funny that in 7 years we've never actually done that before - usually it's me staying in babysitting or vica-versa (less so - Rach has got more mates than me). It made a refreshing change. For the first time in a long time I felt high on life last night. It must be because everything's finally coming together.

There's also another reason. It may sound silly but I've been reading a book in the last week which has had a profound effect on me. The book is Yes Man by Danny Wallace. You know, Danny Wallace - the bloke who's currently presenting Castaway on BBC1 and did that series on BBC2 last year where he started his own country. Well in this one he basically decides to say yes to everything for a year, saying yes to every favour, request, suggestion and invitation. There's a bit of background to how it starts and why he does it, but the results are quite spectacular and should be a lesson to us all. It has certainly changed my outlook on life. I know it's only a book and some of the events may be exaggerated or made up for dramatic effect, but there's a clear message that begins to appear about halfway through the book - which is by being positive and open to new experiences, in general, good things will happen and you'll be a much happier and content person.

If you think about it, I bet all the best things that have happened in your life came about because you said yes to something. Like for me, I met Rach and we now have our beautiful daughter because one day 7 years ago I said yes to going out on her work leaving do even though I didn't really know her at the time. And now, we're about to start a whole new adventure because we're opening ourselves up to new experiences and opportunities. It's a bit extreme, I know, emigrating to the other side of the world, but if you don't say yes to things, your life will never change. It makes me laugh the number of people who have asked us why we're moving to Australia. My retort is: why should we not move to Australia?

I'd encourage everyone to take a risk every now and again and try something new, perhaps even something life-changing like we're doing. After all, is this really the best life is going to get? Don't you want something more? Don't you want to experience new places and new cultures?

I appreciate we're lucky and not everyone has the opportunities we do to make this move. No matter what your circumstances however, I strongly believe life will improve if you take a few risks and say YES. It's the same with money and business. Most of the multi-millionaire entrepreneurs got where they are today because they took risks and gave it a go. I've recently read Duncan Bannatyne's autobiography: Anyone Can Do It. He built his business group up on the back of spending a few quid on an ice cream van, and then took huge risks quickly expanding his business, nearly bankrupting himself in the process. Anyway, my main point is not about taking risks so much as about saying yes, but I guess the two can go hand in hand. Let's face it, we say no to things most of the time because we're either worried about the consequences, or we're worried about the unknown and the lack of control that saying yes might bring. Sometimes we also say no simply because we can't be bothered and it's too easy to say no. For instance, normally, I would have probably turned down the offer of a night out last night. My default position would be I've hard a hard week, my train doesn't get in to late and I just want to chill out in front of the TV. However, I decided to say yes and I ended up having a really good time. I don't think I've laughed so much in years.

Say Yes to reading this book, it will change your outlook on life:


Oh by the way, yesterday I still didn't make the 16:18 from Manchester Piccadilly!