I passed a sad landmark last Sunday. It has been ten years since a friend of mine from high school, Ed Matthews, died. He had turned 16 two months before, and he took his own life on December 27th 1999.

I do think of him on occassion. We met at the start of year 11 (September 1998), and quickly became good friends through sharing a lot of the same classess. Ed's importance on my life and on my character really can't be overstated. I was an awkward boy, short in confidence outside my group of friends. Ed was massively popular. He was cheeky and playful - he would disrupt a class with a joke, but in such a way that he rarely got in real trouble. I attribute, at least in part, my future interest in comedy and performing to him.

People would joke that we were identical twins (despite only having bright blond hair in common) and I loved hearing that, because I secretly doubted I was half as interesting or funny or as enigmatic as he was. He was a teenager who refused to care what anyone thought of him, in a way that most people only bluster about. He wasn't interested in the politics of the school yard - he had time for you if you were interesting and fun, regardless of who you were friends with. He brought out the best in everyone around him. I think he made me comfortable with myself, and helped me embrace who I was and what I was interested in, and care much less about how I was seen. If I can pass only one attitude to any children I might have, it will be that.

Of course, I was fifteen. I considered him one of my best friends, but when he killed himself, part of the shock was because I knew nothing that might be troubling him. He never even called. He just went and did it. I know a little of what happened now, the falling out with the unbelieveable overreaction. He left a note in his pocket for when it was found. On it was written his name, his address and the sentence "everyone likes a considerate suicide." His last joke.

Sometimes I feel angry at him. Sometimes, thinking back, it barely seems like that Christmas holiday happened to me at all - so much has changed since then. But mostly when I remeber us daring each other to lie on the book shelves at the back on the class until the teacher noticed, or him hopping around on his BMX, or the last time I saw him (Christmas Eve 1999, laughing and waving), I think what I do is miss him. The answer to all the unanswerable questions drives me crazy.

Hilarious.

"Hey Zach, if you play your song Killing in the Name Of on the radio, you won't swear will you?"

"Oh, no".

"You'll just say 'I won't do what you tell me', instead of 'Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me'."

"Oh, yes".

"Well, I believe you, because I have no reason to think, based on this little exchange, that you would ever not do something that you were told to do. No reason at all".

I'm supporting the Rage Against The Machine for Christmas Number 1 campaign, not because I think it sends a powerful message (it does not) or because I care about who tops the Christmas chart (I do not), but in the name of SHENANIGANS. I am pro-frippery. And also vastly amused that Cowell would call this bit of fun 'cynical', given how he makes a living.

Buy the track or don't buy the track. But do make a donation to Shelter, who do amazing work for a group of people it would be easier to forget about: "You'll never silence the voice of the voiceless".

UPDATE: Cowell again bemoaned the campaign earlier, calling its organisers "miserable". He also said it's denying Joe "his moment". Firstly, he's had plenty of moments, including the one where he won the talent contest that he entered and got a million pound recording contract. Secondly, there's the implication of entitlement. The fact that Cowell sees the Christmas number one spot as something that should be granted to everyone who wins his show is just another reason to get on board.

John Hutton, as Defence Minister:

"The individuals transferred to Afghanistan are members of Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), a proscribed organisation with links to al-Qaeda....

...The US government have explained to us that those individuals were moved to Afghanistan because of a lack of relevant linguists to interrogate them effectively in Iraq...

...The US has categorised them as unlawful enemy combatants and continues to review their status on a regular basis...

...We have been assured that the detainees are held in a humane, safe and secure environment that meets international standards that are consistent with cultural and religious norms."

Let's play a game called Spot Everything That Is Wrong With The Above. It's round one in a game called Spot Everything That Is Wrong With UK/US Counter-Terrorism Policies. To highlight a few:

- America pretty much decided their affiliation without a trial. Reprieve (a human rights charity) dispute this status for at least one of the detainees.

- Does "review their status" mean check they are still barely alive? Or check their assumptions weren't wrong?

- The relevant linguists explanation is the weakest explanation for anything ever.

- Perhaps the word "linguists" was a typo. For the word, "violent psychopaths".

- Assurances as to the high quality of conditions of imprisonment from the people you ask to covertly torture suspects don't carry much credibility.

- What do cultural norms mean for secret prisons? Because I'm fairly sure the cultural norm of a secret prison is nothing good.

- Aslo, what do religious norms mean for secret prisons? Muslims are allowed to pray five times a day? I think if I were in a secret prison, I'd be praying a lot more often than that.

I was reminded tonight, pottering around YouTube for guitar songs to copy, the first time I heard my favourite REM song - from their 2001 unplugged set: Cuyahoga.