Saturday, November 15, 2008

[newest releases] not to be missed

Coming soon: The Phoenix and the GOP


Due out - November, 2008:

Kalms, Lord, Musical Chancellors, Tory Free Press

Whimsical variation of the old game of musical chairs.

Allan, Alex, Not so much a Coma, Just Gratefully Dead, JIC Ltd

Amazing recovery of a man given up for dead.

Featherstone, Lynne, Baby PMQ and the Question of Integrity, Choona Ryness Ltd

Comedy hour and the scoring of points by Britain’s greatest PM.

Obama BH, Book Deals, Student Loans and Cocaine, Renegade Publishers, Kenya

Obama – the missing years.

Walker, Heather, Bush’s Barney Bites Boston Celtic’s Brightest Babe, Jon Decker Press

Gog and Magog had nothing on these two.

Windsor, C. P. A. G., George, Albert, Bertie and LBA60, Royal Mews Press

Thoughts on regal names and the dilemma of faith

Palin, S. L. H., Geography 101, Gravina Island Press

New schools text on countries, continents and what you can see from your window.

[black friday] start of the christmas season


Black Friday is the Friday after Thanksgiving in the United States, where it is the beginning of the traditional Christmas shopping season.

Americans and knowledgeable folk from other countries can yawn and skip this post - it's for those who don't know of this day. Wiki continues:

Retailers often decorate for the Christmas season weeks beforehand. Many retailers open very early (typically 5 am or even earlier) and offer doorbuster deals and loss leaders to draw people to their stores. Although Black Friday, as the first shopping day after Thanksgiving, has served as the unofficial beginning of the Christmas season at least since the start of the modern Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade in 1924, the term "Black Friday" has been traced back only to the 1960s.

It's a bit of a controversial name, with retailers objecting to the negative connotations but with others suggesting it is when they finally come "into the black" for the year, i.e. make a profit. Some suggest it is black becasue of the huge traffic jams and general congestion around shopping centres. Ads like this appear all over the U.S.A. and people can pre-order.

Either way, though it is not always the most lucrative of the year's shopping days, it is one of the most important. Perhaps some Americans can fill us in on this day - what it means to them.

[britain] easy on my mind


Fabulous autumn day in the woods today and in the words of John Buchan's Richard Hannay:

"I could not contrive to feel careworn."

The colours, from light green through the browns to orange and the canopy of branches were soft on the eyes and the smell of the forest was something else. Everyone walking past was acknowledging everyone else with a nod and the nastiness of the past week just dropped away. Squirrels hopped about and ate nuts between their paws and birds called.

I'm going to run posts on the best of Canada, the U.S., Australia and Russia at some point but today is "the best of Britain". Britain has a few things going for it, despite the recession, despite the ASBOs, despite this government and their USSR mentality, despite lots of things.

Here are some:


1. There is a sense of history. Even woods have a history to them, an ancient name and you can imagine hunters in there 700 years ago, the deer and so on. The castles and historic buildings, the mews and the like go without saying.

2. There are such restrictive planning laws over here and yet that cuts both ways. Local councils preserve the look of an area and for people already living there, there is a strong element of conservation in place. Building tends to be upwards rather than of the sprawling ribbon variety and whilst that creates a boxed-in, huddled together village effect, it allows much woodland and field to remain intact, along with wildlife.



3. The colours are so rich and vibrant. Australia has its dusky hues, very nice too, Sicily has its light, rocky, sandstone feel but here it is closer to primary colours.

4. There is a climate of eccentricity here which spills into, say, the motoring field. I know people in the States who do up old Buick 56s and so on but there is a different feel this side of the pond. Here there's a ready acceptance of Healey replicas, frog-eyed Sprites, Cobras and Caterhams and train spotting is a recognized pasttime. It allows someone to breathe, this atmosphere.

5. Climate - there are four seasons, sometimes in one day and today's cool dampness, with a bit of a breeze, was quite soothing. Nothing gets too extreme.

As I said, I'll extol the virtues of the other countries in subsequent posts but today I'm just looking at Britain. I couldn't imagine anything lovelier than to have a little place near the woods, themselves near water somewhere, working online from home and doing a bit of dinghy sailing and rambling in my spare time.

If only. Maybe it will be possible one day.


[alcoholism] when is it recognized

It's not a good idea to open a post with an apology but I'll apologize up front to any readers who are the prisoners of addiction, be it alcohol, other drugs, caffeine or even chocolate.

We're going to an almighty knees-up tomorrow and the thought flitted through the head, "I hope there's some beer there." Many know that I don't smoke and hardly drink - I think the last beer was a month ago, the one before that a month and a half earlier and the one before that in Sicily. Can't remember when I last smoked.

However, I'd kill for a beer right now - a nice, luscious Theakstons or whatever, foaming at the top and sliding down with the minimum of effort. Should I check in to Alcoholics Anonymous?

A bit more seriously, when does a person recognize the problem? At what point? Seems to me that he can't recognize it until it's upon him. There's a drinking culture among youth and it's highly publicized. I do think it's worse than yesteryear but then again, I was first drunk at thirteen, then at seventeen and there was a fair bit of bingeing after that. Must have been a saint between thirteen and seventeen.

What happened? Don't know - just grew out of it, I suppose. I've always loved red wine and developed a taste for a single malt along the way so there's no moral objection to the stuff. Even Jesus advised people to try a little wine instead of water, I believe.

Again, where is the point when you're addicted?

Friday, November 14, 2008

[mfttj] zvwyoko ejgfaf jstfkff








Word verification - Zvwyoko?  Jstfkff!  I hate it, I hate it, I hate it, I hate it.   

There.

I feel better now.


[igloos] how to build 'em


With that time of year almost upon us, you'll clearly be wondering how to construct your igloo. How Stuff Works explains:

1. Find an area with a lot of dry, hard-packed snow. Use the snow saw or knife to cut large blocks -- the harder the snow is, the more solid the snow blocks will be. Your snow blocks should be about 3 feet long, 15 inches high and 8 inches deep, according to "The Complete Wilderness Training Guide."

2. Smooth the edges of the blocks. Place them in a circle, working your way up. Blocks should decrease in size as you work upwards. Using your shovel or saw, cut a hole under the wall to create the igloo's entrance.

3. Overlap the blocks and shape them to lean inward, creating the dome. The blocks should support each other in order to prevent the dome from collapsing. If necessary, use a stick or other support in the interior to support the blocks at the top until the dome is finished.

4. Once all the blocks except the last one have been placed, find a block that is slightly too large for the last opening on top. Place it on top of the igloo and wiggle it into place, shaping as needed. It should be shaped to fit exactly in the opening.

5. Shovel loose snow onto the igloo. Pack it into all of the crevices. Smooth the inside of the igloo by hand and shovel out any extra snow.

6. Finish the entrance by digging a hole in the shape of the desired entrance (some igloo aficionados prefer L-shaped entrances because they keep the wind out better). Then cover the hole with snow blocks.

7. You must cut ventilation holes in the walls and roof to prevent suffocation. Air holes also prevent body heat from causing dangerous levels of carbon dioxide.

8. If you want to upgrade your igloo, consider adding these amenities:

* A small stove: Yes, you can cook inside an igloo. Excessive use of a stove can build up carbon monoxide to dangerous levels, but your air holes should guard against that.

* Extra head room: Some igloo builders recommend digging the floor down a little to allow for more space.

* A sleeping platform: You can loft your bed with some extra blocks of snow. Since warm air rises, you'll enjoy a little extra heat that way.

There is a nice pictorial version here too.

[rome quiz] five curly ones for the grey matter

This quiz is a bit unfair because unless you've studied for it, the two quickest ways to answer it are by going to either Tiberius Gracchus or Wiki.

Yes or no?

1. Livy did deep research into barbaric history or customs.

2. Livy argued that Rome's failures were owing to a long history of impiety.

3. Falerii was conquered by the Romans shortly after the Gallic invasion which concludes Livy's story.

4. Livy relied only on the historical record, never on stories handed down.

5. According to Livy, Postumius was a very good man.


And don't forget - it's Tiberius' birthday today! Happy Birthday.

Answers here.

[war declared] er ... not when it is israel

It wasn't long ago that this blog looked at the Middle-East and in particular Israel. At that point, it was a case of waiting for Livni to be elected.

Now it seems to be sliding into chaos again. Those supporting the Palestinians I find interesting - what do they say to this nonchalant announcement:

Hamas militants in Gaza fired several rockets into southern Israel today, while Israel kept its crossings into the territory closed as a five-month ceasefire appeared to be collapsing fast.

Er ... not a couple of rifle shots across a border fence. Not an incursion of foreign squads a few kilometres in. Rockets. As in "rockets which can kill" and are an act of war. Is there a Palestinian state? If there is, then what are they doing firing rockets into another sovereign state and why is no one screaming about it?

Like, where is the UN condemnation and the condemnation of every world leader? All right, you can say there should be a Palestinian state. Right. Now does that mean that Israeli sovereignty has no status?

Hello? Anyone out there?

UPDATE:  Courtesy of Anon, view this [hope the link works].  What chance that society?

Blogging will be slow

Just that, readers. I'll be back to it when I can. No mysteries, just work seeking - have to go out. Have a good Friday. James

Thursday, November 13, 2008

[sally's meme] six things

Six things about Higham, as requested by SallyinNorfolk:

1. After a little accident at 17, can't stand gin anymore;

2. Was once a DJ, playing German cosmic music;

3. Snapped a piston rod on the M25, which then catapulted backwards, missing everyone;

4. Can't speak on the telephone for more than a few minutes;

5. Uses sidestroke when escaping by water;

6. Shoes did not melt in minus 37 degrees as they did in plus 52.

I'm tagging the first six people who comment, if we get that many.

[time paths] need they always be linear

We just watched the 2006 Denzel Washington movie Deja Vu. If you don't know the movie, click here.

Rather than discuss the movie, I'd like to look at the issue it addresses, albeit in simplistic terms. This doesn't follow the plot but is just an idea springing from the plot.

Let's say we agree on two things:

1. Time moves forward in a linear way [1];
2. It is possible to create another path [2] by going back in the past and starting over.

So we start at a point in time before where your partner will be killed, say, in a ferry disaster. Now you are not on the ferry and you witness the disaster. Look at the diagram top left and the tick represents this path.

At that point, you are able to twist time to go back before the disaster. With the knowledge of what is about to happen, you have to stop him/her boarding that ferry and also do what you need to to prevent the disaster.

You do that but in saving the ferry, you yourself die, represented in the diagram by the cross. clearly, we don't want that to happen but you're no longer around to go back later and prevent your own death.

However, a second you now appears and joins up with your partner. This second you was the one already in this time/space position? The one dying, saving the ferry, is the "intruder" you.

Now, let's say the people controlling the machine in the future point after the original disaster move to return you to that point. Do they return the dead you or the linear, living you?

What do you think?


[real friends] and the fair weather sort


Don't situations like these past few days really sort out who your real friends are and who the fair weather friends are? You also find out those whom you thought were friends but turned out to be enemies, through automatic assumptions about you and by the little snide asides by email to third parties.

To those true friends - thank you so much all of you for those words and sometimes that touch of humour ,to boot. You possibly think that your words of support are what any friend would do but I want to say they are much more than that - they gave me the energy to go through with an unpleasant but necessary task.

Calum was the one who put it in the clearest way. Whilst he admitted up front that he didn't have the facts and so couldn't comment on the actual issue, he felt he knew me well enough and trusted that I would not be telling lies, even if there was some incentive to do so. Imagine the case I could have made if I'd constructed it?

That was very heartening because while close people know you well enough to realize that your version is true, others in a sort of middle position have to go with their gut instinct and I do appreciate that.

My non-blogging friend has also been excellent with his practical support and blunt advice that has saved me from doing something silly a number of times, as well as giving me great ideas for posts all the while. The brave Ubermouth I'll not write much on because it is still live and any words of support can be used against her but she has been a source of great strength. Her kind comments have also been much appreciated although, IMHO, not really deserved to that extent.

Now, out of this whole thing there are some offers to come down for drinks. It would be lovely to be able to arrange something on a particular day at a neutral venue somewhere midlandish so I'm thinking that one through just now. It would be lovely to just relax over a meal and a beer for once.

[mulholland falls] 50s film noir in 1996

I have a confession - I love film noir from the 50s.

Mulhollland Falls, from 1996, stars Nick Nolte and Chazz Palminteri, two of a violent four man LAPD squad who target gangster and mobster crime by taking their targets to Mulholland Drive and throwing them off the cliff there [Falls].

It's a bit slow in places and the cinema goers didn't take to it but it is definitely haunting and the four cops are menacing indeed. There's humour in there too, for example, on the way to dealing with a drug dealer, they argue over who's going to drive the car.

For people who enjoy the film noir sparseness and angularity plus the novel plot twist of the questionable jurisdiction of the LAPD on military territory against the 50s backdrop of nuclear testing and coverups, this would suit you. In book form, you'd probably have been reading Chandler.

It's currently possible to watch it on youtube but for how long? watch that space below.


Wednesday, November 12, 2008

[declan ganley] not protocol, old chum

I'd like to meet his tailor.


Oh I like this one very much. Rubbing my hands together as I type [which is a bit tricky] but most likely you know all about this anyway from months ago.

How many of you good people out there have heard of Declan Ganley?

Give up?

Maybe all of you today because he's been in the news. He's "founder and Chairman of Libertas, a campaigning and lobby group which advocated a No vote to the 2008 referendum on the Treaty of Lisbon in Ireland." He lent millions apparently and facilitated airtime and so on - many say he was instrumental in getting the No vote so high.

So far so good. Today:

Czech President Vaclav Klaus, who is on a state visit to Ireland, angered ministers by staging a news conference with [Declan Ganley]. Irish Foreign Minister Micheal Martin called the action inappropriate, only to be dubbed a hypocrite by Mr Klaus.

Now that is most undiplomatic language and breaches protocol which I know just a little about, having been involved with a trade minister in some international meetings. That sort of thing is so beyond the pale [unfortunate choice of word by me today] that I'm immediately asking where he gets the confidence to say that from.

Possible answer:

Ganley personally has strong financial links with the American military and homeland security. A number of the contracts which he has with the Pentagon - which he has now admitted amount to at least $ 200 million-appear to be on a closed, non-competitive basis, potentially enabling him to earn significant profits.

Right - so that is interesting but what is even more interesting, to me at leeast, is the tone of the Wiki article, which spells out in detail the case against him but his own explanations are "Ganley claimed", makig him look very dodgy indeed. I don't believe it for a second. He may be dodgy, don't get me wrong but this is a beat up.

Something occurred in that meeting to give Mr. Klaus confidence. Now what could that be? Let's look at the Czech Republic just now. They are a member of the Vizegrad Group of four countries which requires funding. The Americans are also interested:

The agreement between the Senate and the House of Representatives would also fully fund the request for a radar site in the Czech Republic, opening the door for the next U.S. presidential administration to begin building a European missile defense system.

Could this be where the "stick' came from between the President and Irish ministers? It's also interesting that only the Irish stand between freedom and the EU monster - they must have a sense of history, of destiny in the world. Or else, as my friend has just said, they received all their goodies from the EU early from the EU, said thank you and as no more was coming, decided to vote No anyway. Irish perversity?

Either way, Declan Ganley, for whatever reasons, appears to be standing between a monolithic organization and freedom. That appeals to this blogger very much. Also the fact that:

The Czech Republic takes over the rotating EU presidency on 1 January 2009.

[troutie] and the problem of blog ethics

Troutie's avatar


UPDATE: From a paranoid comment by Mutley, it appears that some think there is hidden meaning in this post relating to the matter which closed yesterday. For those with short memories, I stated that nothing of that nature would appear on the front page in any form.

It hasn't but some people obviously seem to want to divine meaning into what is a straightforward post. so, as they say in the films, any resemblance to persons living or dead is entirely coincidental [and unfortunate].

Now, let's get on with the post in peace:


Tom Paine writes of real friendships and online friendships.

We certainly need a way in English to distinguish real friends from "blog friends," "Facebook friends," "LinkedIn" or "Second Life" friends.

While this holds water, especially in Second Life where nothing is as it seems, I do think that blog friendships do not always have to end in grief. Through unfortunate circumstances, I found myself, in May, outside my infrastructure of work, home and friendships and thrown onto the world of blog friendships in a very real way.

Such a thing is going to be fraught, whether a blogfriend or real life friend but as for the question of whether I was the same person in both personae - I'd like to think that there were no major shocks on this score for them. An example is Andrew Allison whom I met up with in Hull and we got along possibly better than we even had in the blog world.

It seems to me that there are kindly people and there are snakes in each of those worlds Tom mentions but perhaps the blogosphere affords us the chance to expose the snakes more easily and yet less effectively. in the end. Nothing like looking into their eyes for confirmation, I suppose.

Aaron, of Tygerland addresses another issue:

Our impeachment of President Clinton was another example of placing the wrong political emphasis on personal matters.

Well, yes and no. Whilst the Clinton impeachment was a political beat-up, what about this following situation?

Imagine there is a collection of bloggers, say Pajamas Media or Ethical Bloggers or whatever, whose criteria for being one of them obviously includes it being a fine blog but they also require the ethical standing of the blogger to be high?

Imagine that Adolph Hitler is gassing Jews just now, with assistance from his henchman, not unlike Saruman and Wormtongue and yet he runs a blog which is about food, especially about trout in butter sauce. It's an excellent blog, ethical, knowledgeable and his answers to commenters are reasoned. He goes around visiting other websites and striking up blog friendships under his pseudonym Troutie but checking out, through seemingly innocent questions, if they have any Jewish connections.

He's invited to join a blog community and all is well until someone puts his real life persona together with his blog persona. Now comes the ethical dilemma, doesn't it? Troutie puts to the collective , through his connection with the head honcho, that a person's real life persona should be no criterion for membership - that the sole criterion should be the quality of the writing.

He is booted out though because of his support of the BNP and all hell breaks loose. The libertarians say he should have been allowed to remain in, even as the body of the 3 millionth Jew goes into a ditch, stating that even his mother loves Troutie and his mates like him and don't want him to go.

The other side says he is a monster, full stop, period and shouldn't be in the collective.

Interesting dilemma.

More tangentially, Tess of the d'Urbevilles confesses her baby to Angel. Leaving aside whether that's a crime anyway, she says she is the same person now as before he knew that. Angel replies that :

You were one person then. Now you are another.

Does what we know of a person make that person different to when we didn't know? Should friendships have left Troutie protected?

UPDATE: We were discussing this matter and someone came out with the idea of what is private and what is public, a la Monica Lewinsky. There is clearly a private life and a public life but where is the crossover point? If a father has a son and the son inadvertently blurts something out about the father, that is now in the public sphere.

Similarly, if two people meet each other around a table in the bar, then it is fair game for anyone there to comment on this. They then move into a private relationship which, as both claim it is private, is private. But if he is mistreating her, then the pact is broken and it goes back out into the public sphere when she tells of it.

Now, back to the contention in the quote above that private life should not be a consideration for any role one goes for. Well maybe but what if the couple are murdering babies or whatever? Should that be taken into account? Does that make it now a public matter?

So in a collective, it is all well and fine to say private life is no consideration but is that so when that private life is for nefarious purposes which hurt others? I was thinking of Myra and Ian here and Charlie Manson.

[free speech] when does it become plain silly


As a libertarian, I have a commitment to free speech, something seen in the past few days on this site. However, is everything an issue of free speech? Here we have the same old religious dispute again:

A religious group's fight to place a monument in a public park is at the center of a Supreme Court dispute over governments' power to limit speech. Pleasant Grove City, Utah, is asking the justices, in arguments Wednesday, to allow it to reject the donation of a display from the religious group known as Summum.

The Salt Lake City-based group wants to erect its "Seven Aphorisms of Summum" monument in the city's Pioneer Park, which is home to a Ten Commandments monument that was donated in 1971 by another private group.

The attitude of the U.S.A. to the separation of state and religion is:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . ." The phrase "separation of church and state", which does not appear in the Constitution itself, is generally traced to an 1802 letter by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists ...

The state makes no law but does not exclude a national religion, which is, historically, Christianity. That is the nominal religion of the vast majority. Hence the necessity for Jefferson to write that letter to compensate for the "deficiency" of the constitutional amendment, in his eyes..

So, if a group puts up a Christian icon of the majority religion in the country, can the Supreme Court then refuse another group's demand for a monument? Alternatively, should city fathers [and mothers] be forced to blight a park with monument after monument to satisfy every religious and pseudo religious body, on the grounds of "free speech"?

Where is common sense in this? Perhaps sense is not so common. In a similar situation in Alabama, only 20% of people approved the removal of a Christian monument, to satisfy the PC demand for enforced equality. In fact, it could be argued that the right to build a monument and the court order to remove an established one are two completely different things, with the latter being not only unconstitutional but hardly in the spirit of "free speech".

Check out the Moore plaque as well.

[promise] now kept

I have kept my word and "the links have been removed from my sidebar and ... the posts secreted away somewhere." They are obliquely accessible.

Nothing will appear here though, as promised yesterday. Check this post, by the way - there has been an update.

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

[thought for the day] wednesday evening


Let not the sun go down on your wrath

[Ephesians]

... especially on Armistice Day. Let there be Armistice.

[armistice day] the essential meaning of the day

This is a re-posting of an article from one year ago. It essentially argues against war. You might like to take in the comments section as well.

Please, I urge you, readers, whether you read my post or not, do go over to Jams after this and read the human side of the story. Please then go on to Cherie's, a lovely post. Do check these out too - Nunyaa and Anndi. Check out Aaron's links too. Here is Cassandra's historical look. Here is JMB's.

Armistice Day, Veteran's Day, Remembrance Day


This piece below is indebted heavily to Wikipedia.

Hawks, backed and abetted by the finance, have always prearranged wars long before the opening salvos. Dearieme brought my attention to another angle on it but the two are not mutually exclusive, as far as I can see. Just a question of emphasis.

Nowhere was this prearranged willingness to sacrifice boys' lives for political purposes more glaringly obvious than in The Great War, a term which already had currency in the corridors of power long before the due date. Even Buchan admitted as much in The Thirty Nine Steps [available online]. Check Chapters 1 and 2.

The Schieffen Plan

For complicated reasons you can read yourselves, the Germans were long harbouring a desire to punish France and for what? Because France had punished them for a wrong which they had perpetrated on France and so on.

This is the eternal cycle of war so beloved of two classes – the aristocracy and the old money of Europe.

Some speculate that if Helmuth von Moltke the Younger has not lost his nerve, Germany might have shortened the war but I think not. Historians almost always fail to take into account the invisible factor in all public life – the Old Finance.

So the long drawn out and extremely lucrative conflict and devastation of the common man was very much anticipated.

Helmuth von Moltke the Younger

French Plan XVII

It is erroneous to suppose that the French were the poor victims in this.

Almost immediately following her defeat by Prussia in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870-71, together with the humiliating annexation by the newly unified Germany of the coal-rich territories of Alsace and Lorraine, the French government and military alike were united in thirsting for revenge.

To this end the French devised a strategy for a vengeful war upon Germany, Plan XVII, whose chief aim was the defeat of Germany and the restoration of Alsace and Lorraine. The plan was fatally flawed, and relied to an untenable extent upon the "élan" which was believed to form an integral part of the French army - an irresistible force that would sweep over its enemies.

Like Caesar's Soothsayer

It wasn't that no one spoke out:

A few dissident intellectuals in Europe had been trying to warn their nations about how different a war among the great industrial powers of Europe would be from wars of the previous century.

This has always been the way and even the kudos of this very blog has suffered for sometimes speaking a truth which is not generally recognized at the time. When it does come out, it is often too late.

And so to Compiègne

This photograph was taken in the forest of Compiègne after reaching an agreement for the armistice that ended World War I. This railcar was given to Ferdinand Foch for military use by the manufacturer, Compagnie Internationale des Wagons-Lits. Foch is second from the right.

I sometimes imagine that meeting in the forest of Compiegne after all the trench warfare, the slaughter and massive dislocation imposed on a bewildered and yet highly patriotic people.

It was 4.30 in the morning of Monday, November 11th in France and perhaps they'd travelled from Paris via Foch's special train, rugged up for the occasion.

Think for a moment what it would have looked like and felt like that morning.


The German delegation crossed the front line in five cars and was escorted for ten hours across the devastated warzone of Northern France (perhaps, they speculated, to focus their minds on the lack of sympathy they could expect). They were then entrained and taken to the secret destination, Foch's railway siding in the forest of Compiègne.

Telegrams were passed to and from the German team:
Matthias Erzberger, a civilian politician;
Count Alfred von Oberndorff, from the Foreign Ministry;
Major General Detlev von Winterfeldt, the army; and
Captain Ernst Vanselow, the navy.

[General Weygand and General von Gruennel are not mentioned in the French document]
... to both the German Army Chief of Staff Paul von Hindenburg in Spa and the hastily assembled civilian government of Friedrich Ebert in Berlin.

Erzberger apparently attempted to take negotiations to the limit of the 72 hours Foch had offered Hindenburg, but an open telegram from Berlin imploring him to sign immediately somewhat undermined his team's credibility.

Ebert was desperate, facing imminent insurrection in many large German cities. Signatures were made between 5:12 AM and 5:20 AM, Paris time.

How it affected some people

Colonel Percy Dobson wrote:
It was hard to believe the war was over. Everything was just the same, tired troops everywhere and cold drizzly winter weather- just the same as if the war were still on.
Stephen Longstreet, in the Canvas Falcons (1970), wrote:
On that November 11, 1918, morning, another flier, Capitaine Jacques Leps, commander of the French 18th Squadron, sat in his Spad. He was about to take off with his fliers and their planes, all marked with the insignia of a leaping hare chased by a greyhound. The engines were turning over, the props spinning silver.

It was time to get into the air, to escort a major bombing raid on Metz. As Leps raised his arm to signal the take-off, someone came running from the airdrome's communication room, running agitatedly, arms waving.

"La guerre!! C'est finie, la guerre!"

Jaques Leps took in the heart-bursting news. He switched off the Spad's engine. The engines of the rest of his fliers went silent, one by one, as the cry "C'est finie, la guerre!" spread throughout the field. Capitaine Leps unfastened his safety belt and slowly got out of his cockpit.
Penultimate

At 11:00 a.m. this day, we put down whatever we're doing and remember long-suffering humanity who have had to endure these things and especially the brave men and women who gave their lives to defend their homes and families from totally unnecessary and indefensible aggression.

Lovely piece on the issue from the Domestik Goddess who writes of singer-songwriter Terry Kelly, who witnessed an act of philistinism and did what artists have always done, in the grip of the strongest emotions — he channelled his anger into his music.

Here is an account of the time:
On the stroke of 11:00, all the store fell silent.

All, that is, except for one man, who was accompanied by his little daughter. Oblivious of the example he was setting for the child, the man continued to try to talk to the sales clerk all through the respectful silence.

I have a copy of the Last Post and will play it during that time. What I love about this day is that it brings all of us together - American, Canadian, Britain, Commonwealth and many others.

Finally

Do not forget the modern German either - he is as much against this madness as any of us. He is not to be excluded from this remembrance day. Many of the British recognize this new reality and it seems to me to be a good step towards the ultimate exclusion of war as a means of resolving disputes.

Check Juliet's post - it really brings it home. Also, last year's series from Jams.



Monday, November 10, 2008

[armistice eve] the slide to oppression

And I thought I was the only one who wrote this kind of thing:

There was a time when I struggled to convince myself that these people were well meaning but incompetent ... There is nothing well meaning about this proposal, nor does it smack of casual incompetence. This is very deliberate. This is an intentional raid on our civil liberties. This is designed to reverse the relationship betwixt citizen and state with the state’s boot firmly on the citizen’s throat. This is pure, unadulterated evil.

Referring to the latest Labour proposal to wrest yet another liberty from the ordinary person who can't defend him or herself.

[how this blog began] well ...


This is a "how I got my start" post. Well, I was only a teaboy in those days .....

Despite some of the people I've been addressing in these past few November '08 days, there are some really good people around the sphere and I thought I'd mention the ones I found or who found me at the beginning.

I've posted on this before but my blogging life began as a result of hogging Stephen Pollard's comments section on a post I can't remember, maybe on Cardinal O'Brian, when an opinionated blogger called Indecent Left, aka Stuart A, swept in and started attacking Christianity. Problem was, most of those trying to argue him down were not in his intellectual class and though I also was not, I decided to take him on.

The result was three whole days of battle and Stephen apparently had a slight spike in his stats as a result. [He now blogs here, by the way.] It wasn't Holmes and Moriarty but there was a great deal of cut and thrust and I was finding my evidence on the run. He seemed to have it at his fingertips. As he got on his high horse, I dropped into my "post-a quote-and-then=speak-to-it-mode". Both were aiming for the high moral ground, both were digging deep.

There was one beautiful moment when he challenged me to produce something about the Councils of Nicea I seem to recall. Damn it, I had to google it, go to page four and cut and paste. That stopped him for about fifteen minutes and then he came in with howls of outrage: "You found that at [followed by a url]!!!" Well I had but not the url he'd said.

And so it went.

Afterwards, we were quite good friends, to the point where we blogrolled each other [he's since dropped me but I retain him] and he admitted it had been a tough battle. I admitted he'd had the wood on me all the way. Some readers of Stephen's blog scored it a draw.

Whatever.

That's where I realized I liked this blogging lark and told Stephen that I was going to set up my own, on Blogger. He gave me advice and came in with both a supportive comment on my blog and a short, dedicated post - my goodness that bucked me up no end but it got better.

In came my first troll though a good-natured troll who claimed he didn't want his own blog but preferred to sniff around the sewers of other people's. Johnathan Pearce advised me not to worry about him and just blog. My very first comment was on an Iceland post by EU Serf and it was another boost to the enthusiasm that a real live commenter had come in and actually, you know, like ... commented.

Chris Dillow came in and gave me some excellent advice too, telling me that Tim Worstall's blog was one of the best going. Tim was also very supportive, in his quick, sharp way and asked me about my first day uniques. I said a bit more than a hundred and he was surprised, quite rightly as it turned out because it was 37 the next day and stayed around there a long time.

I was having some html trouble and Tim put me onto a chap called Devil's Kitchen about this and I was a bit scared of him because he swore a lot and had a pitchfork. To me though, he was a thorough gentleman and gave the required advice. This then led to the other members of the Edinburgh triumvirate, Mr. Eugenides and the Reactionary Snob.

Another to also come in and give some advice was the peerless Pedant General-in-Ordinary, later known as Cleanthes, of The Select, who gave me some barked orders on what to do with my bleedin' template and then added: "Now retire to the mess for tea and biscuits." Later, he emailed me with: "Bloglines, that's the way to go but nobody ever listens to me."

I've just now googled his moniker and had a rude shock. Click on the link and see who is running it now!

Through the PGinO, I found Deogolwulf and then struck out laterally, from Stephen Pollard's links, visiting Clive Davis, Norman Geras, the daunting Oliver Kamm and Melanie Phillips. I noticed that Indecent Left really had it in for Oliver Kamm and wondered about that.

So that's how it started and they were my initial blogroll. Others linked, I linked and so on and thus this blog was underway. All along, the niceness of people came through and the support for each other, which is why others who would character assassinate and dissemble disappoint so much and get the short end from me.

I think the blogosphere will survive, at least for longer than surmised, as this camaraderie is a very special thing.

* By the way, try this blog on for size.

[progress] quite often equals deterioration


Steve Hayes quotes Betjeman;

Let's say goodbye to hedges And roads with grassy edges And winding country lanes Let all things travel faster Where motor-car is master Till only Speed remains.

... then goes on to say:

About 25 years ago the mailships between Britain and South Africa were phased out in the name of "progress". Containerisation had killed them and made then uneconomic, we were told.

Steve then mentions Chessalee, who writes of:
The 'Night Mail', the train that W H Auden and T S Eliot made famous in rhyme, and the 1963 Great Train Robbers made famous in crime, is being replaced by a much less romantic means of getting letters from one end of the country to the other: lorries.

This blog does not accept that the passing of iconic things which shaped the image of the nation. There was every reason, in a similar way to that of the Americans trying to preserve the Diner for cultural/historic reasons, that we should also have preserved the most iconic things - routemaster buses, red pillar boxes, the nighmail and so on.

There is not even a justification, in terms of tourism for this. It is known that tourists like to see things still existing "as they were" and for the residents, the inconvenience of these things is nowhere near as pronounced as the "progress at all costs" supporters make out. Does a red pillar box inconvenience you in posting a letter?

The argument is made that it all costs so much and that progress demands more and more efficiency. Yes, in the bulk of our lives, fair enough. But in the iconic matters - a resounding no. It reminds me of the railways and the argument that it must pay its way, must make money, to justify the huge salaries of the company heads.

Rubbish.

Public tranport is there to serve the citizenry in the cheapest way possible and in some sort of comfort. This sort of woolly-headed thinking has even crossed the water into Russia, where the iconic trams, which still give a cheap, simple ride for the less wealthy and romantic, are being phased out in the interests of efficiencyand deals with China.

Don't get me wrong - technology is going to make all our lives better, I'm convinced of that. But that is a far cry from hacking out the very things which exist in people's minds as images collectively creating the image of the nation.

[martin kelly] the art of the succinct

Martin Kelly has taking to writing long, verbose posts. Here are the latest examples, in reverse order:

Friday, November 07, 2008
The Union Lives for the time being.
posted by Martin at 8:13 AM

Saturday, November 08, 2008
A Bum Steer
If all else fails, the conservative can take heart from the passing of Proposition 8.
posted by Martin at 10:57 AM

Sunday, November 09, 2008
If There Is One Blogger I Wish I Could Write Like it's Mark Shea.
posted by Martin at 7:56 PM

Monday, November 10, 2008

Monday Morning Blues
Not much to say today.
posted by Martin at 7:46 AM

I have an idea - let's all of us go over there and bombard him with our thoughts, just to annoy him. :)

[antidisestablishmentarianism] and the separation of powers



Reading about the return to Pakistan of an expat and how he saw, with alarm, the transition from the zealots being in a minority:

But these zealots, despite their high profile, remained marginal in society as religion was a personal affair, not something you discussed in your drawing room.

.. to this:

I was overwhelmed by the all-pervasive religious symbols in public spaces, and the theocratic debates raging in the independent media, as well as in the homes of friends and relatives.

... it is perhaps one area where the atheists, agnostics, humanists and Christians* can agree.

I'm using the term Christian* here to mean one who has made a personal commitment and plans to live his life doing good things to the best of his ability. The term, as used in this article, excludes theocracy, the militant right, creationist science, door knockers and so on. It is using the term in the way it was meant to be used in the gospels - a commitment to faith, hope and charity.

So, in that sense, all the above groups would support the contention that religion should not be imposed by the state, to the extent that it rules or dictates to them regarding their personal lives. This is a far cry from a country recognizing a religion as its historical roots and honouring that tradition, as it honours all its patriots and national heroes. In this I am a firm antidistestablishmentarianist. - the nominal religion is the nominal religion and to distestablish it is to deny one's past.

Ditto religious freedom. Just as the state should not impose the "state religion" on the people at a personal level, neither should there be any suppression of people's personal faith except where it is shown by incident after incident and by its very nature, to be contrary to the way of life of that nation.

An extreme example is a cult of assassins or the Temple of Set or something like that. A less extreme but still pervasive example is a religion which aims to take over the society and enforce worship, as well as in the subjugation of women and introduction of barbaric practices.

The tradition of the state/church divide was an issue with Thomas Jefferson:

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."

... but he was referring to the fledgling state of America, not to an old world country where the religion followed by all constituted the backdrop to the nation.

Wiki refers to the Turkish and French laïcité:

Turkey, whose population is overwhelmingly Muslim, is also considered to have practised the laïcité school of secularism since 1923. While France comes from a Roman Catholic tradition and Turkey from an Islamic one, secularism in Turkey and secularism in France present many similarities.

There was a quite promising compromise between church and state in 1848 France:

Both bishops and the Catholic press waxed enthusiastically about the February revolution. Three archbishops, Monsignor Affre, of Paris, Monsignor Donnet, of Bordeaux, and Cardinal de Bonald, of Lyons, all publicly pledged support to the new regime. "The republican flag will protect the religious flag," said Donnet.

Modern republicans too viewed the Church as a bulwark of stability especially after the June Days. The Church had not been allied with the Orleanist Monarchy, it remained a powerful institution in society, and religion was a stabilizing influence. So long as leading Catholics and conservative republicans agreed upon issues, Church-State relations were harmonious.

The "honeymoon" was destroyed by a combination of extreme papists and extreme secularists. I have long contended that the intolerant attitude of humanistic atheists is every bit as damaging as the most extreme religious zealot and just as unjust on the common man and so it seems to have been at that time.

In the republic I lived in, in Russia, there was a perfect example of how the Muslim religion could live with the Orthodox Christian church and the secularist Russian state. The key was in centuries of inter-marriage and a tolerant attitude to religion in general. I hasten to add that this was not so during that history itself, especially during the Soviet oppression and that of the much earlier Khanate but in the modern day.

One of the key factors in this was a president who, whilst personally loyal to his Muslim faith, nevertheless saw that the state's progress in the world arena would be benefited by a compromise position. Thus the zealots were shut out of power and no religious war erupted.

This is, IMHO, as it should be. Christian historians might argue that without Constantine, Christianity would not have survived and they have a point. I wonder though, as the early church was most certainly an underground thing, spread by samizdat in a way, whether the raw message of the cross would not have found many adherents the world over anyway.

Looking at the Sharia states, it's also clear that when they are in control, the state as a whole fails to go forward either economically or socially. Of all the modern states where state/church separation is an issue, Turkey is an example of the attempt to make it modern and at the same time, it is being dragged back down by the fundamentalists.

Sunday, November 09, 2008

[remembrance sunday] the armistice story part 1

This is the general version of the story I prepared, one year ago, for my Russian students and thus it repeats many things you yourselves know full well so please forgive that. The comments section makes interesting reading.


We all know about poppies, the day is celebrated around the world and yet do you know the actual story? The aim of this post is to bring together the story in one package.

It is also one of the primary reasons I see no justification for wars being declared. This is not to say we shouldn't be prepared - we should and with the best equipment.

I'm referring to the ruling donkeys deciding that a jolly good war is in order and to hell with the lives of countless young people. Sorry if this makes me hot under the collar.

June 28th, 1914

The events of July and early August 1914 are a classic case of "one thing led to another".

The explosive which was World War One had been long in the stockpiling; the spark was the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne, at Sarajevo's Town Hall on 28 June 1914.

Ferdinand's death at the hands of the Black Hand, a Serbian nationalist secret society, set in train a mindlessly mechanical series of events that culminated in the world's first global war.

One Thing Led to Another

So then, we have the following remarkable sequence of events that led inexorably to the 'Great War' - a name that had been touted even before the coming of the conflict.

Austria-Hungary, dissatisfied with Serbia's placatory response to her ultimatum declared war on Serbia on 28 July 1914.

Russia, bound by treaty to Serbia, announced mobilisation of its vast army in her defence, a slow process that would take around six weeks to complete.

Germany, allied to Austria-Hungary by treaty, viewed the Russian mobilisation as an act of war against Austria-Hungary, and after scant warning declared war on Russia on 1 August.

France, bound by treaty to Russia, responded by announcing war against Germany and, by extension, on Austria-Hungary on 3 August.

Germany promptly responded by invading neutral Belgium so as to reach Paris by the shortest possible route.

Britain, allied to France by a more loosely worded treaty which placed a "moral obligation" upon her to defend France, declared war against Germany on 4 August.

Her reason for entering the conflict lay in another direction: she was obligated to defend neutral Belgium by the terms of a 75-year old treaty.

With Germany's invasion of Belgium on 4 August, and the Belgian King's appeal to Britain for assistance, Britain committed herself to Belgium's defence later that day. Like France, she was by extension also at war with Austria-Hungary.

With Britain's entry into the war, her colonies and dominions abroad variously offered military and financial assistance, and included Australia, Canada, India, New Zealand and the Union of South Africa.

United States President Woodrow Wilson declared a U.S. policy of absolute neutrality, until 1917 when Germany's submarine warfare seriously threatened America's shipping and forced the U.S. to finally enter the war on 6 April 1917.

Japan, honouring a military agreement with Britain, declared war on Germany on 23 August 1914. Two days later Austria-Hungary responded by declaring war on Japan.

Italy, although allied to both Germany and Austria-Hungary, was able to avoid entering the fray by citing a clause enabling it to evade its obligations to both.

In short, Italy was committed to defend Germany and Austria-Hungary only in the event of a 'defensive' war; arguing that their actions were 'offensive' she declared instead a policy of neutrality.

The following year, in May 1915, she finally joined the conflict by siding with the Allies against her two former allies.

The Tangle of Alliances

Such were the mechanics that brought the world's major nations into the war at one time or another.

What was a strictly limited and brief war - between Austria-Hungary and Serbia - rapidly escalated into something that was beyond the expectations of even the most warlike ministers in Berlin and Vienna.

Four years later, with the dead bodies of millions of young people lying in the earth and the royal houses of Europe and the generals thinking that maybe it wasn’t such a good idea after all, the war ended.

November 11th, 1918, at 11 a.m.

The term "armistice" means a cessation of hostilities as a prelude to peace negotiations and is always remembered in the context of the end of the First World War – the armistice was signed at 5 a.m. on November 11th, 1918, and came into effect six hours later at 11 a.m. (hence the 'eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month').

Rethondes

On 8 November a German delegation met with Allied Supreme Commander Ferdinand Foch - who was to lead the military negotiations - in the forest of Compiegne, some 65 km north-east of Paris. The armistice was formally signed in Foch's railway carriage on 11 November.

The armistice initially ran for 30 days but was regularly renewed until the formal peace treaty was signed at Versailles the following year. Should the Germans have deviated in any way from the terms of the armistice the Allies would have started fighting again within 48 hours.

The French saw the terms of the Armistice and the Versailles peace treaty that followed in 1919 as too soft and tried to take everything they could from Germany. The Germans saw the terms as ‘vindictive’ and ‘humiliating’. The country however was in no condition to fight again and so reluctantly accepted these conditions.

In 1940, Hitler exacted the German revenge by forcing the French to sign an armistice - on German terms - in that exact same railway carriage.

World War 2

What is Remembrance Day?

Remembrance Day is a special day, November 11th, set aside to remember all those men and women who were killed during the two World Wars and in all other conflicts around the world.

At one time the day was known as Armistice Day and was renamed Remembrance Day after the Second World War.

In America and in Britain, Remembrance Sunday is held on the second Sunday in November. Special services are held at war memorials and churches all over the world. Americans celebrate the day as Veterans Day.

Rupert Brooke - famous for his war sonnets

But why a poppy?


Throughout the world the poppy is associated with the remembrance of those who died in order that mankind may be free, but how many of us are aware of the real reason for it?

Flanders is the name of the whole western part of Belgium. It saw some of the most concentrated and bloodiest fighting of the First World War. There was complete devastation.

Buildings, roads, trees and natural life simply disappeared. Where once there were homes and farms there was now a sea of mud - a grave for the dead where men still lived and fought.

Only one other living thing survived the million or so bodies lying dead on those fields. The poppy flowered in 1918 and kept flowering each year with the coming of the warm weather. It brought life, hope, colour and reassurance to those still fighting.

Poppies only flower in turned over soil. Their seeds can lie in the ground for years without germinating, and only grow after the ground has been disturbed.

World War 2

John McCrae, a doctor serving with the Canadian Armed Forces, was so deeply moved by what he saw that he scribbled down the poem "In Flanders Fields".

Excerpt from In Flanders Fields
We are the Dead.
Short days ago we lived, felt the dawn,
Saw sunset glow, loved, and were loved
And now we lie in Flanders fields.
If ye break faith with us who die, we shall not sleep,
Though poppies grow in Flanders Fields.
The day before he wrote "In Flanders Fields", one of his closest friends was killed and wild poppies were already blooming between the graves where he was buried.

Here is a fragment of another poem by Englishman Laurence Binyon, from 1914, which is read out at most of today’s services around the world:
‘They shall grow not old as we that are left grow old:
Age shall not weary them nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning,
We will remember them.’
Poppy Day

The first actual Poppy Day was held in Britain on November 11th, 1921, was a national success and so has continued every November since.

Two Minutes Silence

The first Two Minutes Silence was held in London in 1919. The Manchester Guardian reported:
'The first stroke of eleven produced a magical effect. The tram cars glided into stillness, motors stopped dead, and the mighty horses stopped also. Someone took off his hat, and the rest of the people bowed their heads also.

An elderly woman, not far away, wiped her eyes, and the man beside her looked white and stern. Everyone stood very still ... The hush deepened. It had spread over the whole city. It was a silence which was almost pain ... and the spirit of memory brooded over it all.'
This two minutes silence still continues today and though not everyone stops, most do and it is still a very impressive sight.

World War 2

Last Post


The army has always played a ‘bugle call’ at Reveille in the morning and at Last Post in the evening. This latter signal traditionally ends the two minute silence and is a moving experience for most people.

Today

As the old soldiers die and the young people grow up who never knew of these things, surely this ceremony has lost it’s personal meaning?

Here we come to a moot point, especially poignant in Russia. Here so many of the young have let May 9th slip away and yet more than a few of the new generation fiercely hold onto the memories of those sad individuals and families who were slaughtered.

Not with hatred for the enemy of bygone years but with determination, as distinct from lip service, that the people themselves can prevent it happening again.

Would that it could be so.