[winter solstice] 'tis the season of goodwill

Click to zoom

In an earlier post, your humble correspondent wrote:

My whole current mentality is a siege mentality - to prevent being dragged into things.

Interesting then that this morning I was dragged into an issue that I have neither the time nor the inclination for at this exhausted time of year. It was done very cleverly, in such a way that I had no choice but to respond swiftly. Trouble is that no one else is remotely interested either.

It's a great pity that that had to happen because apart from that blot on the landscape, today has been fabulous. The panorama out there has to be seen to be believed and it's a further pity that I don't currently possess a camera to bring you shots of it.

The temperature is mild and the snow is lightly falling in big, soft flakes - but constantly. Roads are lined with mounds of vivid, glitening snow and the overall effect is of a hard-packed piste sculpted in a sort of tableau vivante, [if one can sculpt one of those].

Even further - I managed to pick up 12 James Bond DVDs dirt cheap and these include the first three Brosnan pieces I've been dying to see but could never find - until now.

Further even than that - today was "ladies day" and "Min Day" combined. Much cognac was imbibed and goodwill abounded. The last lady has just departed now. The hush outside and inside here in this warm room is so restful that I'd best et this posted and the quiz before Higham drops off into an inelegant snooze.

As Sean, of Omnium might say: "The Peace of the Night".

[russia-britain-europe] like the steps of a dance

Click on pic to zoom

First the news:

The European Union has called on Russia to reconsider its order to shut down two British Council offices. The Russian government said this month that the offices in St Petersburg and Yekaterinburg had broken laws, including tax rules.

In a statement, the EU expressed its concern, citing the importance of culture in the "EU-Russia partnership". Relations between Britain and Russia have worsened dramatically since the London murder of Russian exile, Alexander Litvinenko, in November 2006.

Some comments

This is more complex than it at first appears. It involves alliances and written agreements. It also flies in the face of attempts to create good relations. Any Russia-watcher would know that when an article like this appears in Pravda, then this is a fair barometer of government intention overall.

It is essential that Russia listens to Europe and yet bilateral agreements should be exempt from being tied into other issues. In practice, of course, they are not mutually exclusive.

Britain thinks Russia was out of order to bump off Litvinenko within Britain. And yet this has not been proved and further, this man and others like Berezovsky were using their privileged status behind their British immunity to attack Russia.

America was faced with the same situation in Cuba. Would they have been justified in attacking the missile sites in Cuba? This is not the same question as whether they would have been justified in invading Cuba. The question is: "How far is a nation justified in eliminating a threat to its security, especially when that threat is hidden behind a host nation's immunity?"

This is the question behind Al Qaeda, behind Gaddafi and Lockerbie, behind Iraq, behind Iran.

And who is in the best position to judge a nation's security interests? Is it that nation itself or that of the people within the country from whence the threat is coming? Example - imagine that a group of Brits in, say, Holland, are hell bent on hurting Britain's interests by stymying trade deals, security cooperation and whatever else between Britain and Holland.

Holland acts to protect these elements. How far would Britain be justified in intervening? Leaving aside the wrongs and rights of the issue itself, surely Realpolitik dictates that somewhere down the track there'd be a lot of aggravation involving alliances and commitments to assist.

Whilst neither Britain nor Holland would desire this state of affairs, international conventions would dictate that things must proceed along certain lines. So both sides would foresee worsening relations but what choice would there be, when those elements being protected in Holland are continuing to harass and nobble Britain?

As a Brit, naturally I see our point of view. Living here so long and being on terms with certain people in government here, I see the other side too. What I can't see is an immediate solution to the issue.

Thoughts on the map at the top

The map is what Europe might have looked like today if the Nazis had, in fact, won. It can be seen that both the United Kingdom and Russia are unresolved issues. From historical documents, it appears that Britain would have enjoyed semi-autonomous status, not unlike what they will have when the EU formally takes over in 2010. This would undermine British nationalists' ability to muster and motivate anti-union forces.

Russia is another matter. The view here is that there was no doubt Germany intended to subjugate the Russians and use them as slave labour, the less useful going to the gas chamber. Hence the added piquancy to their resistance at Stalingrad. They were, in their own eyes, fighting for survival or oblivion. Churchill's own warning.

In Britain, this would possibly not have been the case and the noted sympathies between the aristocracy in Britain and the Nazi machine, which have been commented on so negatively, might have been a softening factor in Nazi eyes.

It seems more likely that the disintegration of the Nazi Empire might have begun within Germany itself. Interesting topic.

[captain matchbox] my wahine in wang

This one's going to take quite some setting up.

In Australia, there's a road connecting Melbourne and Sydney [about 880 km] and it varies from four lanes each way, down to a single lane [at least it did in the mid '80s]. Naturally, there is heavy transport the whole time along the legth of the highway and also naturally, there are truck-stop cafs.

These tend to be beside the road in one horse towns, with one pump and one caf. The women serving in such cafs tend to be, well, what's the most polite term, not of the highest social strata? Plus they're Australian country and Australian country tends to be fairly ... er ... down to earth.

The husbands tend to be largish and inclined to think a little more simply than the city slicker, on average. They like things to be straightforward and have interesting ideas on decor, such as plastic palm trees in tubs.

OK, so into this we have a band travelling this highway - the Hume Highway - in their psychedelic van. But not just any band - a Melbourne inner-city comedy routine whose lead singer, calling himself Microphone Conway [real name Mick], a short, slender youth with slicked-back black hair and "city" written all over him, has a penchant for lounge crooning, a la combo.

Not only that but the whole band wear hawaiian outfits and sing of 'wahines" - Hawaiian for Polynesian women or goddesses. Lastly, we have the name of the town - Wangaratta - often shortened to Wang and this might be the reason the band was there at all [although the song below was performed pre-1990].

The sparks, therefore, fly and that's the subject of this little number. It's quite typical Australian humour, which is not always obvious and can be quite as dry as British humour at times. As for the bunny with the harmonica - Oestrebunny eat your heart out [or have a carrot].

Enjoy.

[dysfunction] can strike at any time

Wonder why.

I always have [had?] the opposite problem. Can be quite an embarrassment at times, say in the fitness club when the lady trainer comes over to assist with your bench work.

[scots rule] listen to yer countrymen, broonie

Absolutely adore this one. Toque reports.

How very, very, embarrassing for Gordon Brown - the Scottish Parliament voted last night to demand a referendum on the EU Constitution.

The SNP and Scottish Tories said Mr Brown had treated the British public with “contempt” for failing to have a referendum before signing the treaty.

Hee, hee! May I share with you my experience of the Scots? In my early sportsmaster days, I tried to organize a Games at our school and invited members of many communities to join us - the Irish, South African, French, Italian and so on.

The idea was that they come and demonstrate a game or activity especially of their culture. I was hoping for some Welsh singing. We had a good response from all nationalities except the Scottish.

It wasn't that they were unwilling. As the spokesperson for the highland games explained to me on the phone, they just weren't talking to each other and so couldn't get organized.

Who couldn't get organized? The families, laddie, the clans. There was a feud running at that time. Instead, he gave me a whole lot of phone numbers for the various families and suggested I phone them individually and the very best of luck.

So the Scots ended up not being represented. I do love the Scots - interesting from an English Nationalist, isn't it? Except for Brown. He should be sent to Elba.

[blog birthday] jon turns two

That uber-satirist, Jon Swift, turned TWO this week. Do get over and congratulate him if you haven't already done so, people.

There's also a little milestone of my own. If you Google "nourishing obscurity", the obvious happens. But if you Google just "nourishing", it wasn't so clear until recently.

Now I'm proud to temporarily be in 3rd place - temporarily because it's a pitched battle against these Americans here.

Unfortunately, "obscurity" is still in obscurity but I'm not complaining.

[winter and the festive season] here with a vengeance

Today, December 21st, is the first of the three shortest days and I love this time. Our weather has also come to the party.

The type of weather we currently have is of the picture postcard variety - massive piles of snow everywhere and yesterday it snowed all day - big flakes filling the air, slowly and silently falling to the gardens, paths, hedgerows and onto the branches of trees.

There's a forecast minus 30 on the weekend so that will be the first really low temperature we've had.

Unfortunately, the health is not 100% just now and there's a variety of reasons, not least the constant battles throughout the semester. No overt battles but silent brickwalling, which in the end takes its toll. Need to recharge the batteries and avoid any dire New Year "celebrations". One or two commitments to take care of and then touch wood that I can keep people off my back for a week and a half.

I like the Orthodox Christmas better, on January 7th. We've had a rest, we're ready to start seeing people again and the weather always seems so much better then. The mood's better and I'm feeling better now just thinking about it.

Yesterday I got a little frosty myself over a most unimportant matter, with a client who had even brought a little food gift. That was a clear danger signal to back off and maybe postpone my RL work until after New Year. No point blowing a good relationship over something a tired mind might construe as worth the battle.

It's a dangerous time where people try to drag you into their agendas - BP members can see that from the latest mailing list posts but I'm having none on't. Ditto in RL here. My whole current mentality is a siege mentality - to prevent being dragged into things. I've disconnected the phone as an interim measure and the only way anyone can get to me is either via e-mail or with crowbars.

There's a nice cask of wine at the ready, the fridge is stocked up and the doors locked. Post-New Year, after a recharging of batteries, should then be a matter of getting round to any friends I still have left, for a bit of festive cheer. It's a lovely time over here.

[no denying] that there's denial and denial

Two primitive fishermen with spears step through the water and wait for the sand to resettle and for the water to become clear again. They're looking for flatfish.

A rainbow fish appears instead and one of the two doesn't want that fish touched. What's the most effective method of preventing it being caught?

I'd say it would be to accidentally on purpose muddy the waters and then the fish can't be seen. Not only that, it would now be tipped off and may well swim away out of range.

Maybe it's not the greatest analogy but you'll soon see where this is going. Maybe, as Lucia Flecha da Lima claimed:

"Paul Burrell was perfectly capable of imitating Princess Diana's handwriting."

Maybe so. Maybe not. A whole host of thoughts crowd into the mind, to be filtered through predispositions and prejudices and please don't claim you're unbiased or looking only at the facts. You might be trying to do that and so am I but we're restricted by our experiences, by our foreknowledge.

This woman won't accept that Diana felt that she was going to be killed. It doesn't gel with her experience. There are obviously those who would place great store on da Lima being "one of the princess's closest confidantes" and therefore this being an appeal to authoritativeness, in order to conclude the letter's a fake.

But we don't actually know.

On the other hand, if it is true, then very powerful personages wish it to be the accepted view that the letter's a fake. It's only logical that no stone will be left unturned. Against that, it's only one letter and only one peron rejecting it, long after the fact. To appeal to numbers who believe in it or not is pointless.

Hand in hand with this is the necessity to vilify the opponent and the standard subterfuge is to label anyone accepting the letter as a conspiracy theorist. End of story. No need to pursue it further.

Against that, there is the view that a certain type of researcher always leans towards the conspiratorial explanation and this clouds his judgement when it comes to something which can be explained away more plausibly, by less sensational means.

This is serial rationality and the rationalist always has the advantage over the passionate ferret in that he appears ... well ... rational. A prime example is Cheney who always sounds plausible, even though he's not saying anything which stands the test. He draws on a few stock phrases which appeal to the no-nonsense conservative and that's accepted as truth.

On the other hand, the rationalist could well be right. I've read some quite cogent arguments for the "single bullet theory" with JFK, now that the hysteria's died away. The claim to "likelihood", witnesses' testimony and the relatively clear view from the building behind JFK, let alone the grassy knoll, is powerful but it might, after all, be wrong.

To claim Oswald couldn't have made it down those steps and be drinking a coke is a straw man, as is the ludicrous diagram of relative body positions in the limo, used to disprove the single bullet theory. And the vehemence with which both sides stick to their entrenched positions precludes debate. Actually, I believe it was an ordered hit but that's neither here nor there.

So, this letter. It exists. It's Exhibit A. To not admit it as evidence, you'd have to prove Burrell could have forged it so well it got past the handwriting experts. And who's to say Burrell forged it anyway?

Finally, the murky muddying of entrenched interests who'll either pay or kill. Well, what can one do about them?

Does it matter? I think it does. If it's a forgery - why was it done? And who did it? Burrell, to revenge himself on the slights he felt by the princess and the boys? Maybe.

One thing I do know though is that the "water-muddiers", the flat deniers, the "everything must be a conspiracy" advocates - none of them have any place in this process of finding the most likely scenario.

Most likely scenario because I don't think anyone's going to uncover the truth.

[carla bruni] and sarkozy?

Stranger things have happened ... haven't they?

Vigilance (for Freedom), Even During Christmas Break

Indianapolos

One thing I really enjoy is waking up and finding that one of the "team members" on this blog has posted and this is an open invitation to some of my other guests to post as well.

Today it is Matt, of Buckeye Thoughts, his blog sadly no more. Matt is a young American now stationed in Indianapolos and attending [or did] Purdue University, West Lafayette. And yet his blog dealt with the Buckeye State.

As you'll see from this guest post, his interests are wide and yet he and his friends over in the States have been getting more than a little worried of late by what they're seeing:

Seeing as how it is Christmas Break (I've been on it since 4:15 p.m. EST last Saturday), you all would think I could relax. I have been but at the same time have still been very preoccupied. The primaries for the two parties nominations of presidential candidates start in a few weeks. As a political science major, you'd think I'd care.

I do, deeply. Yet I don't care about either party. Yes, that's shocking to say that for the first time in my 20 years of life on this Earth, I don't care about either party. I've strongly identified with one since a young age (at first because of my parents, naturally, but later on because it held the values I held dear), but won't say which one. Both, to me, in this upcoming election are poised to sell my country outright to highest bidder.

On the one hand, this was announced. I'm sure you all remember James writing several posts on the SPP and how it threatened American sovereignty. Don't start to pop the champagne just yet. That announcement seemed very suspicious to me; I was right to be suspicious. Contrary to what some of you may think, I don't buy into conspiracy theories. When I first heard of this whole concept of the Security and Prosperity Partnership, I thought it was a joke, a conspiracy theory. After reading and doing research, I realized it was very, very real.

I even wrote a letter to my school's newspaper a while back about it, taking aim at a person who denied it (not an ad-hominem attack, but attacking his view that it didn't exist). He wrote me back, saying that upon closer inspection, the whole thing (the SPP/the plan to create the NAU) was simply just a dialog. I wish I could be as blissfully ignorant as him but I can't.

It seems every time I go abroad something happens. When I leave in January, something will be happening in March. In March, the Supreme Court will be hearing arguments made by the District of Columbia, which is trying to uphold its ban on the 2nd Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens in the district. The Court's ruling will be judicial precedent to a) repeal anti-carry laws nationwide or b) give precedent to the ability of where to carry (and the eventual confiscation) of firearms.

I should be happy; I'm on break. I am and yet I am very worried. This coming year could be the taking back of the US from those who would sell us out: the SPP and those who would oppose 2nd Amendment rights for law-abiding citizens. Make no mistake, I am not some whacko. I have said, many times, the Bill of Rights must be respected in its entirety (all 10 Amendments) or not at all. By the same token, 2008 could be the beginning of the end for my country. Regardless of what happens in March (the decision will be passed down, supposedly, in June), November will decide the future of my country. I hope someone comes in who is willing to stop the madness before it's too late. I hope...