Thursday 29 July 2010

UFO's or paper lanterns?












These pictures of the night sky were taken while teaching in Pua in Nan Province in Northern Thailand in December 2008. In fact, at this specific time I was talking on the telephone with a friend in London. Apart from this no one else was around to hear or see what I had witnessed. UFO's or, Thai paper lanterns?

Click several times (two stages) on pictures to enlarge -


see link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sky_lantern

Monday 26 July 2010

Keats: A personal view

As everyone knows John Keats (1795 - 1821) was an English poet who spent a somewhat idyllic childhood in leafy Enfield. For myself this is where our similarities begin and end. Or do they?

Keats was born above a Pub. It is now called The Globe but was once named the Swan and Hoop Inn.

In a biography by Andrew Motion on Keats it is written that Keats's father was killed in a riding accident on his way to work as a publican at the The Swan and Hoop Inn in Moorgate, London.

By this account this accident occurred not very far from Ye Olde Cherry Tree public house in Southgate which lends itself to the idea of Keats's father having popped into Ye Olde Cherry Tree for a pint or two. Then stumbling outside onto his horse and shortly off again a few moments after having been thrown to the ground.

Did Keats's father visit the same hostelry as my forefathers? My parents and paternal grandparents before them met at Ye Old Cherry Tree public house in Southgate and established marital bonds soon after. This atavistic quality in the neighbourhood has not yet, however, born fruit in my life.

But perhaps some similarities persist after all. As a child I was invariably involved in some fight or other and usually with children much older than myself. On further reading I have learnt that Keats also had something of a pugilistic reputation in his early life. Not bad for five feet nothing with latent poetic sensibilities. So we both liked a punch up did me and Keats.

Many years later, Keats went to live with his elder brother George in Cheapside. From this base he had hoped to commute a shorter distance to Guy's hospital to train as an Apothecary but felt compelled to do what he had to do which was to write poetry. Keats was in his late teens during this period.

I began my first job at Companies House in Old Street near Moorgate. Within a few years I went on to work in another Government Department in Gresham Street near Cheapside. But this all happened well over one hundred and fifty years after Keats.

Keats's first published poem, 'To Solitude' - appeared in 'The Examiner' on 5th May 1816. Leigh Hunt was the editor who had lived in Southgate but later closer to the centre of London in Hampstead shared similar radical political liberal ideals as Keats. Indeed, Hunt's magazine was considered to be London's primary radical arts publication of that time.


O SOLITUDE! if I must with thee dwell,
Let it not be among the jumbled heap
Of murky buildings; climb with me the steep,-
Nature’s observatory - whence the dell,
Its flowery slopes, its river’s crystal swell,
May seem a span; let me thy vigils keep
’Mongst boughs pavillion’d, where the deer’s swift leap
Startles the wild bee from the fox-glove bell.
But though I’ll gladly trace these scenes with thee,
Yet the sweet converse of an innocent mind,
Whose words are images of thoughts refin’d,
Is my soul’s pleasure; and it sure must be
Almost the highest bliss of human-kind,
When to thy haunts two kindred spirits flee.

Here Keats observes nature and binds it to his soul.

As time passed, however, Hunt and Keats found that the quality of their relationship depended more on the mutual appreciation of poetry than it did on their shared political views. Keats had many influential friends and Leigh Hunt was one of the first but he was not the last. In the late summer of 1817 Charles Brown, a Scottish Poet of independent means, met Keats. They travelled to many parts of Britain together. This experience shaped Keats who drew upon this experience to embellish his naturalistic observations. But it was Joseph Severn the Christian and painter who would nurse Keats as he lay dying in Rome in February 1821. Severn later painted the Keats of his imagination and memory. It is a stunning result and may be viewed at the National Portrait Gallery in London.

I have rarely had much inclination to write poetry and so it is hardly likely that I would have had a poem published but when I was about eighteen I did write and publish a magazine in London called 'Teenage Depression' which involved reporting and writing on music as well as interviewing some of the famous counter culture musicians of the time. Some thought it radical and sales did on occasion reach a thousand or so copies when it appeared which was often quartely. The magazine attracted some interest and went on for several years.

Occasionally, with some of my friends, we chanced to walk on Hampstead Heath not knowing or caring that this was where Keats had once been.

A few days ago I went with a friend to see the Keats Museum in Keats Grove, Hampstead. I imagined how Keats must once have lived. What Keats must have seen includes an old low to the ground fan like mulberry tree which still offers plenty of its delicious fruit. A scene viewed only a small distance away from the large window through which Keats once observed a natural and sublime world. Here he wrote another poem and must rank as one of his best and one of his last. It is -

To Autumn:

SEASON of mists and mellow fruitfulness,
Close bosom-friend of the maturing sun;
Conspiring with him how to load and bless
With fruit the vines that round the thatch-eves run;
To bend with apples the moss’d cottage-trees,
And fill all fruit with ripeness to the core;
To swell the gourd, and plump the hazel shells
With a sweet kernel; to set budding more,
And still more, later flowers for the bees,
Until they think warm days will never cease,
For Summer has o’er-brimm’d their clammy cells.

Who hath not seen thee oft amid thy store?
Sometimes whoever seeks abroad may find
Thee sitting careless on a granary floor,
Thy hair soft-lifted by the winnowing wind;
Or on a half-reap’d furrow sound asleep,
Drows’d with the fume of poppies, while thy hook
Spares the next swath and all its twined flowers:
And sometimes like a gleaner thou dost keep
Steady thy laden head across a brook;
Or by a cyder-press, with patient look,
Thou watchest the last oozings hours by hours.

Where are the songs of Spring? Ay, where are they?
Think not of them, thou hast thy music too,—
While barred clouds bloom the soft-dying day,
And touch the stubble plains with rosy hue;
Then in a wailful choir the small gnats mourn
Among the river sallows, borne aloft
Or sinking as the light wind lives or dies;
And full-grown lambs loud bleat from hilly bourn;
Hedge-crickets sing; and now with treble soft
The red-breast whistles from a garden-croft;
And gathering swallows twitter in the skies.


"Keats believed that the truths found in the imagination access holy authority."

I agree.

A charm of finches

Evolutionists are usually of the opinion that the world and everything in it has evolved gradually. So gradually that the timescale is considered by some of the greatest scientific minds to be millions or billions of years in the making.

Earth is thought to be 4.5 billion years old. Minerals were formed. Later still, Animals and plant life appeared.

But what came first, the chicken or the egg? the answer is now thought by some to be DNA. But where did the DNA come from?

DNA exists. But how did it get here? Was it by chance or, by design?

Intelligent Design refers to God. Those who prefer a Darwinian view on the existence of life argue that what you see all around you was not created by God but by chance; that evolution on Earth is a very slow process that has taken millions or billions of years for life in all of its diversity to reach the stage it has today.

If we accept that existence today has been created by purely an evolutionary process then there must have been times when the process was incomplete.

For instance, the eye of any living creature must have taken millions of years to evolve until finally the eye is fully formed.

The strange thing is - and this fact has been voiced by Martin Down in his book 'Deluded by Darwinism' - that over the past one hundred and fifty years millions of fossils have been discovered around the world and not one them reveals any evidence of this process; every fossil found is fully formed.

So what is going on? I was led to believe that evolution was a process but there is absolutely no evidence of this process except within creatures of the same species.

The Finch was first observed by Darwin in the Galapagos Islands about one hundred and fifty years ago. These observations amounted to evidence of a variation in the evolutionary process and it is convincingly argued that The Galapagos Finch has evolved into a new species of Finch uniquely adapted to its island environment and habitat.

But this charm of Galapagos Finches remain Finches. They are not seagulls or penguins. Nor, given the lack of evidence to the contrary, ever likely to become seagulls or penguins.

What does this mean?

It means the evolutionary process explains only the development of small differences between species. Martin Down writes:

"Darwin's error was to mistake variation within a narrow range of organisms for the evolution of all forms of life; to mistake what is called micro-evolution for mega-evolution."

If we are not descended from Apes where have we come from? Why are we here?

For an atheistic Evolutionist the answers are often complicated. The answer depends on time - a lot of time and on in believing in something which does not have the evidence to sustain the theory posited. For the Creationist the answer is simple. It is an answer which depends on revelation, personal explanation and, faith.

That answer is, God.








*quote from book and much inspiration thereof on this subject taken from 'Deluded by Darwinism?' By Martin Down.

Tuesday 20 July 2010

Time

Let me not to the marriage of true minds
Admit impediments. Love is not love
Which alters when it alteration finds,
Or bends with the remover to remove:
O no! it is an ever-fixed mark
That looks on tempests and is never shaken;
It is the star to every wandering bark,
Whose worth's unknown, although his height be taken.
Love's not Time's fool, though rosy lips and cheeks
Within his bending sickle's compass come:
Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks,
But bears it out even to the edge of doom.
If this be error and upon me proved,
I never writ, nor no man ever loved.

Saturday 10 July 2010

Reply to Ped

Ped has been venting forth on a few of my blogs, especially, “The Apostles’ Creed”(see below). This is my reply:

You quote verse line and chapter of the Bible which, for someone who is not interested in Christianity, strikes me as damn odd.

Strangely enough, it is YOU who is the “Bible thumper”, as you insultingly put it. Albeit, a negative one.

Your attempts to goad the likes of me with never ending rants about Christianity reveal far more about you than they do about me. The rants are often small minded and petty. But you know that.

You fail to see the good that Christianity has done in this world. I have written a lot about this but you never respond to that. Only the negative.

If you read a book by Michael Burleigh entitled, “Sacred Causes”, you would realize just how much you don’t know about the politics and history of Catholic Christianity.

I have never said I am an example of being a good Christian, indeed, I have often said the opposite, but you have attempted to put me in your one size fits all religious box. Jackdaw has also done this. You both have much in common.

You are also inclined to make comments with no end of libel attached to them and then feign surprise if anyone is offended.

This has happened here. And, this is what this most recent exchange is about. Perhaps what you say is so about the libel not being directed at me but then if I do not protest your constant accusations will remain unanswered.

I have not bothered to contest much of your rage against Christianity because on the rare occasion I have responded you do not evaluate the information presented to you.

This happened earlier on this blog when I corrected you only to read your reply which stated that you were “only taking the piss”. Charming.

Well, I had gone to alot of trouble writing for your benefit. Similarly, with my last comment on the “Cambridge blog”, which was written in October last year.

It took a lot of time mulling over the history of Christianity responding to your question/s, ignoring how impolite they were. But you never bothered to reply. It has happened before.

By the way, no apology was expected. If I offend someone I apologize. But I know this is difficult for some. I realize that you think of yourself as someone special but I do not share that opinion.

I hope this ends our discussion.

Abortion or Adoption?

I have read or commented on a few blogs about abortion. I do not want get into the morality of it all type of debate. That will continue and will not be resolved here in terms of any overall concensus or agreement.

What I wish to ask is why is the default position for most women on this question of unwanted pregnancy an issue of abortion and not an issue about adoption?

Am I overlooking something?

I once read that anything up to a quarter of all women who have an abortion experience pyschological problems as a result. If this is true, surely it adds weight to the argument in favour of adoption.

And, I was under the impression that there were countless numbers of childless couples looking to adopt. If this is so, why do so many choose abortion rather than adoption?

What is wrong with adoption?

Gibraltar

In the news today is a story about the visit of Princess Anne to Gibraltar, a British colony. The Spanish are not happy. The Telegraph reports thus:

Jose Carracao, a Socialist senator who sits on the foreign affairs commission in the Spanish parliament’s upper house, said: “This visit is annoying and is bound to prove controversial in a territory of doubtful sovereignty.”

I visited Gibraltar in May 2006. I felt proud to be British. Oh I know in saying this it will annoy some. Personally, I find being British something to be proud of but I know how much this upsets others. I have never understood this. If a Frenchman is proud of France and says so, does it upset me? No, it doesn’t.

Anyway, it felt good to be walking down a main high street flanked by British pubs, Union Jacks, Ice cream, English accents, Marks and Spencer, Red Telephone boxes and, British Policeman out in shirt sleeves. The weather, however, was probably the essential difference between colony and country.

New Labour politicians might have wrecked my own country but even they have not yet had much of a chance to ruin Gibraltar.

The Rock itself is huge. Although, Gibraltar in area is really quite small. A mile or two from tip to toe. Its history, however, is much longer. Three hundred years of British rule despite many attacks by French or Spanish armies.

More recently, Gibraltar has been of immense strategic importance as a naval base and gateway between the Atlantic Ocean and The Meditteranean Sea especially during WW2 when the Nazi U-boat fleet threatened Allied shipping.

The Gibraltan people wish to remain British. Apparently, 99% voted to remain British in a referendum only a few years ago. The people decided they did not want to become Spanish. They prefer being British.

‘The intellect comes to rule once the soul has abdicated.’

“Spengler sees Blood as the only power strong enough to overthrow Money, currently the dominant power of our age. Blood is commonly understood to mean race-feeling, and this is partially true but misleading. Spenglers idea of race has nothing to do with ethnic identity, indeed he was hostile to racists in that sense. The book talks about a population becoming a race when its united in outlook, possibly diverse ethnic origins are not a concern.

Crucially Spengler talks about the final struggle with money also being a battle between Capitalism and Socialism, but again Socialism in a special sense: “the will to call into life a mighty politico-economic order that transcends all class interests, a system of lofty thoughtfulness and duty sense” .

He also writes ” A power can be overthrown only by another power, not by a principle, and only one power that can confront money is left. Money is overthrown and abolished by blood. Life is alpha and omega … It is the fact of facts .. Before the irresistible rhythm on the generation-sequence, everything built up by the waking –consciousness in its intellectual world vanishes at the last.” Therefore if we wanted to replace Blood by a single word it would be more correct to use life-force rather than race-feel.”

What Seneca ought to have said.

He who is brave and follows his conscience is FREE.

What I have learnt since blogging

That tolerance is better than confrontation.

That underneath the image French secret agents are often kind, intelligent people.

That adverbs can help to modify preferences. ‘The God Delusion’ by Richard Dawkins is a good example of this and I would not have read his book were it not for being questioned by some bloggers about it on MyT.

That sometimes it is better for a writer not to attempt to describe everything and leave something to the imagination of the reader. Hemingway taught me that prior to MyT and is the only exception that proves the rule here.

John Simpson – a BBC English journalist – has shown in his writing how effective a semi colon is; a liberal leftie but he talks alot of sense I must admit. I like him.

Generally speaking I have learnt that left liberals are often – but not always and not all the time – unthinking conformists of prevailing fashions which probably explains why they supported the Climate Change argument as passionately as they did.

I think they are wrong not because they represent left liberalism but because all the evidence I have looked at – and I have blogged on this a few times – convinces me otherwise. The tag left liberal simply reminds me of a political attitude or point of view.

I have learnt that democracy today is fragile and that a few dominate society and the media. These few I presently label as left liberals. An example is, Peter Mandelson.

But one day this ongoing power struggle will change. When it does, you will notice more labelling but this time it will emerge from the left. This is politics.

On MyT I have been amazed at the vitriol expressed. More usually, however, I have been pleasantly surprised at the grace, politeness and tolerance shown. MyT reveals humanity for all its faults and attributes.

MyT has also enabled me to crystalize my thinking which I fully understand is not agreed with by those who live elsewhere. Thanks for listening.

Comment 2009

What you often see here are people who feel, rightly or wrongly, ignored and marginalized by their own Government. Many people in England feel helpless and hopeless; alienated by what is happening to their country. Largely this is the fault of politicians and a metropolitan liberal left elite who make decisions on our behalf. They have created a client state which has threatened the vary fabric of this democracy. There are so many issues; and you must be aware that people have other concerns regarding crime, freedom of speech, identity, The EU, loss of sovereignty, massive national or personal debt, poor quality state education etc etc. Now I understand that sitting on the beach in the French colony of Martinique or the South of France can be a pleasant experience. I understand that reading some of the views expressed here on MyT can come as quite a shock from this perspective. But then I also know that you occasionally descend into Peckham or elsewhere so you must realize that people have every right to feel helpless and hopeless. Strangely enough, I do not think you care about these people. In my opinion your concerns are with those who will guage the greatest politically correct value from your compassion - Burmese women notwithstanding.

Bleak house

After much deliberation on where to go I finally arrived in Northern China to begin teaching. That was several weeks ago.

Now I feel numb with the cold realization of what lies ahead. It is a bleak prospect. Nothing is as I expected it. I was too keen to return to teaching and made far too many assumptions. Not a sensible way to choose a job that I am contracted to- the contract is about 25,000 words – until March 2011.

On the upside it is no longer -20c although I must admit that extreme weather can appeal as long as it doesn’t result in complete chaos. The people I work with are collectively the best bunch of teachers I have met.

Fragile ego’s and power games do not appear to register as an everyday concern for the teachers here. Everyone is far too busy getting on with what they have to do. Or, heading off for a nearby bar when time allows.

But that is in a city thirty or forty miles away from where I am. There is another teacher who lives with his wife nearby but they seem to live a private existence.

My first day teaching was a shock. The forty miles commute beginning at 7.00am then four two hour lessons until after 5.00pm. Five lessons the next day. Students are aged from about five years old – I never expected this – to adult. I am trained for teenage and adult classes but they are a rarity.

Salary is fair and I am amazed to find so many teachers content with their lot. Although, my temporary commute is longer than most I find the challenge almost overwhelming since each lesson must be planned using unfamiliar material which I find largely uninspiring.

But most children seem to enjoy it especially if games can be introduced into the learning experience and I know that this is where all future focus must now be.

Where I live is typical of many Chinese towns or cities on the East coast of China. Concrete and cars prevail amongst mainly uninspiring architecture. Noise and opportunities for shopping compete for attention on almost every street except where the very poorest live. At night, however, neon is king lighting up anything that doesn’t move from office blocks to KTV. Entertainment can come at a price; it usually does.

As many here on MyT might know I have not taught for almost a year due to pneumonia which I caught while teaching in northern Thailand. I became very ill and eventually had to return to England where I attempted for the rest of the year to get back insurance money from AIA. They never paid.

And yet I would not have it any other way. I have found a spiritual strength inside me that I never knew existed. The bleakness of it all has focused my mind on what is essential to life. It is not atheistic materialism. It is not capitalist consumerism. It is not Communism. It is the peace of the spirit which has nowhere else to go.

I stare into the face of failure but in all this I have discovered my soul.

Christmas tales from Suburbia

I saw another ufo last night. At least this is my assumption. I think I must collect assumptions. It is a habit of mine.

Looking up at the night sky last night - as I am often inclined to do when the bathroom is occupied – I stood in the garden and looked up to see a very bright star. It even twinkled.

But it wasn’t small. It was the largest star I had ever seen. It was on the NW horizon and appeared just above a neighbours house.

Looking up again – my concentration wandered - I could see that it was was twice the size of what I would normally expect. The star, I mean.

But was this a product of our materialistic and increasingly kitsch Christmas culture? In this area of North London some houses are literally covered in Christmas lights. People in these parts really know how to celebrate.

Turning round round and up again to the direction of final interest I noticed that the star began to fade suddenly from white to yellow. Then, it disappeared altogether.

My immediate thought was that the owner of the house had switched off her Christmas lights. But I was not fully convinced of that. Then it happened.

I stood transfixed as a short cigar shaped object suddenly appeared at the very point where the star was only a few seconds beforehand.

I zipped up my fly just as the ufo travelled in a Westerly direction across the night sky.



Twinkle, twinkle, little star,
How I wonder what you are!
Up above the world so high,
Like a diamond in the sky!

Comment

I guess we must disagree. But not because we must but because I see things from an entirely different angle to you. Or, at least this a personal view. Nations take shape in and through myth; and national myths are often built upon ancient stories. In this respect the United Kingdom is no different from many other nations in that people often choose what binds a nation and its people together. Not that patriotism is unique. What is unique is a UK Monarchy which still persists against all reasonable logic. Why? Because the Monarchy represent, amongst other things, the cultural heritage of the nation. I cannot see what is wrong with this. Living symbols of history are a lesson, not a problem. In times of plenty it might not mean much but when things do not turn out as expected people can often find unity in what is historical or shared as a community. I prefer to see the UK evolving in a natural process taking with it a history which has often been the envy of the world. Lastly, I acknowledge that we live in a meritocracy but the egalitarianism you speak of is at odds with the increasing disparity between rich and poor too often seen in the UK these days. I think there is too much pressure on people to “succeed” these days and little excuse if they “fail” (my quotation marks). Not everyone can be a success. I am not against egalitarianism but I have my reservations against placing it as a model for life and society since we are not all created equal. People sometimes need an excuse for failure. Today, they havn’t got that which may explain increasing depression and mental health problems. Anyway, enough. God save the Queen!

They WERE loved

The England team failed in South Africa for many reasons.

Yes they were tired after a grueling Premiership season. Yes they are paid too much and like boxers can taste the high life and lose their hunger. Yes the tactics were static. 4-4-2 against Germany was too rigid and some change or flexibility would have created at least some element of surprise. However, such creative thinking was beyond a grossly overpaid management team.

The players did not have as many opportunities to drink beer together. Such bonding sessions are important to English culture and an Italian manager may have overlooked this factor. But a big reason for failure was that bloody excuse for a trumpet that many South Africans claim as part of their culture.

Much has already been written on the deadening noise which cancels out the usual crowd atmosphere of cheers and applause. The effect, however, on the England players was devastating. They could not hear their English support. More than players from most other countries English players need to feel loved. They have grown used to it. In England football has become a religion. A successful Premiership footballer is worshipped. He is a god.

But an English footballers divinity is suddenly called into question as soon as one realizes that they probably cannot string a sentence together or kick a ball in a straight line. This happened in South Africa. The English football team performance was as everyone knows truly abysmal.

But it was not all of their fault. They simply could not hear just how loved they were.

Wezi

A mate of mine is from Zambia. Well, we live opposite each other and teach at the same school in China. Have done for a few months now.

Anyway, he invited me over last week to share a meal with himself and his wife who is also from Lusaka. We shared some beer. Then it was time to eat Zambian food.

I forget the names but I ate some small dried fish and crispy cooked caterpillar. I also ate something that had the texture and taste of swede. But it was a lot more stodgy and filling. I enjoyed the experience.

After a few more beers we talked about football and the coming World Cup. Zambia are not taking part but I was intrigued about the colours of the Zambia football team?

‘What colour shirts do they play in?’

My host went into the bedroom and collected what was one of his most treasured possessions; a Zambian copper coloured national shirt.

What is the players’ name, I asked? The shirt was turned around – I looked intently -immediately, I saw a black 13 and above it a Zambian name: NUMBA.

How I laughed. Great evening, I thought.

Then Wezi told me a story that I ought to have known. The Zambian national football team were killed in an air crash in 1994. At the time they were probably the best African national team and favourites to qualify for the World Cup in America.

The shirt shown to me was a shirt of a player who had died on that fatal flight. His name: Numba Mwila.

see link:www.zambianfootball.net/2009/04/28/blog-…

Friday 9 July 2010

Are we alone?

Talking aloud to an appreciative audience is one thing. Knowing what you are talking about is another. So am I correct in thinking that the night sky, as we view it today, is already thousands, if not millions, of years old? And, if this is actually the case, might we not now be looking at something that no longer exists?

Ping Pong

Before arriving in China several years ago I could not play Ping Pong. If I did play, I lost. Now I rarely lose. I can spin the ball like a New Labour government minister talking about the benefits of Multiculturalism. So what has happened? Well, it was not exactly a gradual improvement. Practice may make perfect but almost instantly I began to beat the Chinese at their own game. This is no boast. Simply, a fact. I can hardly kick a ball anymore. But, Ping Pong, give me a bat and call me Chester Barnes. So how to explain it? I appreciate that both genes and the environment are factors that shape much of our lives. I used to be of the opinion that genetics was perhaps an even more powerful explanation (although at the age of Sixteen in 1975 I swiftly came to the conclusion that it was about 50/50) in the continuing nature nurture debate. However, it now appears that the environmental factor has eclipsed the genetic. Or, is this necessarily the case?

What makes Art interesting?

I do not wish to debate, “What is Art”? Even though I know it would be more than useful to begin with an agreed definition. Some say it is the juxtaposition of shape and form. But too many people disagree on what art is to be able to apply a useful definition. No, I simply wish to ask what do you think makes art interesting?

The Moon landing

Was the first ever Moon landing a hoax? Was it all Hollywood? I had never previously even considered this a remote possibility until six or seven years ago when a programme appeared in the UK which suggested that there might be good reasons to doubt that Man ever made that “one small step for man, one giant leap for Mankind”. I am not saying I believe it was a hoax; only that there is now doubt in my mind when none had previously existed. As a child I had watched transfixed at the events taking place through the medium of a black and white television on that historic July day. Apparently, none of this happened. So what did happen? Well, according to disbelievers, NASA was under increasing pressure to justify its expenditure especially during a moral sapping and expensive Vietnam war. NASA needed results. And, quickly. Towards the late 1960’s a variety of key critics voiced concerns about the progress being made to reach the Moon before 1970. It is even claimed that the deaths of key Apollo personnel meant that it would be easier to fake a Moon landing. Possibly, using Hollywood techniques out in the bleak Nevada desert. Then there are technical points about the film itself. Why are there no stars visable? It is not the right type of shadow. etc etc. Some say that if it was faked the Soviets would surely have said something. They would have known. I am not so sure. I accept that they might have known but better to say nothing than reveal how much they really did know. In the Cold war scheme of things this would be logical if not prudent. Ultimately, this is a conspiracy theory I am agnostic about. I have no idea who is telling the truth. But I remember being amazed at the thought of it all on July 20th, 1969.

The blood of Albion

There is yet another Telegraph report today about crime in the UK. Good old Multicultural UK. The UK that was once a warrior nation. A nation and its people, proud of a unique identity, conquered and controlled events around the world for at least a good few centuries. History more than underlines this fact. But the British people are now reduced to a habit of welfare dependency and defeatism in the face of constant moral high ground arguments put forward by the liberal left. The arguments inform us that Multiculturalism is cool. Not only that but also good for the economy. Get used to it. Those in power, New Labour, agreed. I have already posted a blog or two on this subject so perhaps we ought to listen to the Nu Lab Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith who, at last, reveals the truth about things:

“I am too afraid to walk around Hackney (in East London) after Midnight.”

That’s right. The Home Secretary is too scared to walk alone at night. Not that she need wait until 12.00 Midnight. Even a few hours before Midnight would result in more than a few nightmares. A week or so ago a 16 year old girl was Gang raped. After the attack was over the rapists squirted some type of acid inside her to get rid of DNA evidence. She now exists in intensive care. Her life is almost probably ruined. I have said all of this before. But I make no apology. I am furious about this. There are plenty more examples. This is a society unlike that even a few decades ago. Yes, there was football violence and more of it as well. But it was usually between consenting adults. It is the attack on the innocents that makes my blood boil. The ignorant, despicable, cowards.

A few years ago a friend of mine, who lives in London, returned home after visiting his uncle in a nearby neighbourhood. It was raining heavily. He could hear footsteps. He looked behind him. Three youths. He was about to be attacked. He stood his ground. The first youth was almost upon him. But suddenly stopped. Now all was clearly visable. It was no victim. My mate is a 2nd Dan grade Karate. Mid thirties. Fit and strong. The first youth said: “Nah…he will punch us out”. A close call. They ran off.

The fabric of UK society is falling to pieces. No more Liberalism please. Liberalism was wrong about pacifism in the 1930’s. Wrong about behaviourism in the 1960’s. Wrong about Genetics in the 1970’s. Wrong about Socialism & Communism in the 1980’s. And, it is wrong about Multiculturalism in Noughties. If you are a liberal come and get a reality check. I hear it is free on the NHS these days.

Not afraid of the dark

Crushed to pieces,

by hatred incarnate,

a girl of Sixteen lies in a London hospital bed,

raped by many who will never know better.



Alone with no hope or peace,

A world fragmented by instant gratification,

Unleashes violence against the innocent,

and reaps never ending sorrow.



In the wind it blows hot and cold,

stirs my heart, so it does.



I ought to be quiet,

and say no more,

about a young girls rape,

but don’t you see,

her life is in ruins.



If love is eternal let it be with you now,

do not be afraid of the dark,

I pray that God will comfort you and bless you.

Women are idiots; men are lunatics

In the Summer of 2006 I went on a short trip to the Balkans. I told few people about where I was going and did not take a camera with me. After arriving at Split in Croatia I caught a bus which took me along one of the most beautiful coastlines I have seen. I had yet to read the classic book by Rebecca West entitled, “Black Lamb, Grey Falcon” published in 1941. Rebecca was once a lover of the writer, HG Wells. Although the relationship floundered after a decade or so she appears to have gained much experience from the liason. For example, Rebecca says that women are idiots and men are lunatics. Why? Because women tend to be concerned with a private world of family and relationships whilst men are usually more concerned with outside, public events. For the women this might result in an idiotic situation where they find themselves making beds as a foreign army invades the city square. For men, it means they might have little notion of family tensions or emotions as they discuss sports or the meaning of some political news. Maybe things are different today. Rebecca is outspoken. And, judgemental. I like this, if it so happens that the author knows what they are talking about. More often than not I think she does. I discovered, “Black Lamb” while wandering about the main square of Dubrovnik. It took me about six months to read. Though, I often read Hemingway at the same time. It is not just a book recording her thoughts as she travelled the Balkans at different times in the late 1930’s (lastly, with her husband) but an insight into the authors soul and the ethnic tensions of that time. On my journey, I swam in the sea and looked back at the impressive sight of white coloured rock on land some miles further in. Further on, in Dubrovnik, the coastline is majestic. High up on a castle wall one can see a clear blue sea interrupted by emerald green or a brief wave of white. In the square itself is a floor of marble. And, in one building it is stunning to walk into a room of classical Roman style and look up to find that there is no roof. It is like looking at a moving picture as the clouds glide passed. On this short journey I also travelled through Bosnia visiting various towns and cities including Sarajevo, Mostar and Majagorie. At Majagorie I witnessed the Marian visions. It was an eventful and thoughtful week.

Tibetan Impressions

Left the UK a few days ago. Am now back in China. The land of milk and honey. Or, rather, the land of media interest. At least this seems to be the case recently. And, so it should be. Trouble is my fellow Lao Wai does not agree with me. Many remain silent and argue up any perceived slight of their adopted home, China. This is fair enough, I can understand why many people hold alternative views to my own. But I detect self interest. What do I stand to gain from defending Tibet? Nothing. What do they stand to gain? Well, they can gain the whole world for all I care.

In London I found the air as fresh as it could possibly be. Who do I thank for this? The clean air act of 1955 or Ken Livingstone? I think the former might have more to do with it. But no doubt Ken claims the glory. As well he might. Hope his days as Mayor of London are numbered. Talking of politics. Did anyone read about New Labour and One trillion pounds wasted on Education, Welfare and the NHS. As far as I can tell none of these services offer what has been invested in them. Apparently, for those that are interested it works out at 50,000 pounds a household. Do the politicians know what they are doing? Hell, they do.

As I was saying, England was a breath of fresh air. I walked to many a pub often taking a route beside a river or some woods. Then it was time to catch up on what English ale tastes like. Good. Though, I often found the ambience as inviting as anything else. So many pubs contain centuries of English history within their four walls. Now it appears that government legislation; a smoking ban, further taxes on alcohol, Local councils approving the building of more and more Supermarkets are having an affect on the Pub Trade. I am informed that in Barnet a local British Legion Club and several Pubs will be demolished to make way for two more Supermarkets. There is already a 20 aisle check out at Sainsburys yards away from the proposed new buildings. I wonder whether local councils are taking back handers on this? If so, greed could well be a factor in the changing face of Britain.

In London, I went to the National Art Gallery and stumbled upon a demonstration supporting the people of Tibet. I walked with them but said nothing. If ever a people looked beautiful and proud yet helpless it is the Tibetans. I don’t know why but I feel sad for them. Well, I do know why but people do not want to hear it.

The air is fresh in England. But the politics is stale.

I also had time to celebrate Easter. It was a reason for coming home. I am glad I did so. An old story but fresh enough for the thousands who attended Mass at Westminster Cathedral.

Here is the news: the bleedin' obvious

Out here in Thailand I have had ample opportunity to watch the BBC World News. In China, my previous abode for three years, the BBC was banned. Though, I understand that this ban on the BBC is no more. Anyway, the important thing is that I I can now watch British news in a foreign country.

The immediate impression I have is just how Left Liberal the BBC news actually is. I must admit that several news reports have made me laugh out loud. Not because the standard of journalism is bad. Far from it. But there are moments when what is being reported appears to defy common sense.

In one report, for example, a BBC journalist took the trouble and danger of reporting undercover in Zimbabwe. The BBC is banned in Zimbabwe. It was a courageous thing to do. The report concluded that intimidation and violence was leading to an unfair election. Well, blow me down!! I never suspected that.

Talk about pulling your puches. While the population of Zimbabwe starve and are beaten to death your average BBC journalist will be agonizing about intimidation and unfair elections.

I suspect, however, that unless the SAS or a similar professional military unit are given the opportunity of enforcing regime change, the suffering in Zimbabwe will continue. To do nothing except gnash liberal teeth makes the owners of such teeth entirely complicit with the death of the innocents. So why do such people continue to abide in angst rather than recommend effective action?

The answer is Liberal Left views on Post Colonialism.

From what I have heard so far on the never ending debate on Zimbabwe there are some who more concerned about sensitivities associated with Post Colonialism than they are about saving peoples lives. In the modern BBC world, a bleedin’ heart image matters more than life itself.

Left Liberal ideas on Post Colonialism dominate and affect policy decisions but, I argue, that these views are mistaken since it was through Victorian Christian Missionaries and the enforcement of anti slavery laws at sea by the British Navy that the indigenous people of Africa were saved from Arab Swahili/Muslim slavery. Trade was considered by David Livingstone as essential to defeating slavery so that goods rather than people became the necessary commodity. It made sense and it worked.

Others, such as the explorer, Henry Stanley, developed a Christian moral initiative into a what became known as colonial Africa. Colonialism might not have been an ideal system but it certainly helped to get rid of the slave trade. Today, the people of Zimbabwe are slaves to a home grown tyranny. And, I don’t need to be BBC reporter to know this. I do not need to be paid at taxpayers expence to report on the bleedin’ obvious.

How long must action against a corrupt and murderous regime be delayed? How many people must die before Left Liberals abandon mistaken notions on British history?

Secular Myths

This morning I read something which surprised me. For a long time I have accepted secular and conventional wisdom on the Catholic Church. I had thought that the Catholic Church was rich. People told me so. I believed it.

I had thought there might be something in the claim that the Catholic Church had a lot of money in the bank. And so it is often asked how it could truly represent the poor and marginalized in the world? A good question until I found some time to read more into the subject.

In an acclaimed book entitled, “Sacred Causes” by Michael Burleigh there is plenty of detailed information which explains things. On page 70, Burleigh says:

“During the first world war, pope Benedict XV gave away his own fortune and then the Holy See’s ordinary revenue to repatriate prisoners of war and civilian refugees, so that by 1922 the Vatican treasury amounted to the lire equivalent of £10,000. Unable to pawn a Bernini, Michelangelo or a Raphael, his successor managed to deplete the financial recources still further, with generous donations to those ruined by the hyper inflation in Weimer Germany and gifts to the starving multitudes in the Soviet Union. Only the generosity and financial acumen of North American Catholics staved of financial ruination.”

Now this breaks a few secular myths, does it not. Good for you Catholic Church. As usual the secular world invents its very own secular myths whilst ignoring the truth.

The English language: a personal view

Is English innate? I have read many stories of foreign people knocked unconscious and wake up speaking English. I once recall reading the account of a German man who fell down the stairs and became unconscious. On waking up the German man could speak English. He could not speak a word of it beforehand. Or, so the story goes.

Much to the annoyance of her friends an American woman from Florida once woke up after a mighty fall speaking English in an English accent. But English is not the best language in the world because of this speculation, no matter how compelling the stories.

The best writer in the world is, as many argue, Shakespeare. I am not a fan since I have not found his plays that entertaining. However, I cannot argue against the quality and world renown of Shakespeare’s work. Shakespeare also introduced new words and sayings into the English vocabluary. “All the worlds a stage” is a metaphor but probably created by Shakespeare.

English evolved from Anglo-Saxon (German) and, after an invasion by Viking Normans in 1066, French became the language of the ruling elite. It was not until Henry V in the 15th century that French was pushed into second place amongst English Royalty and others at Court. Later, (Dr Johnson et al) attempts were made, to introduce more Latin and Greek into the English language.

In Academia (and Medicine) words such Biology or Biography reveal Greek roots. Bios, means life in Greek. Lampos is another ancient Greek word which has been Anglicized as “lamp”. Though, its meaning remains the same as lamp or light. So, it might be considered that English has absorbed four languages in one. Four strings to one bow.

Add to this about sixteen thousand phrasal verbs eg a blazing row, a heavy smoker or, even, **** off. Add to this thousands of collocations – sayings and phrases that go together - and the English language numbers 550,000 words. More than enough for communication of the best and most profound quality.

Roughly speaking it is possible to identify the origins of certain English words through the number of syllables employed. Many popular – most used – Anglo Saxon words such as; if, is, am, are, be, the, it, for, of etc etc are one syllable. French, Latin and Greek words tend to be more than one syllable.

The French word “number” is said to be the most used French word in the English language and is two syllables. Although, I would of thought the word “menu” runs it close for usage. In addition to French, many Latin and Greek words are three, and even, four or five syllables.

English is not just the best language in the world because most people seek to speak it. It is the most widely spoken language in the world bar none. And, not just because of the great writers from England, Ireland, Wales, Scotland and America who have contributed to this outstanding language. No, it is a great language because it has also evolved according to necessity. A living language.

Not the top down introduction of words as prescribed by the powers that be in Spain for Spanish or many other continental countries. In English there is the genuine growth of a language spoken by the people and what appears in the Oxford English Dictionary has not been decided by academia but by common usage.

I said that there are well over half a million words in the English language. There are about 185,000 and 180,000 words in German and Chinese languages respectively. Enough, for a decent conversation, no doubt. But not as many as English.

The English language really is the best language in the world. And, as we have seen, for many different reasons.

Problems with authority?

I am not saying that most people with father issues vote Labour but most people I meet who vote Labour have father issues. Why is this?

The river of consciousness

If you are a Materialist all calculations follow from such thinking. But consciousness can be seen as a convicing alternative reality. I mean that what is called reality, such as reading this writing on a hard surface is, at the sub atomic level, all one and the same thing as yourself.

The only real difference is that one reveals consciousness. Those who have faith in God will take this further to say that it was a divine consciousness that created the universe and all that emerged or evolved from it. So reality is consciousness, not Materialism.

Appearances can be deceptive. Keith Ward writes as much in his new book on “Why there almost certainly IS a God”. It is a response to a famous Scientist, Atheist and Materialist, Richard Dawkins.

Sitting beside a river in Thailand I had plenty of time to sit and stare or stand and look at the sky above. The river and the sky, both. I swam across the river and gazed back from the opposite side and where I had been musing on things.

Five past twelve

I was reading something the other day which caused me to wonder whether we are all, ultimately, unknowable?

Is there something about us which cannot be fully known? Or, is what people call love a key into anothers psyche?

I would say that people are unknowable since we do not fully understand ourselves.

On the other hand, however, some say that love is blind. If we accept this explanation or idea then, in essence, people remain unknowable.

What do you think?

The NHS

Inspired to write something after reading a number of outspoken comments on MyT about the origins of the NHS I decided to turn a comment made only a few days ago into a blog. This is the view of some:

‘Do not forget that socialists CREATED the NHS. Do not forget either that right-wing extremists would rather there were no NHS at all’.

Is this true? I do not think it tells even half of the story. This is my view:

More polarization from those who appear to be more concerned with public victory than truth. Without the Beveridge report there would have been nothing for Bevan to work with. Without a loan of about $3,000,000,000 from the American government; no finance either. In other words, Socialists had to go cap in hand before any new hospitals could be built.

The NHS came at an incredible price. Many might argue it a price worth paying but Britain did not finally pay off the loan until three years ago. Today, the NHS costs an extra £13 billion which is the amount spent on health tourism. Women from all over the world arrive to have their babies on the NHS. The concept of the NHS was for those who had fought for freedom. It was never meant to subsidise and support the world; fine though that concept undoubtedly is.

A BBC article concludes:

‘The Dawson Report of 1920 was the first big step towards a national health service, recommending a comprehensive system under the auspices of a single authority. It was followed by the Royal Commission on National Health Insurance in 1926 which pioneered the idea of a publicly funded health service. The creation of the Emergency Medical Service in Second World War further hastened the pace of change. It was the first time healthcare funding had been taken over by central government. In 1941, a government-commissioned independent inquiry found healthcare varied vastly across the country. With the voluntary hospitals permanently on the verge of financial collapse and the municipal hospitals almost universally loathed, there was no shortage of pressure for change.

Final catalyst

The final catalyst for the NHS came with the Beveridge report into social care in 1942. Sir William Beveridge, an eminent economist, identified a national health service as one of three essential elements of a viable social security system.’




http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/events/nhs_at_50/special_report/123511.stm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-American_loan

Thursday 8 July 2010

Forum

The following discussion took place a few days ago shortly after posting a blog entitled, The shame of the Left: http://mosaic007.blogspot.com/2010/07/shame-of-british.html


Comment:

Well, Nobby, here is a left-winger who doesn't hate his country. I think what we dislike is perhaps the idea of unthinking and misplaced loyalty, flag-waving and attempts at rewriting history. You correctly state that this country has done a lot of good around the world, but best put away the rose tinted shades and accept that there has been a fair number of balls ups along the way.
It is also, I think, a mistake to see 'the left' as some sort of cohesive and unified group with a policy. It is not. Just like the right, it is a loose and disparate grouping, which I think you are identifying as anyone in opposition to the 'right'.

Reply:

Much depends on whether you are talking about patriotism or nationalism? There is nothing wrong with patriotism but some left wing intellectuals find any form of patriotism cringe worthy. This is their problem and this issue was correctly identified by Orwell in his essay the Lion & the Unicorn many years ago. This blog is a response to those who often seem ashamed of their own country's history. So what you say about 'rose tinted shades' is missing the point by a wide margin. I do not see the Left as a cohesive unit at all. But since I do not know each and every individual by name (nor do I wish to) it would be strange to refer to this collection of individuals by anything other than by what they have in common. That they have differences does not surprise me in the least. Differences define us. But so does agreement and there is usually some sense of shame in the minds of The Left on matters relating to patriotism which, by the way, is not always unthinking but genuinely heartfelt.

Comment:

Hello Nobby. I have to say I have a serious dislike of nationalism, and certainly do make the distinction between that and patriotism. It is a matter of choice, and whist it seems to be a characteristic of 'the Right' to embrace both. I think you will find many socialists and liberals, like me, who have fought, or in my case, supported troops with medical services. I think you will find many socialists who died in WW2 and WW1 with weapons in their hands. Whether they died fighting for 'their country' or their fellow men is the question.
With regard to my country's history, I am ashamed of large chunks of it, and that is my prerogative. What I am proud of, is the fact that nobody can stop me saying so, and that is how it should stay. I also reserve the right to question whatever parts of our history I see as questionable. It is by no means all of it.

Reply:

For me the crux of it is when you say that you are ashamed of large parts of British history. Of course you are entitled to this view and this is but one strength of a tolerant democratic society. But I am also entitled to question your view which I believe is based upon unthinking conformity with prevailing fashion. What exactly is it about British history that makes you feel so ashamed? I ask not so much for the history lesson but to analyse what I suspect is a UK centric outlook, albeit Left sided. My guess is that you will depend on Britain having once had an Empire. If that is where your shame is located we will have much to discuss especially since so many former countries of Empire are now willingly and proudly part of a British Commonwealth.

Sunday 4 July 2010

The shame of the Left

Why do British/English Left Wingers hate their country? Why are they ashamed of British history? I do not understand it. The British have so much to be proud of in terms of their charity and force for good in this world. They were the first developed nation to put an end to slavery by trading in goods rather than people. This ended the Muslim Swahili slave trade in Africa. Both Blacks and Whites were slaves of the Ottoman Empire. Scandinavians who ventured too far into the Mediterranean had little defence against an attack at sea since their Navy was in no position to defend them. But any slave who managed to free himself and climb on board British Royal Navy ship whether he be Black or White or Yellow would be a free man in the early 19th century. No other Navy offered a comparable freedom or were willing to fight to see freedom enforced on the high seas. The Left refuse to acknowledge not only this but great advances made in medicine, social reform, democracy, wealth creation and so on. Britain is a country which now attracts millions of immigrants who seek a better way of life. Immigrants come to Great Britain for every reason; economic advantage, security, work, respect, love, hope, peace, adventure. Although some come for an easy life and others for crime too. Nevertheless, Britain remains a country which has produced more than its fair share of famous people who are well known not for the bad they have done but for the good. Everyone knows this. Everyone knows that Britain fought WW2 against tyranny on the continent of Europe. Most might know that Britain had to borrow $3,000,000,000 from the Americans to finance a welfare state enjoyed today by health tourists the world over at a cost to the tax payer of £13,000,000,000 a year. Such generosity continues. The Left often see Great Britain as a ruthless exploiter of all and sundry. The Left are often ashamed of their country; although I see the Left as people who are simply ashamed of themselves. This is not the shame of most Brits but it is the shame of the British as represented by a significant number of British people who never tire of making their bleedin' heart heard. I think I will now go and read some Keats or Shakespeare. Much more preferable to neo-Marxist ideology.

Saturday 3 July 2010

Political Correctness: from "isms" to "obias".

Back in the days when Lefties thought that the Environment explained human behaviour (1970's) and never conceived that genetics would one day revolutionize human understanding of this naive politicized view we never considered we would now have not only " 'isms" but also, " 'obias".

In days past, we had: Socialism, Communism, Trotskyism, Internationalism, Stalinism, Racism, Leftism, Liberalism, Nazism, Fascism etc etc.

Now we also have: homophobia, xenophobia, Islamaphobia, commitmentphobia, arachnophobia etc etc.

So what has happened and why has the suffix changed? Does this suffix change mean an end to (usually lefty liberal) ideology and the beginning of (usually lefty liberal) personal abuse?

In other words, a change of tactic. Instead of changing the world through a process of ideology they now want to insult you and change your mind at the same time.

Personally, I think the suffix change reveals exactly this. Most people in Britain were unaware, until the past few years, that they had been discriminating against anyone in particular. Now, or so it appears, we are all criminals. Now we are all, xenophobic, homophobic, Islamaphobic etc etc.

Have we not heard all this before? And, are we not, we English, the most tolerant people on the planet to take this abuse day in, day out? It appears that the "isms" have now evolved into "obias".

Good luck all and, as Dave Allen may once have said, "may your (politically correct) God go with you".

A Clash of Civilizations

n the Summer of 1993 Samuel Huntington wrote about a "A Clash of Civilizations". He talks about the future conflicts of Mankind which he says will be increasingly based upon cultural differences. But I am not about to write a book review. I do not have enough time for this. What I would like to say, however, is that the history of this world tells us that power does not stand still. It either displays its strength or wither and dies. Nature abhors a vacuum. If America, and its cultural and religious inheritance ie Christianity, were to forego its role as the world's Policeman someone else would necessarily step into their shoes. It will not be the EU because it does not have the political will to enforce moral imperatives. So who would fill a power vacuum left by The United States? I think the concern is that the answer to this question is Islam. This is the reason for all of the blogs. My guess is that if those who now write blogs about Islam were suddenly to heed recent advice and refrain from doing so those who follow Islam would gain in confidence and begin to assert their own views. World history tells us that more often than not people base their cultural identity through language, race and religion. Multiculturalism is, as yet, an unproven liberal ideal. We all wait to see the consequences.

England v Brazil: World Cup 1970

For some, this game was, and remains, pure magic. An honest battle for the World Cup, in the qualifying stages, between the holders, England, and the traditional giants, Brazil.

For others, it is dated. It is history. A match that is not quite Stonehenge. But getting there.

The modern game is, by comparison, not only up to date, it is obviously much quicker and, far more skillfull. Although, I have heard that the modern match ball is much lighter these days. Perhaps, in order to accomadate some lass who has a pretention to "bend it like Beckham".

Most who have seen English Premiership games would concur with the latter view. But hold your horses. Let us ask a few questions first.

What is the best save ever?

Answer: A Gordon Banks save; stopping a Pele header and a certain goal.

The Match? England v Brazil, World Cup, 1970.

Second question. What is the best ever tackle?

Answer: Bobby Moore's perfect tackle on Jairzinho ending another Brazilian attack on goal.

The Match? England v Brazil, World Cup, 1970.

Who are amongst the top twenty players of all time?

Pele, Jairzinho, Bobby Moore, Bobby Charlton and Gordon Banks.

So, arguably, at least a quarter of the worlds best ever players were playing in one match.

The Match? England v Brazil, World Cup, 1970.

What about discipline. Theatrics. Spitting, fighting. Red cards. Bookings?

I cannot quite recall if anyone was booked. Possibly. But it looked every inch a game played in the right spirit. At the end of the match Pele and Moore exchanged shirts in mutual admiration. All could see that it was a display par excellence and an example of how the game ought to be played, without theatrics.

Sometimes, history does get it right. And, not all change is for the better.

Anyway, what was, The Match? England v Brazil, World Cup, 1970.

I watched this classic game, one evening, a few years ago, accompanied by two bottles of red wine. It was a delight to hear names such as Keith Newton, Terry Cooper, Uncle Tom Cobbly and all.

Shame we lost. If only chances had been taken. With a little less sun and a little more luck, we might have even won the damn thing. Again. Now wouldn't that have been something.

Ritual

Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem, Creatorem cæli et terræ.

Et in Iesum Christum, Filium eius unicum, Dominum nostrum; qui

conceptus est de Spiritu Sancto, natus ex Maria Virgine, passus

sub Pontio Pilato, crucifixus, mortuus, et sepultus; descendit ad

inferos; tertia die resurrexit a mortuis; ascendit ad cælos; sedet

ad dexteram Dei Patris omnipotentis; inde venturus est iudicare

vivos et mortuos. Credo in Spiritum Sanctum, sanctam Ecclesiam

catholicam, Sanctorum communionem, remissionem peccatorum,

carnis resurrectionem, vitam æternam. Amen


(Apostles' Creed - Roman Ritual)

Goodbye Thailand.

Time to say goodbye. I have been in Thailand for six months. Some of it good. Some very good. And, some moments have been bloody awful. I came to Thailand again in September last year to take up a teaching job. This led to a posting in the mountains of northern Thailand near the Laos border. It was a remote place to be but it was different and not the usual scheme of things, and that appealed. So did the friendliness of the locals who seemed to be only a second from a smile.

The race to smile beats other Thai's by a few seconds. The students at the school were the happiest people I have met. And, most wanting to learn English. I found that teaching English for Thai children is often more rewarding for all concerned if I use a game to move things along. Thai children want to have fun and express this all the time. But don't confuse this with not being disciplined. At the beginning of each class, a class leader - usually someone with something about them and more often than not, a charasmatic girl - would say, "Stand up please"! Then the whole class stood up in unison saying, "Good morning, Teacher"!!

The way they said this really made me smile. On one occasion a student responded with a question to a game I had introduced about adverbs of frequency. Spontaneously, I found myself mimicking the way Thai people say, "sometimes". I said, "sumtaime" or something similar. They loved it. Could not stop laughing. Sometimes, the girls in some really able and happy classes would, after winning a point at the boys expense, burst into a Thai song. It was such a delightful song which never for a moment betrayed any sense of gloating, that all the boys could do - and myself for that matter - was to smile, sometimes inanely, until the song had ended.

As most will know I have also been ill in Thailand. I caught pneumonia or a bacterial infection of the lung or whatever it was. But it seriously affected my breathing and put an early stop to my teaching time here. I have thought that because of this and the loss of a few thousand pounds in lost earnings and medical expences that it may have been a mistake to come to Thailand. I think I have already said this. But on further reflection life is to some extent what you make of it, good or bad. It is important, I now think, to be able to accept the choices we make even when those choices sometimes seem like a mistake in retrospect.

In an earlier visit to Thailand, I visited an area famous for temples or, as Thai people say, a wat. The picture above was taken after visiting one of the many spectacular wats in Bangkok. Thailand is a land of smiles and a land of both contrasts and contradictions. A land of girls and boys and ladyboys. A land of soldiers and politicians.

But, most of all, Thailand is a memorable land with a beautiful memorable people.

Did political correctness cause the latest economic crisis?

The recent economic collapse has produced several theories as to its cause. I have listened to several BBC debates on Newsnight where speculation abounds on this issue and sometimes more besides. Some say the cause of the current economic crisis was caused by greed; the less attractive side of our human nature.

By this I assume that the inference is that greedy capitalists have bitten off rather more than they can chew by lending to those who did not have the ability to repay on debts incurred. This is the landscape of mortgage lending in America or, Sub Prime, as they say over there in the States.

As we all know the Sub Prime market collapsed last year. Those responsible were a collection of culprits; individuals, lenders and/or financial institutions. Or were they?

What I did not know is that in America lenders had a quota of Sub Prime that had to be sold to ethnic minorities. And, if lenders failed to lend an appropriate quota of funds then the financier or Sub Prime lender would be fined. In other words financiers were forced to lend money to those who might not have the funds available to repay on a loan.

So, or so it would appear, money was lent according to politically correct doctrine; not according to sound financial common sense which ought to be more concerned with the ability and likelihood to repay on loans received.

Can it be true? Is my information correct? Did political correctness cause the latest economic crisis?

If this synopsis is without foundation in fact or truth please convince me otherwise and I will join you in condemning the greedy capitalists.

Boys played loudly

Slumped into a chair in front of a blackboard that had seen better days I waited for a few minutes as my students took an obligatory break from a two hour class. On my left one of several children remained seated in class. They are Chinese and mostly eleven years old.

A bob of black hair shines from a pretty face. She looked at my newly grown beard and asked, 'how old are you'? I replied in Chinese, 'one hundred and twenty eight years old'. I could see eyes that believed and disbelieved at the same time.

She looked again but this time more intensely. Suddenly her arms went up into the air above. For a few seconds I wondered what this could mean then I realized I was wearing a rather unsightly hat which is fine for the cold but little else. I took it off.

She smiled. 'You are not so old', she said. And then offered me a sweet which I took and ate. I enjoyed it. We both sat and chewed a few more sweets. For a short while longer peace reigned in this small world. Boys played loudly again. The rest of the class returned. Now it was time to teach.

Boy

When I was a boy in the 1960's at a North London Primary School, I became very interested in learning French. At the age of seven I could speak a few sentences and count up to twenty. But all that changed when I later arrived at the bog standard Comprehensive.

The standard of teaching was not as good so most of us with any enthusiasm lost interest in speaking French.

This is how I started to become an Englishman.

Faith & DNA

I think that there is a hopelessness and helplessness in society today which is not unrelated to atheism. This does not mean I dislike atheism or atheists. Indeed, the opposite is often true and such independent thinking can sometimes provide inspiration, innovation and, new ideas. But atheism also means that the English working man is now left with few real hopes. Welfare dependence or nationalism are increasingly seen as the most attractive secularized choices for those who have seen their country change; largely for changes sake over the past twelve years without gaining much benefit (no ironic pun intended) for themselves.

I am not suggesting, however, that Catholicism or Christianity be wheeled out as a some sort of consolation prize for the poor and ignorant. I have seen too many examples of faith in action on the streets to house or feed the homeless to start making patronizing assumptions on what effect faith can have on society. Faith has had a massive impact on society and I think usually for the good. Of course, bad people can hijack good causes. This point is more fully explained in Michael Burleigh's, 'Sacred Causes'.

'Sacred Causes' provides much detail on the background to Communists murdering Catholic clergy in Spain and the Soviet Union in the 1930's. For example, Nuns were left to rot in public plaza's so as to disprove 'incorruption'. Although this was a misunderstanding since Catholic tradition has it that Saints flesh, not Nuns', does not decay or rot. History can often be about a subjective interpretation of the facts so that anyone can claim insight into this, that and the other. But some historians are more convincing than others.

Faith is personal so is very difficult to explain. Can you explain love? If you love someone does that mean you can do anything to them? Of course not. But if you truly love them you would not intentionally hurt them. So I believe the same is true of faith. However, here is the rub. The OT story of God, Abraham and, his son. From a Christian perspective this does make sense. If through faith God saw that Abraham was willing to sacrifice his son then God would one day do the same to save Mankind from his sins.


Is everything logical? I doubt it. Man is a religious animal. It is in our DNA.

Was God being reasonable to expect Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac?

I doubt that too.

Friday 2 July 2010

The Tibetans

Apparently, the fastest genetic change happened amongst Tibetans. The genes of Tibetans have evolved quicker than other humans in order to adapt to life at a high altitude on the Himalayan plateau; ‘mountain natives altered their genetic make-up in less than 3,000 years.’

Many Tibetans live today as refugees all over the world but especially in countries such as India, Nepal, Britain, America and, Switzerland. Their love of Buddhism travels with them.

Thursday 1 July 2010

The French General

De Gaulle despite his faults, his pride, his sometimes apparent absurdity, remained the bedrock of France. He alone represented a French dream and an independent French identity. Gaullist certainly. But as a Catholic, De Gaulle was anti-Communist and under no illusion what this atheist regime stood for. Yet, De Gaulle also found a friend and the future of France in 1960’s Moscow. This is politics. It was and possibly still is the French way of finding influence in the world.

They WERE loved

The England team failed in South Africa for many reasons.

Yes they were tired after a grueling Premiership season. Yes they are paid too much and like boxers can taste the high life and lose their hunger. Yes the tactics were static. 4-4-2 against Germany was too rigid and some change or flexibility would have created at least some element of surprise. However, such creative thinking was beyond a grossly overpaid management team.

The players did not have as many opportunities to drink beer together. Such bonding sessions are important to English culture and an Italian manager may have overlooked this factor. But a big reason for failure was that bloody excuse for a trumpet that many South Africans claim as part of their culture.

Much has already been written on the deadening noise which cancels out the usual crowd atmosphere of cheers and applause. The effect, however, on the England players was devastating. They could not hear their English support. More than players from most other countries English players need to feel loved. They have grown used to it. In England football has become a religion. A successful Premiership footballer is worshipped. He is a god.

But an English footballers divinity is suddenly called into question as soon as one realizes that they probably cannot string a sentence together or kick a ball in a straight line. This happened in South Africa. The English football team performance was as everyone knows truly abysmal.

But it was not all of their fault. They simply could not hear just how loved they were.

Dr Livingstone I presume?

After reading a fair bit of the new biography about the explorer Henry Stanley I was surprised to learn of just how much adversity he had to overcome before "finding Livingstone". And, that, in deepest dark Africa, he probably never said: "Dr. Livingstone, I presume".

Apparently, what Stanley said about himself owed much to a deep insecurity about his childhood which developed into a need to exaggerate short comings or any perceived weakness.

Consequently, some have placed too much trust in what Stanley said instead of what Stanley did. Nevertheless, what Stanley did was extraordinary enough. He had to overcome being rejected by almost everyone he knew including his parents. Though it is not this that concerns me.

It appears that an Arab/Swahili Muslim slave trade was at work throughout East and Central Africa during the 19th century. David Livingstone, a Christian Missionary, witnessed the reality of this and considered that the only effective way to end the slave trade was by opening up the whole region to colonialization and trade. For trade in goods and ideas rather than people.

It is notable that Stanley was to some extent duped by King Leopold ll of Belgium who placed Colonial and nationalistic ambitions above any altruistic or Christian ideas for ending the slave trade. King Leopold also used Stanley to compete with the French for land in the Congo.

But it is Henry Stanley the misunderstood hero who emerges from these pages of history as a man of our times. Who overcame personal disadvantage to continue in the vision set down by Livingstone.

So instead of immersing ourselves in shame about British history let us consider the facts. That William Wilberforce was an English Tory. That David Livingstone was a Scot. That Henry Stanley was Welsh (albeit with an American accent). And, that, alongside the might of British Navy and British public opinion, all helped to fight against the slave trade in Central and East Africa.

Yet another atheist from Oxford

I have just read Richard Dawkins latest book entitled, The God Delusion. I realize that Dawkins is a well respected man in the scientific community and so hesitate to say anything critical. However, I am wondering whether I am correct in my thinking that his views on religion are, largely, reductionist?

For example, he writes: "The proximate cause of religion might be hyperactivity in a particular node of the brain".

The proximate cause of religion might indeed be the node of the brain but it may also be many other things apart from biochemical reactions in the mind. And, even if it were, it does not necessarily mean that this furthers an atheistic view. In other instances he employs psychology or biology or chemistry to not only explain particular aspects of religious belief but also to assert a strident atheism.

Perhaps, his atheism is temporary. It is well known that atheism can, and does, lead to a deeper faith. I doubt if it will in this case but you never know.

It will be interesting, however, to see what happens to the views of the liberal left intelligensia as British society and culture becomes increasingly concerned with religion and other issues evolving from multiculturalism.

In the meantime, does anyone agree that Dawkins views on religion are reductionist?

ps By the way, what is it with atheism and intellectuals based in Oxford?

Cambridge

"I was walking about in Cambridge and passed a bookshop and in the window were portraits of Russell, Freud and Einstein. A little further on, in a music shop, I saw portraits of Beethoven, Schubert and Chopin. Comparing these portraits I felt intensely the terrible degeneration that had come over the human spirit in the course of only a hundred years".

1. Who said this?

2. Do you agree?

3. Is it not truer today than it was sixty years ago when, approximately, this quote was made?

A river of consciousness

The only real difference is that one reveals consciousness. Those who have faith in God will take this further to say that it was a divine consciousness that created the universe and all that emerged or evolved from it. So reality is consciousness, not Materialism.

Appearances can be deceptive. Keith Ward writes as much in his new book on "Why there almost certainly IS a God". It is a response to a famous Scientist, Atheist and Materialist, Richard Dawkins.

Sitting beside a river in Thailand I had plenty of time to sit and stare or stand and look at the sky above. The river and the sky, both. I swam across the river and gazed back from the opposite side and where I had been musing on things.

I considered the latest book by Pope Benedict XVI about Jesus of Nazareth. There was one sentence in particular that lept off the page and stood full square before my conscience.

That God can be truly worshipped only through right conduct. These words have left a deep impression.

I returned from my swim to walk up some wooden steps. I sat down in a deck chair of sorts and picked up another book. This was the Oxford book of Saints. A collection of biographies on hundreds of those who have been canonised by The Vatican since Jesus of Nazareth was crucified for claiming to be the Son of God.

Some Saints are said to have had the ability in their lifetime to read men's hearts. I wonder if anyone claims the same ability today? Other Saints are said to have performed miracles. There are even some claims made of levitation. Indeed, the Saint of Astronauts is Joseph of Copertino - The Flying Friar - who is said to have moved through the air on at least seventy reported occasions.

But it was the cases of an incorrupted body that most captured my attention. Saints:

St Andrew Bobola

St Alphege

Catherine de Vigri of Bologna

St Cuthbert

Are all examples of reported instances of people finding an incorrupted body after death.

During the Spanish revolution of the 1930's the Left sort to challenge religious ideas by killing hundreds of Nuns, Monks and Priests which were subsequently left in public squares to rot.

It was hoped to convince people that Christianity or at least those who are in some kind of religious or Christian authority are nothing special. But these Monks and Nuns had not yet become Saints. So they decayed in front of political ambition.

I imagine the Spanish Left of this time considered the religious scheme of things as some form of competition for the hearts and minds of the people. Once politics has overcome Faith in God it is all the easier to manipulate a secularized people bereft of religion.

The river and the sky. Both change ceaselessly. The rain falls from the sky and becomes the river. The water evaporates and becoimes the cloud in the sky. A never ending natural cycle of rebirth.

A Thai friend once told me that many believe that the Soul or Spirit is, after death and three days, made known to those most loved. Indeed, her Mother heard the voice of her brother -aged 26 years -calling out to her three days after died from a gun shot wound..

Did not Jesus talk about his spirit being resurrected after three days? I think He did.

Some cultures and religions recognise the spiritual solitude of the desert, some the peace of the ever changing river and others, the vast emtiness of the sky.

All are connected and belong to a divine consciousness we call God.

The Garden of Gethsemane

In 1975 Britain joined the EU. In 2009 Britain signs the Lisbon Treaty. We are now fully signed up members of the European economic club. But, as we all know, this is not just about economics. The EU concept is also about sovereignty and this has also effectively been signed away by those who govern us today.

So what is the problem? Why are many British people often less than enthusiastic about being part of a European Superstate?

At root I think it is about identity. The British people are in the main quite proud of their identity which has largely been shaped by a history of independence, free speech and victory; a victory over tyranny which others failed to defeat.

These others are our continental neighbours. Most people on the continent are not so proud of their history and seek a new future. This is understandable. If I was French or German or Italian I too would seek to be part of a new European Federal Republic. But I am not French or German or Italian. I am English.

In the geopolitical world there is an increasing shift of influence which is not just about the strength of a nations economy; it is about military might. Without American muscle the EU is dependent on other nations accepting arguments about Human Rights law. Meanwhile competing nations often see Human Rights law as Western Imperialism by the back door.

The fact is that in the dawn of the 21st century, 19th century political ideals are as strong as ever. Nations gain influence in this world as much as by military strength as they will through economic advancement. It was ever thus. Indeed, without American military strength I do not think the EU would last five years.

In response some say: 'the US has no choice but to have a gigantic military, it is what holds the country together'.

In reality, however, the truth is rather more prosaic. The US does have a choice. American defence budgets can go down as well as up. It happens all the time.

There is also another issue. A question of moral imperative which is all the more relevant to the debate because many influential politicians in Europe undoubtedly see themselves as holding secularized moral high ground in arguments about Human Rights law; a stick with which to beat other nations not so keen on democracy.

But it is not an army and hardly likely to be while the Germans still refuse to allow their soldiers to engage seriously in any conflict including Afghanistan.

So how do European Federalists square the moral circle of relying on the power of America for greater European influence in this world?

In my view they cannot. It is simply treacherous of a British government to have compromised British sovereignty whilst relying upon a questionable and dubious morality.

A naive yet incredibly selfish political elite has sold a unique and immensely world respected British identity for thirty pieces of silver. Unbelievable.

The final catalyst

Inspired to write something after reading a number of outspoken comments on MyT about the origins of the NHS I decided to turn a comment made only a few days ago into a blog. This is the view of some:

'Do not forget that socialists CREATED the NHS. Do not forget either that right-wing extremists would rather there were no NHS at all'.

Is this true? I do not think it tells even half of the story. This is my view:

More polarization from those who appear to be more concerned with public victory than truth. Without the Beveridge report there would have been nothing for Bevan to work with. Without a loan of about $3,000,000,000 from the American government; no finance either. In other words, Socialists had to go cap in hand before any new hospitals could be built.

The NHS came at an incredible price. Many might argue it a price worth paying but Britain did not finally pay off the loan until three years ago. Today, the NHS costs an extra £13 billion which is the amount spent on health tourism. Women from all over the world arrive to have their babies on the NHS. The concept of the NHS was for those who had fought for freedom. It was never meant to subsidise and support the world; fine though that concept undoubtedly is.

A BBC article concludes:

'The Dawson Report of 1920 was the first big step towards a national health service, recommending a comprehensive system under the auspices of a single authority. It was followed by the Royal Commission on National Health Insurance in 1926 which pioneered the idea of a publicly funded health service. The creation of the Emergency Medical Service in Second World War further hastened the pace of change. It was the first time healthcare funding had been taken over by central government. In 1941, a government-commissioned independent inquiry found healthcare varied vastly across the country. With the voluntary hospitals permanently on the verge of financial collapse and the municipal hospitals almost universally loathed, there was no shortage of pressure for change.

Final catalyst

The final catalyst for the NHS came with the Beveridge report into social care in 1942. Sir William Beveridge, an eminent economist, identified a national health service as one of three essential elements of a viable social security system.'




news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/events/nhs_at_50/spe...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-American_loa...

The incredible story of Nobby and the Frenchman

One hot summers afternoon in 2004 whilst out walking in northern Spain I stumbled upon an old town just a few hours East of Burgos. Anyway, in order to find some relief from the sun and after sorting out my accomadation for the night I ventured into a tree covered plaza. The peace and quiet was bliss. It was early afternoon so shadow remained thin on the ground. Up above a leafy canopy created mottled light. I had walked a long way that day. The rest was good. Then, in a corner on the far side, I happened to notice a small church. It looked interesting. And, also might provide further respite from the heat. So I walked over and, up the steps. At the top, I carefully turned an old iron handle which opened an even older looking wooden door. Inside, it felt cool. And, a moment after, a gentle breeze passed by as I closed the door behind. It was not dark. Light streamed in from windows above. I looked up. Then I heard a voice. It was in English. Definitely foreign. But I had no idea about the nationality of the owner. I looked down. Then up again. Standing in front of me was a big chap. A few years younger than myself. Probably mid to late thirties with long brown scraggy hair.

He looked irritated: "Take off your hat".

"What? I said.

He now looked angry: "Take off your hat", he barked.

I put my hand to my head. Indeed, there was a hat.

"This is a Church", he said.

"Sorry". I took off my hat. I had forgotten all about a straw hat I had bought a few hundred miles earlier in another hot Spanish town.

Then he turned around and continued to walk down the aisle. The Church was quiet and empty. A few others in the Church looked at me. I felt embarrassed.

Just as suddenly, he turned around again. He looked at me with contempt:

"Are you English" ?

"yes", I said.

He turned away. His suspicion was confirmed. I was simply another cultural moron from England.

Bloody cheek, I thought. Almost immediately, I said: "Are you French" ?

This time he turned around slowly. There was a sheepish expression on his face:

"Yes", he said.

Views

I guess we must disagree. But not because we must but because I see things from an entirely different angle to you. Or, at least this a personal view. Nations take shape in and through myth; and national myths are often built upon ancient stories. In this respect the United Kingdom is no different from many other nations in that people often choose what binds a nation and its people together. Not that patriotism is unique. What is unique is a UK Monarchy which still persists against all reasonable logic. Why? Because the Monarchy represent, amongst other things, the cultural heritage of the nation. I cannot see what is wrong with this. Living symbols of history are a lesson, not a problem. In times of plenty it might not mean much but when things do not turn out as expected people can often find unity in what is historical or shared as a community. I prefer to see the UK evolving in a natural process taking with it a history which has often been the envy of the world. Lastly, I acknowledge that we live in a meritocracy but the egalitarianism you speak of is at odds with the increasing disparity between rich and poor too often seen in the UK these days. I think there is too much pressure on people to "succeed" these days and little excuse if they "fail" (my quotation marks). Not everyone can be a success. I am not against egalitarianism but I have my reservations against placing it as a model for life and society since we are not all created equal. People sometimes need an excuse for failure. Today, they havn't got that which may explain increasing depression and mental health problems. Anyway, enough. God save the Queen!

HMS Politics

Since Britain caved into the demands of the suffragettes and granted universal suffrage I have seen my country gradually go down the tubes. No two ways about it. Bleedin' heart ideas about politics have now crystallized into New Labour dogma. The women who once burned their bra's are now freezing our pants. This is the feminization of society.

It is now more and more likely to find someone who is vegetarian and demands equal rights for animals. The ancient Greeks and even the Victorians never had to put up with this crap. Neither should we. But we do. All the time.

I'm surprised that Britain still has an effective Army. Certainly it no longer has a democracy worth fighting for. Almost every idiot under the sun can now vote. And they do. In their dreams New Labour would like the vote to be given to children and, if they had their way, criminals too. Change, is the mantra; the dogma appears as change for changes sake. For some, change is progress. Most would prefer progress for a change.



The ancient Greeks would have thought us bonkers. And, of course, we are. No longer does a classic template exist in trendy, right on, minds. Socrates, Plato, Aristotle; they had it about right. What a time it must have been when the most educated voted for the wisest and most able. Unlike today that was a democracy worth fighting for. It inspired what we have now. But what do we have today?

What appears to concern many today is racism and homophobia as if every other sin was somehow less important. Well, it probably is to those who have nothing better to think about. The feminization of society has led to New Labour being voted into government three times in succession. It used to be a Man's world.

In her classic book, 'Black Lamb, Grey Falcon', Rebecca West said that women are idiots. She also said that men are lunatics. Her point was that generally speaking women knew very little about the world of politics but they knew much about their private and domestic world. By contrast, men tended to be far more interested the public and political world outside. But they often knew far less about the concerns and interests of their own family. These are genetic differences. Celebrate them.

Sometimes nature will provide an exception to the rule. Margaret Thatcher - God bless her - was an exception. Please, no more social engineering from unthinking conformists who follow slavishly prevailing fashions. No more vogue. No more New Labour. No more idiots running the country.

I have known a woman for many years who bought a newspaper so that it gave the appearance of knowing what she was talking about. Problem is she never read the damn thing. She is bright, able and much better than myself at most things. But in conversation about politics or history it is obvious to me that she has not a clue except on matters related to character and personality. Discussion about policies or past national or international events would be pointless. My guess is that she is not unusual in this respect.

What we need today is someone who is capable of navigating and commanding HMS Britain. A person with exceptional talent. Not someone who is paraded as a victory for left liberal social engineering. In the ebb and flow of political change perhaps a beautiful, mid twenties, Margaret Thatcher could improve things. But she would have to be tough and to know the ropes. The ship must sail, the wind must blow and Britain expects every woman to do her duty.