WITH MIXED FEELINGS

I have mixed emotions about the shooting of Charles Kirk. I know I am not alone. I misread a Guardian Opinion piece which stated, inter alia:

The shocking killing of the co-founder of Turning Point USA Charlie Kirk,  a hugely influential activist who rallied young people to Donald Trump’s cause and far-right ideology more broadly, has been widely and rightly condemned across the political spectrum. Leading Democrats and progressive activists made clear that such violence must not be tolerated.

I initially understood the phrase “widely and rightly condemned” to be a comment referring to Mr Kirk’s political views, rather than his killing. I thought that was a rather harsh but brave comment coming from the Guardian in the circumstances, until I re-read the paragraph for clarification, which of course was referring to the act of violence.

I later read another article on SUBSTACK by Ricky Hale of Council Estate Media which began:

When I heard that Charlie Kirk had been shot, my first feeling was sadness, and then as people reminded me of the terrible things he had said and done, I did not know what to feel. I had a mixture of emotions, I guess, same as I did when those billionaires took a submarine ride and we all laughed, but I still felt bad for them.    

Here is the thing: you're not supposed to acknowledge the inner-conflict. You're supposed to mourn a dead father and say nice things about him, otherwise you're a terrible person. Also, you're supposed to not give a fuck about his passing, otherwise you're mourning a fascist. However you react, you will make someone mad.   

The thing is, it's okay to feel sad that Charlie Kirk is dead, even though he was a terrible person, and it's okay to joke about him being dead, even though he was a family man. It's okay to feel mixed emotions because we're humans and so much about us is contradictory.

While I feel a tinge of sadness that a fellow human being has lost his life in such awful circumstances, this does not mean I will be shedding tears for him. Charlie Kirk does not deserve my tears. If you did not know much about him, the internet has been quick to remind us how horrendous his views were.   

First of all, Kirk saw empathy as a weakness and joked about the attack on Paul Pelosi. He frequently denied there was starvation in Gaza and excused Israel's genocidal practices. He was a forced birther who said he would make his ten-year-old daughter carry a baby to term if she were raped. He was a horrendous racist who argued that black women were too stupid to be taken seriously. He called George Floyd a "scumbag" and said black people were better off in slavery. At one event, he kept referring to an Asian woman as "chink". He blamed transgender people for gun violence and called for the stoning of gay people. I could go on and on, but needless to say, Kirk was a person who stoked division and incited violence.                                                                                                                                               

I confess Mr Hale’s point of view expresses more of what I feel about the incident. It is indeed very difficult for me not have mixed feelings about the death of a man like Charlie Kirk whose views and influence I abhor. I am clearly not alone. I have frequently written about opposing points of view. It is important to be aware of  other’s views and coming to grips with trying to understand them, however appalling they may seem. For those on the left of the political spectrum, it is necessary to make a distinction between genuine conservative political views and racist bigotry. Indeed, not all socialists are immune from being racist, homophobic or anti-transgender. Political views, philosophies and personal emotions are often not rational. To paraphrase  Richard Rorty when referring to Martin Heidegger, author of Being and Time, ‘there are many great books written by very bad men, Heidegger is just a supreme example’. 

Personal contemplation as to why we exist, or how we came to be, does not necessarily improve the way people interact with each other, particularly when what we come to believe as fact is false or delusional. Much depends on what and how we are taught, or what and how we learn. Again, there is a distinction between teaching and learning. 

So, like Ricky Hale, I cannot shed a tear for ‘influencer’ Charlie Kirk, however I can shed a tear for the American citizens who have to live with the continuing and growing  hostility that will be engendered by this particular act of violence. They are also having to deal with a President who will try to make capital out of the situation for his own personal benefit, and use it to deflect from his own personal responsibility for promoting and creating the climate of violence and division that exists in today’s United States of America, which has led to the killing of Charlie Kirk. 

LIVING WITH DENIAL

Lenny Bruce did a bit in one of his routines about cheating on your partner. “Deny it, don’t admit anything, even if they’ve got pictures, deny it ‘I was just lying down next to her to see which one of us was taller’. Deny it”. Advice Donald Trump seems to have adopted whole sale. In the face of the now published birthday card to Epstein, bearing his signature, he puts out a photo of his signature next to the signature on the card, claiming it is proof he didn’t sign the card, even though it is the same signature. He expects people to believe his denials despite the evidence of their own eyes. There must be another level of brazen we have never seen before, but Donald Trump has scaled the heights. 

The great tragedy is that his acolytes still rally  behind him, repeating and amplifying the lies, in the expectation that it will work and keep what is left of his base on side. And it seems to be working. What on earth is wrong with the congressional republican party members that they continue to prop up this man? The duplicity, chicanery and stupidity, coupled with the narcissistic persona is there for the world to see, and yet western world leaders seem to mollycoddle him because of the office he holds. Is it not time to put a stop to that and call him out? Why is he not putting the weight of his office into cutting off Putin’s regime through more severe sanctions? Why is he not putting more pressure on Netanyahu by withholding supplies of weapons and support in general?

From what I can gather from the reports I see and hear from many citizens in the United States he is reviled. They see him as a would be dictator and are taking to the streets and town halls in protest at his ‘regime’. What is sad is that the rigidity of the written constitution does not seem to allow for his immediate removal, save by way of an impeachment for so called high crimes and misdemeanours  which requires a vote by two thirds of the Senate. We have already seen how that works. It doesn’t, due to the numbers of his republican supporters. It would require a defection of at least 22 Republican senators out of the 53 currently in office. Before that can even happen, the House Of Representatives has to pass a bill of impeachment, which is even more unlikely to happen given that the Republican Party holds 220 seats in the House to the Democrats 213. 

It is clear that the founding fathers never anticipated a person in the shape of a Donald Trump would ever become President of the United States of America, primarily because they never anticipated that the American people would ever conceive of voting for such a person, nor did they ever conceive that the congress would so easily acquiesce to a would be dictator. At the time there was no reason for them to anticipate such an outcome. It will require some changes in legislation to deal with this development, and that does not look like happening any time soon. So the world is locked into Trump for the time being.

Yet again, history shows that societies have allowed atrocities to occur because they believe ‘it can’t happen here’. It clearly can happen and appears to be happening all over the world. Are we too bound up in our own daily travails to notice what is going on around us? How is it that our countries’ economies have allowed for the proliferation of shoplifting and thefts on such a scale as we now have? Why do we have so many world wide scams in operation on such a scale as to be able to blackmail major institutions and corporations? What has happened to us to allow isolationist populist bigoted nationalism to take hold, and elect such people as representatives of our lives? What has happened to concepts of integrity and duty of care? How is it that we allow some people to deny responsibility  even after what we see and hear with our own eyes and ears? What good is mass media if it all amounts to nothing? We are surrounded daily with pictures and sounds of atrocities and some even take to the streets in protest, only to become part of the story, rather than lead to a solution. 

I am full of questions and denials myself, so what is it that will make a difference? Is it another amendment to the constitution of the United States? Is it proportional representation in the United Kingdom? Is it more severe law enforcement? Is it more social constructionism? Or is it just down to “Deny it. Even if they’ve got pictures”?

 

FAILING TO SEE ANOTHER POINT OF VIEW

Expanding one’s news gathering sources is never easy. I have to confess that I probably rely on the Guardian Newspaper and the BBC for overall information. I do watch a lot of YouTube stuff such as Occupy Democrats, Brian Tyler Cohen, Meidas Touch, Rachel Maddow, The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell, Late Night with Seth Meyers and other podcasts critical of Mr Trump’s Presidency. I believe that most of these Pod casts come up first when I log in because of google statistics on what I regularly watch. I am sure that if my obsessions were aligned with Fox News and friends, they would be the first to appear on screen. In that sense, it is clear that whatever algorithm monitors my access to the internet, it will continue to provide me with material it believes I would seek out in any event.  It learns to feed me the food I seem to like. This is not good for diversity of thinking. It tends to narrow an already narrow point of view. 

Celia brought in the Saturday edition of The Financial Times, offering another perspective, and one that should be taken into account. In its wikipedia entry it states “Since the late 20th century, its typical depth of coverage has linked the paper with a white-collar, educated, and financially literate readership. Because of this tendency, the FT has traditionally been regarded as a centrist to centre-right liberal, neo-liberal and conservative liberal newspaper. So perhaps not so far removed from The Guardian. In any event I perused the paper.

Trump touted Chinese troops for Kyiv. Donald Trump suggested deploying Chinese troops as peacekeepers in post war Ukraine leading support to a proposal first put forward by Russia’s Vladimir Putin, according to four people briefed on discussions.

EU antitrust chief urges defiance of US - The EU must be prepared to walk away from a trade deal with the US if Donald Trump acts on his threats  to target the bloc unless it alters down its digital legislation.

Cook’s showdown with Trump likely to have broad implications for Fed - Central Bank economist’s defiance against removal threat is no surprise to those who know her. Lisa cook, the first black woman to serve as a Federal Reserve governor, is used to a fight. She has the scars on her eyebrow and leg to prove it.

White House removes secret service protection for Harris.

These are just four headline stories from pages 4 and 5 of the Financial Times Weekend section of the 30th August 2025. They represent the gullibility, stupidity, bullying, pettiness and general cupidity of Donald Trump. Three of which traits - bullying, pettiness and cupidity - he shares with Vladimir Putin. This is not a very different approach to stories emanating from the United States, in relation to its President, taken by quite a number of newspapers around the world. Although the articles do not specifically state that Trump is a stupid gullible petty bully, it is how, from my narrow point of view, I chose to interpret the articles.  How much further afield must I go in order to develop a more equitable and considered point of view? I am clearly in a rut.

There is however a lengthy article about Trump’s interventions in the US financial system and in leading companies. He has apparently received little pushback and the article’s title is A calculated silence. Not being an economist or having any real understanding of financial systems or the ‘market’, I am not in a position to comment with any authority, but a couple of paragraphs in the piece caught my attention.

Joel Griffith, a senior fellow at Advancing American Freedom, wrote on X that the “partial nationalisation of Intel reflects disturbing reality: economic policy is increasingly a mix of ‘internationalist’ socialism on the Left and ‘nationalist’ socialism on the so called ‘New Right’.”

Ilya Somin, the law professor at George Mason, says that Trump has moved the Republican Party from being a relatively conservative, generally free market party, to be more like a European rightwing nationalist party that supports big government.
“Nationalist have a long history of these sorts of interventionist policies that have a lot in common with sort of leftwing socialist policies” he says.

An interesting equation of x=y seems to be the formula; but, whilst the article indicates that most American business leaders claim that “the independence of the Fed is absolutely critical” and “playing around with the Fed can often have adverse consequences”, the big beautiful tax breaks have made their own financial position far more secure, and therefor richer, and so self interest keeps their mouths shut, hence the title A calculated silence.

Like Trump, they couldn't care less about what they leave behind them. The collective short term hedonism of this mob is typical as well as despicable. Trump’s interventions in all areas are already having adverse consequences, but it appears that for a few dollars more, the billionaires of the United Takes of America will stay silent and not intervene in his interventions.

A VIEW FROM THE PAST

It was pointed out to me by Iain Mitchell that Peter Ustinov’s comments made about Senator Joseph  McCarthy in 1954 would apply almost directly to Donald Trump. The passage below is from Ustinov’s autobiography Dear Me. Ustinov was, at the time, in California, and was  cast in a film We’re No Angels together with Humphrey Bogart and Aldo Ray. During filming in 1954, he was asked by the BBC to make comment on the Army-McCarthy hearings which took place in Washingtonm DC between April and June 1954. It was also at that time on the 4th June 1954 that Mr Ustinov’s daughter Pavla was born in Santa Monica. Ustinov recorded the piece in a studio at Don Lee Mutual Broadcasting. It is well worth a read and does indeed strike a cord.

Demagogues have come and gone over the years, and display much the same narcissistic and obsessive nature. How they manage to bamboozle so many people who ought to know better is the mystery. You will also note, in the final paragraph, the view Mr Ustinov held of the United States at the time. That view is still held by many, but it is disappearing at the rate of knots, in the current climate, as  the windows are closing up.

CHAT AND PERPLEXITY

I am perplexed by a number of things. I have been listening to Stewart Lee’s audio essay What Happened to Counter Culture on the Artworks program on Radio 4. Interesting stuff particularly as one was living through the period and a lot of one’s own evolution occurred during that time. I have also been reading an essay in Harper’s Magazine by Meghan O’Gieblyn under the banner Easy Chair entitled None the Wiser. It is essentially about the technological development and ramifications of Artificial Intelligence and where do we go from here? It is a perspective on what we define as knowledge and what we believe to be wisdom. Not at all the same thing. 

I have in past blogs commented on levels of education particularly as it concerns voters and representatives in both the United Kingdom and the United States. I can understand why the likes of Trump love the poorly educated, but I am perplexed how people with higher education, law degrees and the like, can be taken in by this obviously distorted individual. To have a politically conservative approach to governing is one thing and a perfectly acceptable point of view, just as a more liberal stance, leaning towards greater welfare support,  is acceptable. That is not to say that conservatives have less concern for the welfare of the citizen, just a different approach to providing it. What is of concern is the extreme and more fanatical approach to government by decree or executive order. 

The rule of the state is founded on the rule of law which is a consensus of the citizens who have developed the laws by which we live. It is partly through legislation and partly through what became established common practice arrived at over years of interaction between peoples. “We hold these truths to be self evident….” begins the second paragraph of the declaration of independence. The idea that all are equal and have certain unalienable rights is paramount. “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organising its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.” is what follows. That is the basis of the contract between the citizens and the representatives they have elected to organise and maintain the stability and existence of the state. 

None of this is too difficult to understand. It is counter extremist and quite clear that the consent of the governed is required to govern and no arbitrary decree, however dressed up to be ‘in the public interest’,  is acceptable. So I am concerned that individuals who profess to abide by the democratic constitutions of their countries, behave in ways that are completely outside the scope of their stated pledge to uphold the values of their constitutions and thereby their constituents. 
 

I come back to our history of counter culture and the current cultural move towards repression, isolation and nationalism,  and the concepts of Artificial Intelligence. Why is it that people such as Margaret Thatcher and Donald Trump, who apparently, according to polls, are unpopular and disapproved of, are elected and re-elected to office? In my own wanderings about, I have rarely come across people who are in favour of these people as rulers of any kind. They put themselves forward as the saviours of democracy but are anything but that. Their actions are completely contrary to conservative concepts of small government. They seek to rule by decree and what they tell the people ‘What the people want’. How often has one heard the phrase “The British people are fed up with, etc.” or “The American people want, etc.” coming out the mouths of the likes of Nigel Farage, Margery Taylor Green, Lauren Boebert, Zia Yusuf to name but a few, without the slightest care about what the people actually want. 

As to the types of demonstrations we saw in the late 1960’s against the war in Vietnam, there have been protests against the Israeli Hamas conflict as well as Ukraine/Russia, but nothing like the fervour of 1968. On top of which we now have legislation brought in by a Tory government limiting  and criminalising political activity on the streets. The current labour government sees fit to let that legislation stand and organisations that are protesting against violence are being proscribed as terrorist organisations. What is that about?

As to AI I have learned new terms. Computer software programs such as Chat GPT, Perplexity AI and Canva have developed over the years, through the accumulation of data and the development of algorithms. These algorithms (a process or set of rules to be followed in calculations or other problem-solving operations, especially by a computer) use the now vast availability of data in order to spill out the desired solution, text or advice, based on the situation fed in by the user. There are however situations which are referred to as ‘edge cases’,  ‘a problem or situation that arises at the extreme or boundary of a system's normal operating parameters, often involving unexpected or rare inputs or conditions. These rare scenarios can expose critical weaknesses, and addressing them is crucial for ensuring the robustness, security, and overall reliability of software and other systems.’

I wonder  just what the continental congress would have made of ChatGPT. “On June 11, 1776, the Congress appointed the Committee of Five (John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, Robert R Livingston and Roger Sherman) to draft and present the Declaration of Independence”. Thomas Jefferson was the principle writer, but just what information would the committee have fed into the computer to produce that document at the time? What algorithm would have been deployed? Or would the situation have been classified as an edge case? And what about Magna Carta or the French Declaration of the Rights of Man in 1789? Do these events exceed normal operating parameters?

So I remain perplexed. So far as I can see there are at present no normal operating parameters in government, not even of any kind. Would Trump. Netanyahu, Putin and the rest of the world's leaders be willing to sit down and use whatever necessary algorithm it might take to print out a permanent peaceful solution to the current case that is the violence being perpetrated round the world and in particular the Middle East and Middle Europe? They show no signs of even making an attempt beyond the photo opportunity. All the rest is just chat without the GPT.

THIS IS INSANITY AT LARGE

What is going on with President Trump? The bizarre press conference in the Oval Office with the President of FIFA and the display of a photograph of Putin and himself in Anchorage, accompanied by a very strange babble of words, makes one believe this man is clearly not well. It also gives the impression that the meeting with European Leaders and President Zelensky never happened at all. The rest of the crap about Washington and saving the world is extraordinary. 

This together with the release of a completely inexplicable interview on tape of Ms Maxwell exonerating Trump from any inappropriate behaviour (despite the previous recording of Trump’s locker room talk-evidence of his real character), stating there is no list of ‘clients’ and Epstein was  killed, as well as claiming the photograph of Prince Andrew and Ms Giuffre is a fake, gives one pause. In addition the FBI and Justice Department’s raids on the properties of John Bolton, his ex National Security adviser and once US ambassador to the UN, gives one even greater pause. 

All these things happening in such a short space of time makes one almost believe in conspiracy theories. It all seems like a massive piece of orchestrated propaganda to absolve Trump of any wrongdoing and begin his vindictive attacks on people who know full well the extent of his criminality. In the meantime he babbles on about the World Cup (something he knows nothing about) and his interior decorating skills with gold.

Are people really expected to believe the nonsense of a person convicted on the evidence of a multiple number of victims? Or, have all these people conspired against Ms Maxwell? Did Trump meet Putin in Alaska for a photo opportunity to exchange autographs and get an invite to the World Cup, despite Russia being banned? Are Mr Bolton’s revelations about Trump actually classified material and thus criminal activity? What on earth is going on? 

The multiplicity of contrasting and disparate events all coming together in one onslaught is bewildering.  It makes one’s head spin at the surreal aspect of it all. 

Trump is without doubt a madman. All these events expose his flailing about to distract and exonerate him in the eyes of his MAGA supporters, who may no longer be buying it. His lies about bringing peace to India and Pakistan have clearly been contradicted by India and Pakistan. It had nothing to do with him. Has he actually done any of the things he claims? His 24 hours have long past. He’s had 5160 hrs and nothing has happened, save a deterioration of democracy in the United States on a massive scale. 

This press conference is an insanity of garbage supported by sycophants and anyone willing to suck up to Trump as they think it is a way of breaking through the crap. It actually isn’t, it just encourages the deranged behaviour. This is an appalling video in my view. Respect ? My God how can these deranged people actually be allowed in the oval office? I despair for America.

ANOTHER VIEW

What’s next? The treatment of Donald Trump by the European leaders is a puzzle. The general consensus appears to be to treat him like an educationally challenged child or perhaps a rather difficult mental patient. Do not disagree with him to prevent violent outbursts in retaliation and constantly offer supportive words whilst cajoling him to understand the actual substance of the problems he claims to be able to control. He has a very simplistic view of the world and because he is President of the United States, a country that still has the strongest economy as well as having the largest military arsenal, it is best not to antagonise him in any way. It is imperative to keep him on side and so what happened over the last couple of days was, in effect, an intervention. 

After Mr Trump’s meeting with Mr Putin he announced his next step as meeting with Mr Zelensky. The European leaders quickly realised that to allow Mr. Zelensky to go alone to face Mr Trump in his bunker - sorry I mean, oval office, together with his usual sycophantic entourage and onside public relations press, it would be essential to stage manage an intervention to gently steer Trump in a more acceptable understanding of the middle European conflict.

This has possibly been successful. Mr Trump was clearly flattered by the arrival of so many world leaders to seek his advice and assistance. Mr Zelensky wore a more appropriate outfit and started with thank you’s galore, as well as a letter from his wife addressed to Mrs Trump. An entire scenario had clearly been developed by the western nations, together with Mr Zelensky,  to gently push Mr Trump to make the necessary phone call to Mr Putin, to let him know that the supposed results of the Anchorage public relations exercise had been slightly altered. Whether anything will actually come of this is another matter.

Mr Putin has shown no sign whatsoever that he has any intention of stopping his aggressive invasion plans of Ukraine, regardless of what he might have said to Mr Trump. Will that reality finally sink into Mr Trump’s brain? The continued gentle pressure from the European allies is obviously necessary. My own view is that the European nations, collectively, are just as powerful as the United States. So far a I can tell, and from what we have seen in past   conflicts in which they have taken part,  the training and effectiveness of the British armed forces is as good as any, if not better than most. I am sure other European military are well qualified. Nonetheless, it does appears that so far as actual military hardware is concerned, nothing reaches the quantity of high performance killing machinery than that held by the United States. Indeed, given the numbers of guns just in private hands, there is a significant arsenal.  At the present time then, they are a country to keep on side. Hence the egg shell treatment of the psychotic narcissist that is Mr Trump. 

There are now developing umpteen discussion scenarios to be tried to reach an agreement should the meeting between Messrs Zelensky, Putin and Trump occur - including not really allowing Mr Trump to be alone in the room, where he can be controlled by Mr Putin. There will be have to be a babysitter of some kind to keep him in check. That will have to involve one of the more astute European leaders. Tis a pity Angela Merkel is no longer around as she has experience with Putin and his attempts to rattle her with his dogs, and with Trump and his petty narcissistic behaviour. 

Whatever the developing situation, the momentum and pressure on Mr Trump is essential. If Mr Putin just stonewalls, as he just might, then further serious economic sanctions must be followed through. Maybe at some point the Russian people will have had enough and break through to overwhelm the officials who keep them in check. It would only take one percent of the population to effect that change, according to various old Russian revolutionaries. 

There have been a variety of views expressed about the Anchorage event as well as the White House follow on with Zelensky and Co. Trump has since babbled away on Fox News and his barbie doll press secretary had whined and moaned about how badly he is being treated by the press and leftists generally and how no other person in the universe had stopped as many wars as he has, and how grateful we should all be that he is President of the United States of America. You note how she always says ‘United States of America’ and never just ‘United States’. Nonetheless, no amount of exaggeration and lies, however often repeated, will make them true. Trump acts and performs like a Putin stooge. There is no other way to put it. He would love to have the same type of control over the United States of America that Putin has over Greater Russia. 

Mr Trump has recently added, as an afterthought, that Mr Putin may not want peace. In which case, where is the displeasure and imposition of new sanctions and hard talk? What happened to the magic of 24 hrs and the single phone call? What was the boast “He wants to do it for me, as crazy as that sounds, he’ll do it for me”? It’s crazy because it is a fantasy swimming around Trump’s limited brain. 

We cannot escape, at least till 2028, that a narcissistic infantile blowhard is the leader of the free world. The western alliance is unfortunately in the difficult position of having to cope with him, because he has been voted into office and is being propped up by a Congress of the United States that has abrogated all responsibility of proper governance, under the rule of law, as proscribed by the constitution of the United States of America, with its checks and balances being completely ignored. There is no one in the executive branch of the United States of America with whom the European leadership can deal with on a professional and adult basis. It has all be reduced to egg shell diplomacy. So, we are all left in limbo and there appears to be no end, unless the 2026 elections in November changes the makeup of congress. Good luck with that.

THE CALL OF THE WILD

It is extraordinary how some scenes in films can effectively summarise and predict events. The Godfather is an instance in point. A serious definitive meeting is set up for Michael (Al Pacino) to meet with Sollozzo (Al Lettieri), the arch enemy, with whom he is supposedly meant to make a deal. A gun is to be hidden in the toilet of the restaurant where they will meet. When the meeting place is determined Sonny (James Caan) makes a comment: 

 

A meeting, hopefully definitive, was set up in Anchorage, Alaska, for Trump to meet with Putin accompanied by their translators to set up a ceasefire in Ukraine. The actual meeting became a three on three, but nonetheless Mr Trump had forewarned that if a ceasefire was not happening on the day, he would not be happy. Trump was going to be strong  and  ‘tell him like it is’. There may not have been any gun planted in the toilet, but whatever, Trump came out with his dick in his hand and left his balls behind as well.  

Not only was there no deal of any kind achieved, but no further sanctions were even mentioned. What Trump wanted was for Putin to say that there would have been no war if Trump had been President at the time he invaded. You could see on Putin’s face, when he said it, that he was almost reluctant to say the words, but he did. Which is probably all that Trump wanted from the meeting. As to the rest of the world, who cares. Oh, and by the way, it’s up to Zelenskyy to make a deal. 

All Trump really wanted was some validation to his claim that had he been President instead of Biden, the invasion would have never happened. Mr Putin however has not claimed he would never ever have invaded Ukraine, but perhaps only waited for Trump to get over himself as president. The sham and shame of the Alaska spectacle is no joking matter. If the Nato leaders do not come back with some strong condemnation of the fiasco in the north and insist on further action and sanctions being taken, than the conflicts around the world are more than likely to continue ad infinitum.

As to my prediction yesterday, god knows what flattery Putin may have lavished on the Three Stooges from the United States. Perhaps he agreed to buy Trump’s bit coins, or pay them vast sums of money, or even blackmailed them is some way. If ever there was a farce mob type meeting, this was it.

In any event, sadly, I was not too far off the mark in my prediction of what the likely result might be. How sad is that?

ANCHORAGE

It is now 14:30 GMT on Friday 15th August 2025. A meeting is about to take place in Alaska, scheduled to begin at 19:30 GMT, between Mr Trump and Mr Putin. The expectations of a significant outcome are being downplayed by the participants themselves. The hopes of many are intertwined with these low expectations, but with a modicum of optimism towards a resolution of the conflict between the Russians and the Ukraine.

I feel somehow obliged to put in my own predictions as to the likely outcome of the meeting, which Mr Trump has forewarned that, if it goes badly it will be over very quickly. and he will walk away leaving serious sanctions behind him.

Be that as it may, I do not think that Mr Putin will allow that to happen, and he will drag out the meeting if only to give a show of his willingness to talk, even if nothing is achieved. For him it is a PR exercise and a proof of his ability to string Mr Trump along. He might likely begin with flattery and, like Mr Netanyahu, produce a letter he will claim to have posted to the Nobel Committee nominating Mr Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize. He will carry on stroking the President’s ego, and Mr Trump will puff up his chest and prune away, basking in his own perceived glory. 

The end result will actually amount to nothing, but Mr Trump will magnanimously claim that Mr Putin in in effect a peace loving man, caught up in circumstances beyond his control, trying to save the Russian/Ukrainian peoples from their fascist controllers. Additionally he will disparage Mr Zelensky for refusing to accept ceding territory to poor Mr Putin.

Of course I am probably wrong and far too pessimistic about the dealings between Trump and Putin, and I have very bad knowledge of higher international affairs and the complexities of diplomacy. I have, in fact, no experience in this field, not even of any kind; however,  I would be the perfect assistant negotiator judging by Mr Trump’s current cabinet appointments. Indeed, Mr Trump’s method of appointments is rather like Lady Bracknell’s:

LADY BRACKNELL: A very good age to be married at. I have always been of the opinion that a man who desires to get married should know either everything or nothing. Which do you know?
JACK: (after some hesitation) I know nothing, Lady Bracknell.
LADY BRACKNELL: I am pleased to hear it. I do not approve of anything that tampers with natural ignorance. Ignorance is like a delicate exotic fruit; touch it and the bloom is gone. The whole theory of modern education is radically unsound.

He does love the poorly educated.

I will post this now and come back after the meeting, no doubt to hang my head in shame for failing to properly assess the proceedings.

CAN YOU SEE STARS

Perhaps my last entry relating to Mr Lammy and Mr Starmer, regarding their relationships with Messrs Trump and Vance was bordering on intolerance. Is my view narrow minded or simple antipathy? I find it difficult to see the President and his second as anything but hard line fanatics with an infantile mindset on power. They seem to have a comic book relationship with the world around them. Indeed, the success of comic book character related films, indicates the fascination and skewed view American citizens have towards good and evil. The attraction to dominance, power and order, leaning towards fanatical nationalism, is seen as good. Any left leaning soft liberalism is weak and, therefore, evil.

So what about the British Prime Minister and his Foreign Secretary? It is a good thing to try to influence people away from the fanatical or hard line approach to diplomacy. In fact, it is a good thing to try to influence people towards simple diplomacy, to stand up for integrity, human rights and decency. I presume that is what Messrs Lammy and Starmer are trying to achieve, in their own way, in the face of the chaotic and whimsical infantile behaviour of Trump and his cohorts. It would be a considerable achievement were it possible.  Who am I to criticise them for attempting what I consider to be impossible? My intolerance of Trump, Vance et al, should not be extended to Starmer et al. and I should perhaps give them a break for making the effort. I feel that somehow my assessment that their attempts are feeble and pathetic, and bound to fail, is being intolerant and lacking in empathy. My abhorrence of the Trump regime is such that I have become narrow minded, and I find any attempt at reconciliation with such a brutish, venal and crass governance, difficult to take in. 

What is going on in Gaza, Ukraine, indeed in many parts of the world is a disgrace. I was recently sent a copy of copy of a letter sent by a young man, just 27 years old, to his parents back in the UK. He had recently been released from a Japanese Prisoner of War camp in 1945. He was sitting on the deck of the USS Santee heading for Manilla on the 8th September 1945, just one month after Hiroshima. 

If ever there was inspiration for humanity, despite the circumstances, read this letter.. I have been given permission by the family to post it on this blog. I also post a photo of the original transcription presumably done sometime in the 1940/50’s.  The letter does contain what is now considered a derogatory epithet, which I think one can forgive in the circumstances. If this does not give you hope, I don’t know what could.

I am very much indebted to the Piper family for giving me pemisson to share it. 

 COPY


On the U.S.S. SANTEE Somewhere around Manilla
                  

        Sat. 8th Sept. 1945.


To my sainted and respected parents, re-establishing communication, your second son, alive and quite definitely kicking, David Towry. From the hands of the Nips to the hands of the U.S. Navy who have shaved me all over and cleaned me up. Proper old lag. I am tremendously happy for
 a little while anyway though the world does not seem to be. Bless you my Olds and thank you very much for having me.
         How do you do? Last communication I have is a p.c. dated Sept '44 which I got last March. It said "All well". I trust it still is so though I have had bad dreams on that score. We reach Manilla
 tomorrow and I hope to get a cable through and an answer.. But what a time! 3  years almost  exactly. I trust you know by now that I am alive at least.                                                                                                                                        I have not the vaguest idea where to begin. I hope sometime to draw a long screed in comparative detail of the life of a P.O.W. As it is I have to hand in this letter tonight and it’s 4 p.m. now  I will draw up the barest outline for you.
DEC. 1941 Sailed from Bombay to Singapore.
4th to 5th Jan. 1942 Landed Singapore, train to Macassor (?). Then fell back on Moar, 19th Jan. Batt, pretty well exterminated. (as far as I know 4 officers survived). Followed 1 month dodging about behind the Nips until 12th Feb. (about), when I and another officer got shang-haied by some Malays and handed over to the Nips. On the 15th Feb. Singapore fell and I was dropped on the 5th Field Regt. A.A. who nursed me very generously for the first months of captivity. I was pretty sick then with some form of blood poisoning with jungle sores and a small bullet in my thigh.
OCT. 1942 Moved from Changi the big prison camp in Singapore by ship to Formosa.  A most unpleasant voyage.
NOVEMBER 1942 Arrived Theihoko In Formosa or Taiwan in a new camp, remained here until Aug. 1943, getting pretty hungry and not very fit.
AUG. 1943 Move of all officers from Theihoko to Shirakawa about 7 miles outside Kago, three quarters the way down the island to a so-called Officers Camp. Here were concentrated all the captured Allied senior officers up to Maj. Gens.,Brigs and Cols. as common as pennies. I stayed here until 28 Aug. 1945 when we moved back to Theihoko and thence 10 days (two days?) ago into the arms of the U.S. Navy, whose hospitality is almost embarrassing.
                         I was fairly lucky at Shirakawa, especially up to the beginning of the year. I held a “staff job”, Librarian, which means I did not have to  go out and work on the farm, initially stayed pretty fit though thin until Jan. 1945. The generals were flown out in Aug. 1944 to Manchuria. The Cols. followed them in Oct. by boat, and the last big move from the island was in Feb. 1945 when they cleared all fit officers and hundreds of men from the island. Bombing was fairly heavy by then.
After the Cols went in Oct. the camp was turned into a "sick camp". We received the debris from all the men's camps, 4 in number, and shocking debris it was - mine accidents, but mainly malnutrition, beri-beri, chronic diarrhoea and shear starvation   Terrifying. Food got bad and went worse and worse until the surrender, when the Nips turned round and showered Food on us - meat and rice and sweets, sugar etc. Hunger was the dominating factor of the whole 3 and a half years. Men talked and thought of little else. Other major difficulties were beatings up, though officers did not get badly beaten up as a rule after the lst year and a half, but the men did; Also lack of news, particularly in the last year; lack of mail - none at all till ‘44.
                     I was sick when the last draft left in Feb. this year, so I stayed. Whether it was luck, or not I don't know yet but I rather guess so. Japan was nobody's business by all accounts. I had the Hell of a packet this year - started malaria last Xmas; paratyphoid Jan-March, and then in June as near as touch got pipped on the post with bacillary dysentry. Bless the Red X; they filled me up with blood plasma and I made it . Convalescence after it was a bit tricky because the food was so bad. In July - Aug. when I should have been putting on weight, I lost about 10 lbs. We were weighed regularly every month, and our last one was on 21st Aug. when I touched 8st. 6 lbs. That afternoon the post- surrender Nips generosity began. I put on over a stone in a fortnight,  an I’ll  be as fat as a turkey in a couple of months.  Voila, c’est fini.
If I tired to put you any more in the picture than that, it would run into volumes. To describe the emotional reactions would be so dangerous, because l'm too close to the whole dam  schemozzle to be able to get any true perspective on it. I’ve seen a lot of most unpleasant incidents, but I abhor, the atrocity stories. They get  no-one anywhere, you never do by taking anything out of context and then postulating it as the whole truth and nothing but the truth. And another  thing is that to be anywhere near fair, and to understand the Nips, which must be done, we must consider them by their own standards. God knows they have enough to answer for, even by that. But they are poor, pitiably pour. I mean pitiably. They kept us just below the starvation line, but often they were only just above it themselves. That is not an apology for them, but I have been scared stiff by the pettiness and rancour and complete loss of any dignity  at all in the few broadcasts I have heard go far. It strikes me that everyone’s hands are pretty mucky. But then, or course, I was never beaten up badly.
                 It’s an extremely unpleasant topic, which is one of the reasons I have not given you the details more. For  the im juiste Present is so marvellous, free with all the space of sea and sky.
Beautiful food, tremendous kindness to us of all ranks in this carrier..Tomorrow Manilla, the day after God knows, but going home, and at peace. Lord, it's worth waiting for. Life at the moment for me is a lovely chaos. Striking matches, smoking American cigarettes, being clean, having new clothes, cleaning teeth with a real toothbrush, and Colgate's -its terrific. A prospect of new books to be read, new films, plays, papers best above all the prospect of doing something, of going places and doing things. It has its terrors though. The decisions I shall have to make very soon will be vital and decisive - jobs etc. And I have scarcely made any decision for 3 years. Its bewildering, I regret to state that I don't know what to do.  Cambridge, I fear, is off. Even that is not definite, but to face facts, 1 have deteriorated physically and mentally, much much slower in the uptake.  There were no facilities  at all for following  up anything in my line of study - we had quite a good fiction - library, but little else. I have had no inspiration regarding things medieval at all.  And I've forgotten most I ever knew. We all suffered badly from malnutrition memory failing, and loss of concentration. The Drs, were inclined to think that it was only passing, and would be relieved  by beef steaks and fish. Time will prove. I wrote a certain amount, mostly verse, but the desire for that seems to have been killed by dysentry - that’s a shocking disease. I had a touch of jaundice in 1943, and I thought that was depressing- but dysentry - cor. Anyway out with your bright ideas for my Future Career. How I have a Future its a terrifying feeling..
                 I hope to be able to cable you directly from Manilla. and perhaps get an answer.  I've written to Anne c/o-New Delhi - which is a trifle vague, but all I know from your last card is that she was there lest Sept: I'm glad you like her to much. Words are not adequate to begin to explain what she has meant to me.  Please send my love to Michael. I suppose I’ll  be saluting him. I suppose he’s out in this part at the world. I trust he’s alright. And Philip? But I feel a bit sick when I start thinking about the people I once knew, knowing not who is alive and who is dead. I move very cautiously among them.
But I'm pretty selfish at the moment,  and take the moment for the moment. Eat, drink and be happy and optimistic, (Drink's not what it might be though. The U.S.N’s one failing seems to be that its dry). But I could live on the coffee alone, it's superb.
                     Here I must leave it  for the moment and get this Post. I’ll be writing again at length very soon I hope. But I hope more to be seeing you very soon. Still at No,10? I've been Astonishingly homesick at times.
                    It was worth waiting for, this release.  Its unimaginable, and I find it hard to believe even how, to grasp the possibilities, like a young bird learning, to fIy. I pray you have both survived the ordeal too; unhurt a much as possible. I guess you have not had much fun.
Look after yourselves, both of you..
                    My address is very vague for the moment. They recommend last service address, which I suppose is 3/9 Jats Malaya, but I think it would be a good idea to add “late P.O.W in Taiwan” to that. However, I hope to have cabled you a more reliable address than that  before this reaches you.. One thing I do hope, is to get out of the Army as quickly as possible.  And my back pay. The things I’ve got to do. Tomorrow and tomorrow.
                   Well my Olds, a la prochaine,  wite und witer. I must go and eat. Eating, marvellous -bread and butter - its incredible.  - Washing with scented soap. There’s no end to the wonders. Tonight I sleep on the Flight deck, with all the sea and the stars and the roosting aeroplanes.             
And tomorrow Manilla. Give my love to any and all you like to the Hasso’s, the Tyndalls, to Win and Hilda and Rob and Ronnie and Richard, and whole damn  lot. .I’ve got enough to go round twice, even after you‘ve knocked off your wallop, which is a very great deal.
Bless me, bless you. I see stars.
              Yours again
               

 

JUST ANOTHER DAY

Once again Jonathan Freedland has hit the spot. I urge you to read his piece from Friday 8th August 2025 in the Guardian at:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/aug/08/hope-summer-gloom-escapism?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

There are areas of life that have medicinal benefits for our mental health. Not looking at or reading the news and putting in ear plugs is sometimes one’s ‘go to’ strategy to alleviating that ever present sinking feeling that there is something very wrong going on. It is not so much displacement activity or escapism, as clocking in to the fact that there are other things happening despite the surrounding gloom. A gathering of people to observe or take part in a sporting event or entertainment production is just as important as attending a demonstration against some inhuman atrocity or in support of simple human rights. The extraordinary surprise is that sporting events or leisure activity can still manage to take place. The fact that Ukrainians can appear at track and athletic meets, tennis tournaments and musical venues is an instance in point. 

What is even more surreal is the image of our Foreign Minister David Lammy happily fishing alongside Vice President of the United States J.D. Vance on the banks of an English river. Whilst it is laudable that such opposites can find common ground, it is tragic that a ‘Labour Party’ activist, who professes allegiance to a socialist ethic and welfare state politics, can have no influence, not even of any kind, over a right wing nationalist who supports a psychotic narcissist, an Israeli war monger wanted by the International Criminal Court, and a Russian dictator’s desire to claim sovereignty over another country and likewise wanted by the ICC.  Does Mr Lammy really think that flattery and bonhomie will change the course of conduct of a Donald Trump through Vance?

In addition, how can a British Prime Minister listen to Mr Trump denigrating one of his friends and colleagues in the Labour Party, and simply smile and say “Actually he’s a friend of mine”, without pointing out the atrocious and criminal friends and colleagues admired by Mr Trump. Of course that changes nothing. The fact that Mr Netanyahu can just brush aside world condemnation just because he has Mr Trump’s ear and support is an outrage. What influence Great Britain and the EU?

I am sorry to bring back gloom and doom and I refer you once again to the contemplation by Mr Freedland of joyous human activity. It is far better for you.

ABOUT REFUGEES

This is in response to yesterday’s comments concerning refugees seeking asylum. Celia pointed out to me that my observations about their perceptions of what they were facing, or stirring up, in the countries in which they seek refuge, were perhaps a bit right wing and anti immigration. I had not intended for my comments to be anti-refugee or to cast aspersions on their character or knowledge or intentions. I confess I am perplexed by the problem and I was rather trying to find some explanation to clarify my own thoughts about the problems arising from the seemingly endless stream of displaced people seeking places to settle, and find peace. As much as I would like to think they should be welcomed with open arms, without hesitation, to be able to do so is not that easy. 

In the early stages of conflicts, like the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the crackdown on Syrian citizens by Assad, the Taliban in Afghanistan, etc. most western countries welcomed the people uprooted by these violent and horrific outbursts, and who were, somehow, able to get away, and arrive at their borders. They were not seen as illegal immigrants but as victims and genuine refugees. They were invited in and offered refuge by many local citizens. It was seen as the right thing to do. That has not changed. What has changed are the numbers of people affected by the length and depth of the devastation created by these conflicts, as well as depravations across the world. 

Initially refugee camps were set up in neighbouring countries where conflicts occurred. They soon become overcrowded, insecure, unhealthy and cruel. Laudable as they are, no amount of ‘foreign aid programs’ and ‘Médecins Sans Frontières’ can resolve the problems and issues generated by the simple numbers of victims created by conflict. Rather than remain in such settings, people’s instinct is to try to move back home, but if that home has been obliterated or impossible to reconstruct, people will move on to find a better place, somewhere they can survive and actually have a life worth living. These are subjective as well as objective facts I have gleaned from current events I have witnessed and been made aware of. 

The problem then arises of where to go and how to get there. Hence, the long and dangerous journeys across land and seas to western European countries and North America which display wealth and prosperity throughout the world with endless streams of advertising in visual media. These countries however, are no longer so willing to take people in as they once were. Immigration has become a complex political and social problem. In particular, the economic costs, community and cultural differences have caused protests both for and against the acceptance of migrants. These events have produced extremes of violence, racism and bigotry in some countries, as well as the putting up of barriers at borders. All of the European nations, including the United Kingdom have been affected. 

In the United States, the maligning of immigrants has reached a vindictive malignancy fuelled by an unconscionable President. He continues to label all immigrants as violent criminals, sexual predators and mentally deficient. A gestapo clone agency, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement, a.k.a. ICE,  are rounding up people for ad hoc deportation. Foreign aid programs have been cut. The claims that not a single person has crossed over the southern border with Mexico since Trump’s return to power, abound. A clearly false claim but nonetheless popular with certain sections of the public. So much for  “Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free”.

In the United Kingdom the slogan of “Stop the Boats” is still hovering over the newish Labour Government and the housing of illegal immigrants has caused ructions. The new Reform Party has fuelled the discontents and the Conservative Party still fluctuates over its failed and now abandoned Rwanda program. The current Government is in difficulties as it has yet to find a successful solution to a seemingly unsolvable problem. Even with the cooperation of the French authorities and the emphasis on getting at the groups providing the boats and landing on the beaches, it has not been able to stop the flow. For a number of reasons it has implied that it is essential for this Labour Government to succeed where the previous government has failed, or it will no longer remain in power. That appears to be the mood of the electorate. Perhaps I am wrong in that assessment.

The only way to stop the boats, is to provide those refugees with a reason not to want or need to risk the journey in the first place. Help them create a homeland they do not need or want to abandon. That means help in preventing the carnage from happening in the first place. That necessitates closer ties between nations, not nationalist separation and divisions and not supporting dictatorships of any kind. Easily said and by rights should be easily done. Surely by now, in the twenty first century, with all the intelligence, artificial and actual, available to the world’s leaders, where almost no area is without a fixed or roving camera, some sanity and rational thought can prevail. 

THEY COULD HAVE BEEN YELLOW

In our bedroom there are three windows, over which hang 3 white venetian blinds, 120cm x 155cm,  from IKEA. They have been in situ for some time. When we first arrived, there were curtain rods from which hung blue, I believe, linen curtains,  which divided in the middle and were pulled either side of the window to let the light in. They had been left by the previous owner.  When we arrived here, some 23 years ago, this room was used as a store room for most of our furniture from our previous dwelling. There are three bedrooms on different levels and we started out using the back bedroom on the middle level. There were occasions when we shifted to the first level bedroom, next to the living room, which was initially used as an office/sitting room/library. Over time, the office was moved up to the loft area,  the furniture was spread around the flat, the store room became our bedroom and the sitting room became just that, with bookshelves housing  the remaining books we held on to. The majority of our books have been given away to a charity shop. It has taken some time for the present configuration to emerge, although it now seems as if it has always been what it has become. That is clearly not the case. 

I am lying on our bed, looking at the three windows, behind the television at the end of the bed (yet another different configuration from when this room became our bedroom) and wondering why it is that I have the feeling I have always been what I have become, when that is clearly not the case. Looking back at the various incarnations of my life, or should I say, thinking about or recalling past events, I consider what changes have taken place. Incidents scroll across my brain, presumably emerging from the hippocampus in the limbic system of said brain. The grey matter with which I was born is the same grey matter which currently occupies the same cranium.  Nothing about that has changed and I can presume that what was ‘then’ is what ‘is now’. But that cannot possibly be the case. The accumulation of incidents have crowded this life and somehow shaped what is known as character in the person I am now. Yet I wonder whether the cumulative effect of these incidents has had any real effect on the nature and personality with which I was born. 

I like to think that I am better behaved than I was or have been. Or is that merely a social adjustment as a result of greater interaction with people that comes with age? My mother was of the view that I was always what I was from birth. Perhaps she came to this view from her parental efforts, in that, no matter how hard she tried to correct the behaviour with which she disapproved, she failed. Yet, I have to confess, that it is probably from my parents that I lean to the left of the political spectrum and have no religious beliefs, not even of any kind, other than in the rule of law. 

Be that as it may, it appears to me that positive character changes are extremely slow to occur, if they happen at all, and if they do, it does not seem to the person concerned that there has been any change at all. As to what one can view as negative character changes, they are very quickly rationalised as having never happened at all. One sees this in particular in the likes of the present United States administration and its supporters. The volte-face is a major character component of the Trumpian entourage, as well as the instant indignation and counter attack at any perceived criticism. This is, I believe, a classic behavioural pattern of the spoilt child syndrome which persists in the mirror stage of development and from which some individuals never grow out of.  It also appears to be something some people admire or are crassly prepared to use to gain position and power through flattery. 

Now why is it that my idle thinking comes back to the question of the way of the world, particularly in the United States? There is much to contemplate in the UK and other areas of the globe. A possible explanation is that, in the last 80 years no other President of the United States has made his presence felt in the same way as Mr Trump. Ever since first becoming president in 2016 and the lead up from 2015, he has garnered acolytes and supporters and moulded them into a sort of cult following. He has also become one of the most despicable men on the planet. He has no honour and no code of conduct, save a love of himself. The power of the office of President of the United States has never been made more apparent to the entire world because of its misuse, abuse and corruption by the current incumbent. We would all like to see the back of him. We will all be glad to be rid of him. 

In the meantime, people are being displaced all over the world. They  seek refuge and support from the western democracies. They are told that there are countries that will provide them with the security and quality of life they dream of. Because of the propaganda and reputation put out by these countries, as safe havens and guardians of freedom and democracy, they are easily exploited by  con men and gangsters who, for a fee, will provide them with an entry to paradise. They do not need much coaxing. 

One of the tragedies is that they do not truly comprehend  the problems they are causing their prospective hosts from whom they seek asylum.  Having possibly spent their life savings for a ticket to that paradise, they do not understand why countries that are apparently so rich and bountiful cannot afford to welcome them with open arms.  They are not aware of the already 354,000 homeless local citizens in the United Kingdom or the 770,000 homeless Americans. All they seek is asylum and refuge. They are not aware of the already crowded local queue. They do not understand the resentment they cause by being seen as trying to jump that queue. It does not take much for bigotry and racism to raise its head. 

My anxieties over the conflicts and horror of Gaza, Ukraine and other areas of disaster, are nothing compared to those living it; yet, it affects my health and well being nonetheless. Displacement activity is one way of dealing with it, so I contemplate the Venetian blinds on the windows in my bedroom and wonder whether I’m right about the blue curtains. They might have been yellow.

WHY BOTHER ?

There is so much comment on the World Wide Webb that is critical of the current American President and, by extension, the United States in general, that it is impossible to make additional comment of one’s own. According to the statistics on my blog, in the last 7 days there have been 2651  views in the Americas, of which 1890 were in Brazil; and in the far east there have been 706 views, of which 603 have been in Vietnam. It is difficult, from the available stats, to distinguish just which postings they are looking at, but since this is a recent phenomenon, I assume they are looking at the more current entries, but perhaps not. Herewith list of stats:

The fact is that these figures are actually quite low when you consider the hundreds of thousands who watch YouTube entries from MeidasTouch, The Young Turks, Jack Cocchiarella, Brian Tyler Cohen, Occupy Democrats, The Daily Show etc.. on a daily basis. Indeed, my figures are extremely low and I suspect that the odd fan in South America may have looked at a variety of postings within the last week, which would mean that the actual number of people reading the stuff would be significantly lower than the 1890. So one has to ask oneself, why bother? I can’t even begin to compare my writing to the flapping of a butterfly’s wings in the Amazon causing a hurricane in the Gulf of Mexico. Indeed it doesn’t even get off the ground. It would have been nice though. 

So I ask myself again, why bother? I suppose I do it to let off a bit of steam and keep the brain reasonably active in the face of aging disintegration. I am extremely grateful to the friends who have graciously made kind and encouraging comments about my musings, as well as putting up with my sending annoying  emails about the postings. I do apologise if I have caused any nuisance. In any event, should any reader wish to, they can always log on to: https://fbuffnstuff.blogspot.com/   now and again. 

As to the current state of affairs, the insanity of the middle east and middle Europe continues. Mr Trump continues to cheat on his golf courses, which he loves to promote. His ridiculous claims as peacemaker, continue to be publicised. His  relationships with Netanyahu and Putin are clear evidence of his hypocrisy. He would rather support dictatorial power than any kind of democracy or simple humanity. The sham of his repeated statements about too many people dying as against his continued actual support of the killers, rather than shutting them down, is despicable. They will not stop. Given what has been going on, any action taken by the IDF or the Israeli Prime Minister is like a recruitment drive for Hamas. They are not defeating Hamas, they are creating converts. The terror and horror they are visiting on Palestinians in Gaza will come back to haunt them in the future. Many young survivors who have witnessed their parents and siblings dying beside them will not forget. They too will be murmuring ‘never again’. That is the legacy, the tragedy and shame of the power hungry, both past and present, who  prowl the globe. 

AGING PROBLEMS

 “Le problème avec l’âge” is the google French translation of the phrase ‘the problem with advancing years’ as well as ‘the problem with advancing age’, ‘the problem with age’ and ‘the problem with the age’. There are many nuances that can be applied to the word ‘age’ in both languages. The meaning of the word depends, of course on,  context. The English seems a bit more specific because of the adjective, transitive verb or definite article applied to it. The French language is more  reliant on nuance and context, although the French like to think it is more precise than English. Many French persons believe, incorrectly, that their language has more words than English, which is why it is more reliant on nuance and context. 

A frenchman can say “C’est l’âge” with a meaningful look or gesture and be given a response “Et oui. Voilà” accompanied by similar look or gesture. An English person can make a like remark, but it might not have the same Gallic gesture or knowing look to go with it. The English will or course have an implied irony, where necessary, and it can often be accompanied by an imitative gallic shrug. Indeed, the English know quite a lot about nuance. Perhaps even more so than the French, even although the word itself is French. 

But I digress from ‘le problème avec l’âge’. There are things happening today, in the second score of the twenty first century, that defy reason. It is as if a more thorough knowledge and accessibility  to  history, and the tribulations of the past, had no relevance at all. We are flooded with endless film, video, documentaries and explorations about the past as never before, yet what lessons have been learned, and what ameliorating decisions have been put in place. The problems of nationhood seem entirely unsolvable, and the finer aspects of civilisation seem unobtainable. Bigotry, prejudice, racism, inequality and isolationism seem to be the bedrock of human behaviour rather than being ground into dust as they should have been long ago. 

Considering humans have been on the planet for at least 100,000 years and the neolithic revolution (a.k.a. the First Agricultural Revolution, which was the transition form hunting and gathering to one of agriculture and settlement) was over 10,000 years ago in the Middle East of all places, one would have thought conflict in that region by now would be extinct. Herewith map of area concerned relating to 7500 BC.  So conflict not resolved for 9,500 years? What is wrong with these people? And for that matter the so called allies and peacemakers of the current age? If anything, we seem to have grown further apart. 

Current documentaries relating to research on the “American People”, in particular those of a very conservative and nationalistic disposition, make it clear that there is a great divide. It is all the sadder because so many young Americans have adopted a very narrow mindset and embraced biblical teaching. Their parents claim they are teaching their children to think for themselves, when in reality they are effectively brainwashing them, all the while claiming that the political left, and democrats in particular, are trying to brainwash them. Many are being home-schooled  and as a result are poorly educated. They are the very corps of the Maga movement. Their minds are seriously locked in to some form of overweening christianity, placing more emphasis on the bible all the while claiming the authority of the United States Constitution, which they have probably never actually read.  The divisions are so deep that I do not think the United States will actually survive and may well perish from the earth, and like Yugoslavia will dissipate into separate regions, creating a variety of sovereignties. Watching the various ridiculous separatist arguments in the US Congress on YouTube is an instance in point. The slavish adherence to protecting Mr Trump and his insanity in the face of his obvious criminality is  beyond any rational explanation. No amount of reality or actual facts have any meaning anymore. All one can say is “C’est l’âge, voilà”

Speaking of age, the deterioration of one’s physical being is difficult to take in. On the one hand, some of us deteriorate mentally whilst remaining more physically able, whilst for others it is the reverse. My physical capacity is dwindling, although I fail to fully take it in. I feel mentally able to carry on doing the same things but the body somehow does not always respond as I feel it should. My own fault I am sure, for failing to do the required exercise to keep the physicality up to scratch. So I ponder on the nature of nuance and the various meanings of words. Voilà, c’est tout. (Try to imagine the gallic shrug)

NEW COMMENT FROM BOB IN CALIFORNIA

Ed,

For what it’s worth, we’ve been watching Trump from here, and we have a few observations:

He’s not driven by policy

He is driven by hate

He’s not a good person at heart

He an evil person, who cares not about others

He seeks power

He will do wherever his whim takes him

He never makes a mistake

He deflects questions about mistakes and reflects blame on others

He is disdainful toward his followers

He has no problem hurting the voters who put him in office

He doesn’t know the laws applicable to his actions

He does whatever he wants

He is lazy

He surrounds himself with “yes” men and women, whom he calls “loyal”

He knows little of the world around him

He surrounds himself with incompetents, who are charged with doing his job as he plays golf and watches TV most of the time

He choses to surround himself with ethically and morally challenged people who reflect his own personal flaws

He is untrustworthy, but he demands that others trust him

He is incapable of comprehending many of the results of his actions

He is declining in mental capacity

He makes statements that are primarily false

He explains, when challenged, with “word salad”, many times saying the opposite things in a single answer 

We have 3 1/2 years left of this disaster, and no one knows the final result. Congress, with Republican majorities in both houses are too scared or overwhelmed by Trump to contest almost anything he does. His cabinet, consisting of many of Fox “News” personalities, is unlikely to have enough people who would vote to remove him pursuant to the 25th Amendment. And, his VP, who would replace him, is a person of little integrity and mental ability, who is in the pocket of a ".com” right wing billionaire.

 

Right now, the only bulwark against this is the courts. 

Yep, it’s as bad as it looks.

Bob

WHEN WAS AMERICA LAST GREAT?

There are a lot of people who have expressed views about the terrible damage the Trump administration  - more often now referred to as the Trump Regime -  is causing to the United States and consequently the entire world. I include the Senator of the French Parliament, Claude Malhuret from his speech to the Parliament on Tuesday the 4th March 2025 and several other European politicians; articles by columnists Johnathan Freedland,  Nesrine Malik and others in the Guardian; a variety of United States YouTubers, Meidastouch, Young Turks, Brian Tyler Cohen and others; as well as United States Senators Adam Schiff and Bernie Sanders; congressional Representatives Ocasio-Cortez and Jamie Raskin; and from MSNBC, Rachel Maddow, Lawrence O’Donnell and Jan Psaki. The list is very extensive. Polls have indicated that the approval rating for the President is at an all time low, and yet the Republican Party in America has somehow maintained a hold on power with an Al Capone clone as leader.  The parallels with Bertolt Brecht’s 1941 play The Resistible Rise of Arturo Ui are irresistible. 

The hypocrisy of Trump and his followers is, without doubt, beyond brazen. His attack on a journalist asking questions about the decimation of weather services and the Federal Emergency Management Agency in relation to the Texas flooding, calling the journalist an evil person, when he, himself, had made false claims and criticisms about federal assistance  during hurricanes  in Florida and the Carolinas as well as fires in Los Angeles, was  outrageous and venal. He clearly did not see the irony, which is typical of his colossal narcissistic behaviour.

When most of the western powers ponder the question of regime change in Iran, they should be discussing more seriously the matter of regime change in the United States. Instead of kowtowing  to Trumpism they should be seeking to expunge it. Enough is enough. 

It was pointed out to me today by Oliver Cotton, that no-one has yet asked Mr Trump when was America Great. He claims to want to make America great again, but has never actually stated when it was last great from his point of view. This same would apply to his followers. When do they think America stopped being great? What will actually bring it  back to that greatness? Trump would have turned 16 in the middle of 1962, his mid teens; probably a junior in high school and in the penultimate year of John F Kennedy’s presidency.  Was that his great year, or was it 1968 with the comeback of Richard Nixon, when he would have been 22 and eligible to vote for the first time in a presidential election?

There is a lot of speculation about what era Trump sees as great America. The period just after World War Two, during which time the United States was the sole nuclear power, could be on his mind.  This did not last very long, but, nonetheless the Eisenhower years were economically successful. The dollar was the king of currencies at the time. The reality is that one has no idea what era Trump has in mind as he keeps saying whatever he does is the greatest achievement of all time, by a lot. Indeed, one has to agree that a convicted felon and adjudicated sex offender being elected president is the greatest con that has ever been achieved by any grifter. 
 
That however is the state of the United States, a country in complete disarray about where it wants to be in the world.  The leadership controlled by amateur incompetence in chaos. Also, there is no prospective leader on the horizon for either of the two main parties. The republican party may find itself in difficulties after the midterm elections of 2026, but the democrats must become a more cohesive group, and begin now to make clear headway against the Trump movement and break through the mendacity of Maga.  

BULLIES GALORE - WHEN WILL THEY BE BROUGHT TO BOOK?

Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize?  Brown nosing has reached a new peak. The entire world surely must be able to see through the scale of flattery accorded to Mr Trump by those who interact with him seeking a positive result in their favour. Nato leaders and now Mr Netanyahu’s cringing letters to the Nobel Committee, copies of which he ceremoniously presented to Mr Trump, all the while putting a ring in the presidential nose and shoving his own prime ministerial nose further up the presidential posterior. A remarkable feat of physical dexterity. Mr Trump preens with delight. His orange glow matches perfectly with Benjamin’s brown snout. Their meeting is reminiscent of the scene between Johnny Rocco played by Edward G Robinson and Ziggy played by Mark Lawrence in Key Largo (1948). One is selling counterfeit currency to the other. “Ya know something, I bet inside a two years they’re gonna bring back prohibition”. So here we have no change, one selling counterfeit currency to the other. Costa Gaza is still on their minds. A sleazy felon and an internationally indicted criminal/corrupt politician, laughing like movie gangsters over the spoils of war. Where is our Humphrey Bogart to take them out for a ride?

What Trump and Netanyahu are proposing is completely illegal and contrary to international law. They appear not to care one way or the other. Both countries seem to have withdrawn from the rule of law in any form, just as Mr Putin has in respect of the Russian State. How the Nobel Committee could have anything to do with such miscreants is beyond me as they are beyond the pale. The bullying of the Palestinian people has surely gone on long enough.  To expect an entire population to just move to neighbouring states or to be confined to an area practically equivalent to a concentration camp is an outrage. What has happened to the United Nations and to the leaders of the other western democracies that they are silent? When will they take a stand in this affair? 

A RAMBLING RANT ABOUT NEWS AND INFORMATION

In the light of what I posted last Saturday, I confess to be exasperated by the apparent  lack of understanding by journalist of how representational government works. I say ‘apparent’ because they seem to impose extraordinary expectations and powers on people they interview who hold political office, and who, somehow, should have magic wands to impose their policies on everyone else. Nor do I comprehend why government ministers allow themselves to be questioned as if they were actually able to perform these feats, whilst also being at odds, or even at war, with their party. The party’s executive branch is chosen to effectively put into action the policies of the party as a whole. That is presumably what they were all elected to office, but no one has a magic wand. 

Wanting a particular policy to be put into action is an aspiration, and getting it approved can be extremely difficult. Even if it doesn’t happen as expected, that is not necessarily a failure. A set back, maybe, but a forward movement nonetheless. If the policies then prove ineffective and fail to improve the lot of the electorate, then the electorate will find alternative representation. It’s not so much about being combative as being able to improve the situation. At least that’s what it should be. Having impossible and inappropriate expectations does not help and the world of Harry Potter is a fiction. 

Given the nature and manner in which this country seems to cling to a first past the post method of elections, and the diverse, multicultural and differently able composition of the electorate, is it any wonder that there are such different political views regardless of political affiliations and parties?We have seen and heard the alleged disputes between prominent members of all political parties. Journalists and pundits just love to comment and stir the pot when such differences occur, as if they’ve discovered some strange and devastating anomaly of “rifts within the party!!”. But that is the nature of party politics in a democracy. Rigidity, conformity and enforced discipline is what leads to dictatorship. 

The very word ‘uniformity’ screams out its problematic meanings, particularly when applied to party politics. It not only exposes rigidity but even goes so far as to impose a dress code. A recognisable uniform that emboldens and implies a kind of menacing solidarity. Brown shirts, black shirts, red bandanas, any number of chosen identifiers of rigidity, conformity and singularity of thought. That is not what democracy is about. Yes, some situations require uniformity, but strictly for purposes of identification and avoiding confusion. The military, law enforcement, team games, nurses, medical staff and any number of other organisations that, of necessity, must be easily identifiable. 

Political democracy is not like that. There are no nations without diversity, whether physical, mental or indeed aspirational. There is a general feeling that conflict is unnecessary or at the very least avoidable.  Causing harm is frowned upon and allowing harm is equally reprehensible. The differences are how we deal with it. We have to deal with disability, poverty, homelessness, illness and any number of misfortunes. As citizens we expect our elected representatives to find the right balance of compassion, empathy, order and economic acuity. In a reasonably informed society the pressure on representatives is heavy, and rightly so. Finding solutions to the problems of humanity is ever present and expectations run high. We all have opinions.

The problem of American influence, however, is causing some consternation. What has changed beyond all recognition is the almost free availability of transmitting information. Facts and opinions flow out at breakneck speed. Sadly, populist opinion seems to have overrun the new information highway. The vulnerable, who are generally poorly educated and resentful (particularly in America) have latched on to people who have promised them a cure for all their ills. Nothing of the sort will be accomplished as it would seem most representatives (again, particularly in America) are gangsters and opportunists. In fact, what has happened is an explosion of violence, supported by fanatics and fraudsters. Division is the modus vivendi of most countries. Some have barely maintained any sort of civility. This is evidenced by the introduction of more repressive legislation on law enforcement issues, which may come back to haunt the parties that instituted the legislation in the first place. 

The economic disparity between high income, middle income and low income have widened as has the geography of wealth in the United States. On the whole, it would appear that the States with the lowest incomes favour the Republican Party and by extension Donald Trump. The North East and West coasts with seemingly greater income and education seem to favour the Democratic Party. However, those with greatest wealth are favoured by the Trump Administration. 

The world is indeed turned upside down. Whereas from the late 18th through to the early 20th century, revolution began with the deprived  and oppressed. Now, these same groups seem to favour dictatorships. I am struggling for some kind of understanding of where we are. I am confused. 

I confess the voices I hear almost daily, in terms of news, are from the BBC. Their analysis and opinions have a certain style. They claim objectivity and impartiality. There is a view that their approach to interviews is a sort of cross examination for the benefit and interest of the listener. I do not entirely agree. It is a combative style of interview and more often than not there are far too many interruptions. I do not object to interruptions per se, but it is far too often an attempt to push the interviewee towards a specific answer (trying to put words in the mouth of the person concerned as if seeking to score points?) because of time constraints imposed by producers and programers. Most European politicians are quite used  to this style of interview; however, the Americans find it impossible to deal with and usually take umbrage.  Trump supporters and acolytes take grave exception and become offensive in the same manner as their hero who instantly attacks journalists for disrespect and fakery, no matter what the question. 

Trump advisors have been particularly sharp and rude to Victoria Derbyshire and Sarah Montague. I do find these two a bit worrying myself, as I feel they are both a bit toeing the line. Far too supporting of an establishment point of view, despite their so called impartiality. I suppose it’s just the nature of the job. There is an element of arrogance that goes with it. Chris Mason, like Laura Kuenssberg before him, exhibits the same attitude as Political Editor. Does it go with the territory? They mean to be objective, but clearly are not. In my view, they often confuse analysis with opinion, although I’m sure they would be offended by the suggestion. 

Relations between government and the press can be difficult, particularly in democratic governments. Government Press secretaries have quite a history. They can be outright propagandist or genuinely concerned with providing information  about the intentions of the government and the leaders movements and appointments. There is  the Joseph Goebbels school of propagandist at the extreme end. Further down the scale, so far as the UK is concerned, not that many press secretaries are that well known. We have had a few with very firm views with the likes of Alastair Campbell for Tony Blair, Bernard Ingham for Margaret Thatcher, Gus O’Donnell for John Major and Allegra Stratton for Boris Johnson. They are a long way from Goebbels. However, Donald Trump’s choices, Sarah Huckabee-Sanders, Kayleigh McEnany and Karoline Leavitt are pretty close to the German orator. Their willingness to spout outrageous falsehoods is breathtaking.  The reverence they appear to hold for Mr Trump is extraordinary. Nothing is beyond them. 

We all know that, in any event, a free press is essential. A relationship between the press and  government is equally important.  It is from this relationship that we get our information about the workings of a democratic government. It provides us with what we need to know. Just how good journalist are at doing it can vary. How far we trust the information we receive varies with how much we trust the source of that information.  Journalists and presenters have a lot to answer for. I continue to trust that my trust in the BBC is not misplaced. Or is it?