DISMAY AND UPSET FROM SW8

Je suis navré,  ou bien, consterné. I am upset and dismayed. Sentiments I am sure are shared by many people, arising from the difficulties listening to political interviews can cause. I do understand the need of journalists to push back on statements made by politicians in order for them to better state their case, or to reveal whether or not they have a case to present at all. It is certainly a style of examination we have become accustomed to and which British politicians, in any event, have come to expect and should be prepared for. 

American politicians resent such questioning as they see it as an attack on their integrity or competence and consequently accuse the interviewer of fake news and either threaten to walk away from the interview or resort to insults and attack the questioners intelligence. That is clearly stupid and displays a clear lack of intelligence and competence on their part, being unable to deal with difficult questions. 

But I digress. The reason I am dismayed is that I sometimes have the impression that journalists seek to ask questions to score some point or attempt to effectively put words into the mouth of the interviewee to show how clever they are at their job. It is a fine line between a so called investigative or aggressive cross examination, and simply trying to obtain an explanation as to why a certain policy or action is being put forward, and to give an indication as to why an opposing view is incorrect or harmful. There is a difference between asking a politician to explain why their policies are beneficial and more effective than what is being proposed by others, who may or may not be in opposition, and attempting to push for evidence of division and rancour. Questions appear at times to be put solely to irritate and disconcert the interviewee. It would seem, creating the explosive moment is more important than obtaining information. That is entertainment, not journalism. Not every interview is meant to be the Jerry Springer Show, although President Trump, treats everything like the Jerry Springer Show.

Be that as it may, I am not sure it is becoming a bit like that on the BBC. I know much is to do with time and fitting in all the items an editor wishes to cover on the particular programs scheduled time slot. A specific number of minutes per item, and things must move on, so the interruptions are sometimes necessary from the program editor’s point of view. Indeed, the producer or editor might be rushing the interviewer to get on with it and move to the next question, but it is the interruptions which are the problem and particularly the frequency and manner of the interruptions.

There is push and there is push. A great big shove is sometimes too much. I could not listen to an interview with the Prime Minister this morning because of the constant interruptions and length of the questions. I was hearing more from the journalist than the Prime Minister. Sometimes journalist forget the they are not the news. Because they talk a lot during a show, they seem to feel that have to keep talking instead of listening. Indeed, it prevents the audience from listening. I could not listen to the interview because there was too much of the journalist. I was plainly irritated, upset and dismayed,  particularly because I have respect for the journalist in question. On this occasion he lost it as far as I was concerned.. Get a grip.Nick Robinson. 

The shame of it is that the Labour Party is going through a bit of a crisis right now, and it is important to hear what the leader of the Party has to say.  I can read comment about his speech and I can agree or disagree with opinion about his speech, I don’t mind him being asked difficult questions, but I would like to hear the full answer before he’s pushed on to something else, especially when the interview is  for some 20 minutes, most of which seemed to be taken up by the interviewer rather than the interviewee. I may be wrong about that, but that its what it felt like. Hence my dismay. Indeed, the interview itself was treated like an advert, with snippets of it broadcast followed by ‘You can hear the whole of the interview at 10 past 8”. This happened several times during the program, a sort of preview of things to come. Why is that necessary? Do the producers really think it’s necessary to preview interviews to keep the listener tuned in? I don’t get it. Is the average radio 4  listener of the Today program so lacking in attention span? Are we really becoming like America? Please let it not be so, because I turned off the interview before it finished. I was not so much informed as irritated. Just too much "journalist'.

A WORD ABOUT COMMON KNOWLEDGE

One of the best 42 minutes I have spent this month was listening to a Start the Week broadcast on Radio 4, presented by Adam Rutherford on 29 September 2025 - herewith is link:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m002k37y

It is definitely worth spending 42 minutes of your time.  

Quite apart from that the world we currently live in seems to have taken a rather large step backward. The old adage (a word that would come under the category of common knowledge) of moving two steps forward and one step backward, to indicate slow progress, no longer applies. Since the advent of Trump and Putin as buddies, and others of their ilk we have moved backwards at least a millennium to the dark ages. To paraphrase Ernest Borgnine’s comment about John Wayne in response to the movie Brokeback Mountain in 2006, I would say “If Petrarch were alive today he’d be turning over in is grave”. You may recall the film was an American western portraying gay cowboys. In any event there are very few indications that the 21st century is anything like a renaissance, which is what it should be. 

The skills are literally at our fingertips. With smart phones we can find any reference and communicate in any language on earth with simple translation software. We can buy and sell our wares at the tap of a screen. We can organise transport and delivery without leaving our homes or not as the case may be. The freedom that technology has brought us is phenomenal. What we appear to lack is the education and the knowledge that should go with it. It has also opened itself up to scams and frauds of all kinds and proliferated mendacious behaviour on a grand scale.

The control of that technology and the abuse it can allow is frightening, and because of the poorly educated and gullible it is being used to further ignorance rather than knowledge and consequently it is taking us backward to a dark age of dictatorships, nationalism and isolationist regimes. We have a chance to move things forward in the most remarkable ways, yet the world seems intent on pissing it all away by catering to the whims of the likes of Trump, Putin, Netanyahu and any other narcissistic political scoundrels you care to name.  

A QUICK NOTE

As each day goes by the insanity of Trump spreads around the globe like a miasmic mist. There appears to be no freshener at hand to make it go away. His address to the United Nations Assembly has clearly left the world stupefied. The continuing roundup of citizens by the ICE gestapo is camouflaged by face masks and ludicrous diversions, such as his advice on the prevention of autism, alongside his colossally incompetent Health Secretary. He is operating without restraint and is now pushing full steam with attacks on former associates who have called him out. His cohorts in the Department of Justice, FBI  and the Department of Defence are allowing him free reign. The Congress of the United States and the Supreme Court appear unwilling to assert their constitutional duty. The astonishing number of young citizens who appear to worship him through the likes of Charlie Kirk, display an astonishing ignorance and inability to appreciate what is actually happening to their country. They are like the Eloi to Trumpian Morlocks as predicted by H.G. Wells.

This is not going unnoticed by the rest of the world. As the danger grows or become more apparent, the United States should be forcefully admonished by other world leaders. Who can say when they will develop the gumption to  move away from placating Trump to outright slapping him down. It is an imperative. Action must be taken. His embarrassing display before the UN must surely provide the proof of his unfitness to govern or be anywhere near the seat of power. He is a disgrace not just to the United States but to the entire world.

Oddly there is a wonderful AI generated comment produced in the guise of the late Christopher Hitchens which is worth a listen: 

BRAVO LADIES

Every now and again someone makes a speech that stands out and starts to make the rounds. On this occasion it was the President of Slovenia Nataša Pirc Musar. Part of her wikipedia entry reads as follows:

“Pirc Musar studied law at the University of Ljubljana’s's Faculty of Law in 1992, where Marko Ilešič, later a judge at the European Court of Justice, was her supervisor. In 1997, she passed the bar exam, and later started working at the Radio-Television Slovenia, where she worked for six years as a journalist and host of the central news program. Later, for five years, she was the presenter of the central news program 24UR on the commercial television channel POP TV. In 2001, she became the head of the corporate communication department at Aktiva Group, where her husband  Aleš Musar worked.
Pirc Musar completed additional training at CNN in Atlanta, Georgia. She then continued her studies for two semesters at the University of Salford in England, during which she did internships at the BBC, Granada TV, Sky News, Reuters TV and Border TV.  In 2015 she obtained a PhD at the University of Vienna's Faculty of Law with a dissertation on a fair balance between privacy rights and the freedom of information.”

It should be noted that her studies in law began at the age of 24 and she obtained her doctorate 23 years later at the age of 47. Her life has been one of continuous employment as well as education. This speech has had over 1.4 millions views so far on YouTube. I’m sure it will make its way around the world.

 

CAN WE GET THE PARTY STARTED?

How to react to the Reform Party in the UK and to Nigel Farage in particular? This is a question I hinted at in my blog about Keir Starmer’s current response to criticism and presumed concerns of the British public as expressed by Mr Farage and Ms Badenoch. The emphasis being put on “stopping the boats” as the foremost concern of the British public is misplaced. Yes, it is a problem, and yes, it has been given priority coverage in the media because of the activities of Tommy Robinson; but, that is not a reason for allowing these displays of bigotry and racism to dictate the government’s agenda on dealing with the problem. Nor should the Prime Minister be seen to be taking advice from the likes of Trump about using the armed services. Should the navy be shooting them out of the water? How insane is that? 

The boats are one problem and the encouragement of right wing nationalism is another. They both have to be dealt with, but not by allowing the right wing to dictate the schedule. Once again Jonathan Freedland, in the Guardian, has stated the case in a piece entitled “Trump has dragged the US to the abyss and Nigel Farage would do the same to Britain. Here’s how to stop him”. I urge you to read the article which can be found at:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/sep/19/donald-trump-us-abyss-nigel-farage-britain

I realise that the Reform party seems to be gathering an extraordinary amount of support in certain polls and as a result has garnered more publicity in the media, but that is mere puff. It does not actually represent the majority of the British public’s view. At least I don’t believe it. That may be my problem; however, it is clearly not something that can be ignored and the current Labour government must find an effective way of dealing with it, and not scrabble around like headless chickens. Surely there must be informed political strategists within the party that can find a way. If there are not, then we are in serious trouble.

I guess I am just an elderly man, now only fit for the older persons assessment unit at Guy’s Hospital. Whatever political strategies I may have contemplated or even promoted are long past my use by date. I never really put them into practice in any event. I am a sideline critic. Nonetheless, speaking from the spectator’s stand is what remains. I have never been asked to participate in a poll. I have never been part of a sought after percentage of a point of view, but I can still be a minute part of the conversation.

Some You Gov polls to contemplate from August 2024:

It would seem that the main concerns all round are the environment, feminism, liberalism and socialism. Most britons it would appear do not favour Reform, or indeed the Conservative Party any longer. One would have thought that would offer some measure of relief for the government and they could react accordingly. Why are they therefore obsessed by what Farage thinks or does, and why does the media have such a fixation about asking what the Government thinks of Reform’s popularity in the polls? What polls are favouring the Reform Party? Why is Nigel Farage as the next Prime Minister even a question? It’s clearly ludicrous. It must be coming from that over 65 classification. But no one I know over 65 even thinks of him as a serious politician. He is a blowhard and would be Trumpian stooge. He invents statistics and lies about ‘the British people’s needs and wants’. It’s what he wants, not the British people. Why is there no real pushback in the media? 

In effect, enough is enough. Is it not time to draw a line and get on with reality and show some direction of thought? If one must respond to the polls, why not respond to ones that matter? All I have left is questions, like what on earth are Corbyn and Sultana up to? It’s clearly no way to get the party started. Put away the champagne, this is not the time.

WHOSE DRIVING ?

I happened upon the Nicky Campbell talk-in show this morning. I have not tuned in before ‘but owing to a mistaken touch on my iPhone, I found myself listening to a few people talking about the shows theme question “Do you welcome president Trump”. Apparently an American resident in London and chair of some Republicans Party group in the UK was on, but I did not hear from her. She was apparently listening to the callers’ comments. 

Most of what I heard was anti Trump, for all the usual reasons (mainly convicted felon, sex offender, liar, Epstein, narcissist etc..) but as to the matter of his imperial style welcome, there were mixed feelings. The fact of Trumps position as President of the United States must be accepted. The fact that because of his office he is able to affect world affairs, in particular economics, must be accepted. The manner in which he performs the office of President is distinctly his own and because of his extraordinary - shall we say - eccentricity, to have any dealings with him requires a specific kind of diplomacy. He is a bully and spoiled infant with a limited attention span, living behind a wall of sycophants and protectors. Not at all an easy subject.

The modern relationship between the United Kingdom and the United States, eventually established by Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill from 1941, is a strong one. It has been difficult for any British Prime Minister to navigate its waverings over the last 80 plus years. It was most significant during the days of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher. Bush and Blair had their moments. But Trump and anyone is a whole different ball game.  We can only hope that Mr Starmer and, now Ms Cooper are up to it. The extraordinary occurrence and coincidence that the Epstein affair should also involve a British ambassador and member of the Royal family is hardly supportive of that relationship, but it is what it is. Helpful or unhelpful in dealing with Trump? Who knows? But it is inevitable that he visit the United Kingdom as President, just as he will other nations. 

Keir Starmer appears to be a straightforward barrister with liberal leanings. In his professional life he has gone out of his way to do pro bono legal good works, defend human rights and generally represent his clients to the best of his ability. He has always sought to obtain his clients’ desired result. As to politics, he seems to be dealing with his office of Prime Minister much as he would as Head of Chambers. He has advisers and secretaries as his clerks, running his schedule and those of his cabinet of fellow KCs and Juniors, dispensing briefs, and relying on their expert opinions. I am sure he wishes his current client, the British people, will get their desired result.

Unfortunately the British electorate are not only clients, but they are also the prosecution, judge and jury as well as the victim. The Government is not a set of chambers, and more unfortunately for Mr Starmer, he, by contrast, is also the defendant who must represent himself. It is often quoted that Abraham Lincoln said “A man who defends himself has a fool for a client”. In Mr Starmer’s case, he has no choice. Is he a fool for having taken on the job? Were we fools to allow him to be put in office? Why would anyone consciously choose to be a defendant is such a case? The prospective indictment is extensive: 

R -v- Prime Minister
Failed to:
    1- Improve the NHS, 
    2- Improve the defence of the realm, 
        3- Improve social care  
    4- improve the economy, 
    5- Improve the environment, 
    6- Stop criminality
    7- Control Immigration    
    8- Establish world peace
The list of offences goes on and on.

The expectations of the public and the electorate are extensive. Achieving any of these goals is an arduous task. Promising to achieve them is a grave responsibility. Making the attempt is at least laudable. Promising them, knowing full well you cannot possibly deliver, or having no intention of making good on the promises, is the crime. 

Representative leadership in a democracy is as difficult as it gets. One cannot give the feeling that one is adrift. Although I am a great supporter of proportional representation, I pause at the possibility of right wing parties having a greater say in government legislation. That is my prejudice; however, proper representative democratic government is essential. There  must also be positive leadership. There must be a feeling of a sense of direction. 

It is difficult to describe. It is not so much strong leadership as decisive positivity. Strong leadership smacks of dictatorship, whereas decisive strikes a more collective note. It’s a kind of “I know where I’m going and I think you’d like to come with me, because I’m pretty sure we’ll all be better off”, That may be a bit wishy washy, but it starts with the positive knowledge of which way to go to make things better. It also allows for flexibility. Compromise is inevitable, but can be positive as it helps move things forward.  

Being the Prime Minister of today’s Britain is not an easy task. Being pulled in a variety of directions relating to certain peoples impossible demands and the barrage of ludicrous attitudes staged by various so called ‘influencers’ and alleged leaders in opposition, is not at all just a mater of simple compromise. It is however difficult to ignore. Perhaps a more robust stance in one’s own agenda and dismissing some of the shower of critical comment from the isolationist right wing would be better than trying to take it all into account. I don’t know the answer but something is required to stop me and some of my friends (who agree) from feeling adrift. Nothing is actually completely out of control but it does sometime feel as if it’s about to be.

Getting back to Nicky Campbell’s question “Do you welcome president Trump?” For my part, no, and I never have. I still agree with Stevie Wonder’s comment before the 2016 Presidential election:
“Voting for Trump, is like asking me to drive a car.”

WHERE DO YOU COME FROM?

Continuing on the matter of the assassination of Charles Kirk, I would refer you to the column of Jonathan Freedland in the Guardian dated Friday 12th September 2025:  
 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/sep/12/us-era-political-violence-donald-trump-charlie-kirk
 

It is worth reading.  It presents an excellent perspective of what appears to be happening in the United States today. Some might say, it is what it has always been, a country built on and used to violence, in complete contradiction of what it purports to be, the dominant civilised free society on the planet. It claims to be the greatest country in the world endorsed by God. 

I was a citizen of the United States for 33 years and I have now been a British citizen for 50 years.  As to civilised free society, I believe I made the better choice 50 years ago. I can explain. I was living in Southern California in the 1950’s, initially in West Hollywood and then Beverly Hills. The weather was glorious and life was reasonably carefree and just as glorious as the weather. I was growing up in what was essentially a well to do white society that was, in reality, a million miles away from the problems faced by the rest of the world. Opinions were divided and the predominant political views favoured the Republican party. I can recall the 1952 presidential election when ‘I like Ike’ posters and buttons where just about everywhere. 

Our house was practically the only house exhibiting a vote for Stevenson poster. It was also the only house on South Rodeo Drive to have cucumbers pickling in jars on the window sill to benefit from the sun. Be that as it may, the political conventions did not engender any violence or animosity between democrats and republicans. The  joint  bogey men  were ‘communists’. Liberal thinking and some ‘social concerns’ were not seen as ‘the end of society as we know it’. There was a mutual respect and civility expressed towards others with different points of view, just so long as they did not express views that were ‘too far left’, whatever that meant. 

Between 1953 and 1956 my family returned to France, during which time communist scare was in full bloom in the United States, and indeed atomic spies were exposed, including Ethel and Julius Rosenberg who were executed for espionage. In fact we left for Europe from New York on the Queen Elizabeth White Star Line at the end of June 1953. The Rosenbergs were executed on the 19th June 1953. I can remember, once we had arrived in France and I started back at school, riding my bike and seeing posters on walls and lamppost depicting Eisenhower looking like Nosferatu leaning over the figures of Julius and Ethel. There were also other posters refereeing to Ike as an assassin.

We returned to California in August of 1956 and I registered at Beverly Hills High School. A world of its own. In 1954 segregation had been ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, yet in 1957  nine black students were prevented from attending Little Rock Central High School, in Arkansas by the then Governor Orval Faubus. This set off riots and violence against integration, despite President Eisenhower’s attempts at peaceful intervention. The unrest and brutal treatment of black people were all over the television news. The Civil Rights movement had truly begun in the southern states and by 1961 the Freedom Rides were in full swing, again plastered all over the television news. But these events were 1500 miles away from Beverly Hills. It was as if they were happening in another country. The south however was riddled with racial violence since before the civil war. This was nothing new and although it was happening before our eyes, for most white people it did not seem to carry the sense of urgency that it should have. Los Angeles carried on in its own way and the laid-back southern Californians with it. In the early sixties with the coming of John F Kennedy on the scene, with his brother Bobby, things grew more confrontational. The problems mouldering beneath were beginning to surface. I left the United States in July of 1965. I was sitting at a Cafe in Paris, near the Opera reading the Harold Tribune and its report on the Watts Riots in Los Angeles. The explosion I left behind me was astounding. I somehow found it difficult to process riots in Los Angeles on this scale, but of course I was late to appreciate the severity of what had been going on around me all the time. California was indeed a dream. 

I arrived in the UK in November of 1965. I found a bedsit in Northwick House on the corner of St John’s Wood Road and Maida Vale, at £5 a week which was not cheap, being equivalent of £123 per week today. I soon moved to slightly cheaper quarters at £3 a week not far away in Warwick Ave. just north of the tube station. The bus fare on the Number 6 bus to the Haymarket was 8d. I kept shillings for the meters to light and heat my room, and pennies and threepenny bits for  the geyser in the bathroom to get hot water. All very quaint and fun, a long way from the comforts of South Rodeo Drive. I was always apprehensive that I would set the entire place alight because of the rather dangerous electric fire heating the room and possibly causing a sever gas explosion lighting the geyser. I thought if I didn’t strike a match quick enough to light the pilot light it would all blow up. Believe it or not, London was not exactly a modern city with up to date facilities. The variety of plugs needed for just one room was extraordinary. 

Racism on the other hand was very up front. The Evening Standard, which had loads of adverts to find rooms to let, overtly advertised “Europeans only need apply” and although that sort of advert was soon deemed illegal, landlords were still making choices. They still do. Nonetheless there was a certain kind of politeness about it all It wasn’t just “Fuck off” it was “Please, fuck off”. I once had a prospective landlady say to me, “You’re not English, are you?”, “No, I’m American”, “Oh well, I suppose none the worse for that”. On the whole however, it was the 60’s, and swinging London was in full swing. So far as I was concerned it knocked Beverly Hills out of the park. It was an absolutely fab time. 

By now, of course, the United States was fully gearing up to Vietnam. I had turned 21 a month before President Kennedy was shot in Dallas Texas. The first and only American election I voted in was the 1964 general election between Lyndon Johnson and Barry Goldwater.  Even then, although there was a great deal of civil unrest, there was a degree of civility between the different political parties. Of course as the war in Vietnam took hold and University student unrest grew the situation changed dramatically. By 1968 and the Tet Offensive in January of that year the world was again on edge. Mr Dubcek was embroiled in the Prague spring. The May ‘evenements’ on the streets of Paris and indeed Grosvernor Square in London were momentous. 

As for myself, between November 1965 and May 1968, I was having a lovely time living, learning and growing up as a young adult in London. Prime Minister Harold Wilson and the Labour Party were in Government. The world cup atmosphere of 1966 was very happy. Imagine a labour socialist government running the country, A far cry from the United States. The General Election of 1966 was a revelation. I went to a number of hustings to see and listen to Quentin Hogg, Joe Grimond and a few others. How civilised, I thought. A few hecklers, but it was all very good natured and a certain quality of speech that seemed to be more elevated than the rhetoric I had been hearing in the United States. On reflection though it was probably more the accents that seemed more erudite. Nonetheless despite the obvious racism and ridiculous class system there was a welcoming of the difference and the foreign where I was concerned. A lot of people were very good to me. I was taken in and made at home. I was entirely free to drift in whatever direction the wind blew. I was able to make decisions as they came up, and hardly ever hindered. I was very lucky, and overall this British history became important. The humanitarian values and respect for human rights and the duty of care are truly what makes this country Great Britain. 

I know it is no longer the power it once was and its influence in the world has diminished a great deal, but it can still make the headlines on occasion. The sad part is that it seems to be falling apart at the rate of knots. Its headline news is no longer of the kind one wants to see. I have watched and been part of its decline for the last 50 years. I am not being nostalgic and claiming things were better in the old days. A lot of things were not better, but what was better were the attitudes of the citizens. The emergence of the Reform party and the backward thinking isolationist thick headed persons that are its leaders is bewildering. They are not anything like being British. They are thugs and primed with ignorance and arrogance. They still imagine that Britannia rules the waves. The British Navy has some 37,601 personnel and 63 commissioned ships and a few supporting vessels. The US Navy has some 336,000 active duty personnel and 101,500 in reserve. They have a vast fleet of combat vessels and thousands of aircraft. The United States has 11 nuclear powered aircraft carriers. China has more ships, but only three carriers in its navy. The United States effectively has carriers on every ocean across the globe, quite apart from its submarine fleet.  However one counts, Britain has no claim on ruling the waves.

The long and short of this rant is that the United States in its present form is the most dangerous place on earth despite the wars in the middle east and middle Europe. I say that because of violence seemingly embedded in its society. Any country that has more than one armed weapon per household  is insane. That the private citizen feels they must be personally armed to protect themselves does not say much about trust in their own values or society. That they are so alienated from each other that they require guns to protect themselves from themselves is without parallel. Praise be that the United Kingdom is not quite yet like that, but it appears to be going that way when thousands take to the streets to demand the deportation of refugees and displaced people caused by the mistakes of western democracy and tragically corrupt governments around the world. 

So I am bewildered by the actions of the children of the people who gave me the support I needed as a refugee from the United States back in 1965. What the hell have they been taught all these years? 

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 to 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.