SHOOTING THE BEAR

I have recently seen and read an exchange on Celia’s Facebook page comprising a lengthy argument over the justification for Mr Putin’s invasion of the Ukraine. I quoted some of it in a previous blog (What Happens from Here? 2^nd March 2022).

 

Personally I can see no justification whatsoever for the actions taken by the Russian President.  As against that, I can see no justification either for the violent internal civil strife going on in south eastern Ukraine around Donetsk and Luhansk, between Russians, who are citizens of Ukraine - but who allegedly seek some form of self-rule - and Russians-Ukrainians and Ukrainians who seek to maintain the sovereignty of the Ukraine as it stands.

 

What makes it even more tragic is that Mr Putin refers to the Ukrainian Central government as neo-Nazis and openly supports the “Rebels” with arms and now chooses to formally recognise these dissenters as independent Peoples Republics.  By doing this, he “gets himself invited” to provide a peace keeping force to defend democracy.

 

This reasoning from a man who not only does not allow dissent or criticism of any kind, but arrests and detains children for protesting against war, and surreptitiously kills anyone who he sees as a threat, or has them detained like Dr Manette at 105 North Tower in his Bastille. He has completely put an end to democracy in his own country and seeks to enlarge his power over former regions which are now sovereign democratic countries in their own right. If anyone should be labelled neo-Nazi it is Vladimir Putin and his cronies.  What is even worse is that he is not really recognising independence but deceiving these republics, maliciously, to once again become oblasts of his new repackaged Soviet under his dictatorship.

 

He has entered an Orwellian alternate universe and is clamping down on any and all truth to keep the Russian people subjugated and ignorant of what is actually happening in the rest of the world. How the Russian Federation Council and State Duma can go along with this is uncanny, let alone the people at large.

 

The Council has 170 members which is made up of 142 United Russia Party, 5 Liberal Democratic Party of Russia (LDPR), 4 from Just Russia for Truth Party (SRZP), 3 from the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (CPRF), 13 Independent and currently 3 vacant seats. The State Duma has 450 members, 324 United Russia Party, 57 Communist Party, 28 Just Russia for Truth, 23 Liberal Democrats, 1 Rodina Party and 1 Civic Platform Party, 5 New Peoples Party, 1 Party of Growth and 1 Independent. In addition, there are approximately 146 million Russian citizens.

 

Putin holds power with the support of by far the largest political party, the United Russia Party. He rules with the backing of Dmitry Anatolyevich Medvedev and Sergei Kuzhugetovich Shoigu. Medvedev is the prime minister and prime stooge of the President. Because of a democratic limit on the length of terms of office, Medvedev stepped in to hold the seat for Putin and then put in motion legislation to effectively allow Putin to stay in power ad infinitum. As to Sergei Shoigu, he is the General of the Army, minister of defence and the second Putin stooge. Medvedev is the tool and Shoigu is the gun. One only has to look at his pictures and the look on his face that he is “nothing more than an A1 trained Karla hood” to quote le Carré. (For Karla read Putin who was KGB

If you examine this picture you will see that Putin and Medvedev, with slightly smug expressions, are looking at whatever parade is passing in front of them, whilst Shoigu is glaring straight at the camera. Indeed, a picture does tell a story.

 

That aside, there are some 620 members of the legislature, who presumably were voted into office as the people’s representative. I cannot believe that not one of those 28 Liberal Democrats or even 60 Communists are in favour of what is clearly a capitalistic dictatorship, run amok. They cannot possibly be in support of this war, can they? As to Just Russia for Truth, well, if Putin is their idea of Truth (Given his display to date) than one can forget about them.

 

But, nonetheless, there must be some elected representatives who are fervently against the goings on in the Kremlin. Is his hold so tight that no one will dare speak out? Dissenting media, it would appear has been closed down. We have seen on our own television screens, radio, press and television personnel raising a farewell glass in regret at the closing of their place of work, but not indicated what they intend to do about it. It looked like a simple acceptance of their lot as being subjugated by a very large and violent not so secret State Police.  We are back in the USSR.

 

The disparity, between the rich and the poor in the Russian Empire, once caused the people to rise up. The disparity between the rich and the poor in the current Russian State is even greater now than it once was.  The Russian people are queuing at banks and ATMs for what little cash they have. Western pressure of sanctions is unfortunately having greater effect on the poor and lower income groups around the world. I think the hope that the sacrifices being made by the people will soon cause serious damage to the oligarchy, forcing them into action to stop Mr Putin to safeguard their wealth, is a long shot; and, whether the economic iniquities resulting will bring the Russian people into action as they once did in 1917 is debateable.

 

On top of sanctions, the very fact that Russia is being ostracised around most the world does not seem to be reaching the Russian People. Do they really understand what is going on? The propaganda blame game has reached new heights in particular with the shutting down all over the country of digital social media. The current Russian State apparatus has moved way beyond what Joseph Goebbels could have possibly dreamed of.

 

Western democratic countries may have problems, but as much as I loathe my clownish Prime Minster, and his ridiculous cabinet, I am still able to call him a mendacious fool, I can still write over the top letters of complaint to my local councillor and my MP and I can do so without fear of arrest and incarceration. Although, given some of this government’s proposed legislation, that very freedom is in serious question.

 

Whether it is possible to break through to the Russian people that we still enjoy such freedoms and that it is something they too can aspire to, even if with difficulty, is very debatable. It is rather like trying to re habilitate a cult follower, fundamentalist, or scientologist. Whatever the conversion, it has to come from within. One hopes there are people inside the Russian continent to lead the way. Unfortunately at present they are nowhere in sight, at least not so far as I am aware, which is probably not very much.

 

In the meantime the Ukrainians wonder why the western powers are unwilling to risk launching world war three, which is a shame, but then when your head is in the mouth of a grizzly bear, you do tend to wonder why your friend stranding next to you with the gun, doesn’t shoot the bear rather than hand you the gun to shoot the bear.

WHAT HAPPENS FROM HERE ?

I was directed by my friend Charles Nabet to a round table discussion, concerning the situation in the Ukraine, on YouTube at the ICES (Institut Catholic d’Enseignement Supérieur) in the Vendée, which took place last evening at 5:30 PM - UK time. Participating in the discussion were: Eric Pomès, Dean of the Faculty of Law and Management Economics; General Frédéric Blachon, Dean of the Faculty of Political Science and History; Matthieu Grandpierron, director of the political science license; Dominique Souchet, diplomat and politician, lecturer at ICES;’ Richard Sindelar, professor of the international department of Saint Thomas in Texas, American university partner of ICES. 

 

Unfortunately the speakers were not specifically identifiable as there were no captions; however, an interesting discussion followed. The introduction, provided by two students at the University, was a precis of the history of the Ukraine vis a vis Russia, and a number of charts detailing the demography, ethnicity and agricultural makeup of the current state of affairs in that country. I decided to take a closer look. 

In brief, here is an entry from Wikipedia:

 

The territory of modern Ukraine has been inhabited since 32,000 BC. During the Middle Ages, the area was a key centre of East Slavic culture, with the loose tribal federation Kievan Rus’ forming the basis of Ukrainian identity. Reaching its height in the mid-11th century, during which it was among the richest and largest realms in Europe, Kievan Rus' gradually declined until its collapse from the Mongol invasion in the 13th century. Over the next 600 years, the area was contested, divided, and ruled by a variety of powers, including the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire, and Tsardom of Russia.. The Cossack Hetmanate emerged and prospered during the 17th and 18th centuries but was ultimately partitioned between Poland and the Russian Empire. In the aftermath of the Russian Revolution, a Ukrainian national movement for self-determination emerged, forming the internationally recognized Ukrainian People’s Republic on 23 June 1917. The short-lived state was forcibly reconstituted by the Bolsheviks into the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, which became a founding member of the Soviet Union in 1922. Ukraine was the most populous and industrialised republic after the Russian Soviet Republic, until regaining its independence in 1991, following the dissolution of the Soviet Union. 

In one way or another, over the centuries the Ukraine has been connected to Russia and the various Slavic states within its purview. The Act of Declaration of Independence of Ukraine was adopted by the Ukrainian Parliament on the 24^th August 1991.

It immediately declared itself to be a neutral state, but maintained strong ties with the Russian State. It was initially part of the Commonwealth of Independent States – mainly composed of the Soviet satellite states – Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan with Russia, and in 1994 was establishing a sort of partnership with NATO. It joined the Ukrainian-European Union Association Agreement which then President Viktor Yanukovych suspended in 2013 in favour of closer ties with Russia. This resulted in mass protests and demonstrations which led to the overthrow of Yanukovych, the establishment of a new Government, and this prompted Russia’s annexation of Crimea in March 2014 and the troubles in Donetsk and Luhansk from April 2014.  That is a very simple explanation of the sequence of events. 

What has in fact added to Mr Putin’s current behaviour is the United States’ questionable behaviour during what has become known as the Revolution of Dignity or Maidan Revolution which took place from February of 2014 and led to the annexation of the Crimea and the following declarations of independence by the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. Indeed developments in the Ukraine between February 2014 and the 2^nd Minsk Agreement on 12 February 2015 are a complex series of events difficult to follow or even understand. The surreptitious push and pull between the western governments and the Russian government over the Ukraine and its future have the makings of one of the more obscure John le Carré plots. 

There is an entry in Wikipedia at: 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution_of_Dignity, 

which provides some clues to the debacle. There is an interesting chronology of events. 

Putin must see the situation and developments in the Ukraine as a squeeze against Russia by the west, using a country with an extremely close historical connection with Russia, many of whose citizens are Russian speaking and still seek a closer association with Russia than with Western Europe and NATO. 

 

Had the European Union, the United States, and its NATO allies but stated from the start of Mr Putin’s build-up of forces along Ukraine’s borders, that the Ukraine would remain neutral and would not be encouraged to join either NATO or the EU, then the invasion might never have happened. 

At least that was the view of one of the members of the panel discussion in the Vendee. The panellist felt that the refusal of the United States to bend on the matter of assurances that the Ukraine would not be allowed to join NATO, now or in the future, was the sticking point from which Russia would not step back. But then nor would the United States and its allies, commit to imposing its guarantees and dictate for the actions of an independent sovereign state, now or in the future. The lead on this point was effectively seen as being within the authority and power of United States foreign policy. Again a simplistic view of what has been going on in the Ukraine since February of 2014. 

Other views have been expressed about events since 2014. One analyst’s view is as follows:

After the US coup of 2014, that installed a puppet regime, the Russian dominated Eastern Ukraine regions broke off.
Crimea went to Russia after a vote / referendum and Donetsk and Luhansk declared independence.
A LOC was formed, and entire Donetsk and Luhansk was under rebel control.
Minsk agreement happened between Ukrainian regime and the rebel states. But the Ukrainian regime continued to violate the understanding for 7 years. 13000 Russian speakers died due to Ukrainian aggression in the rebel controlled regions.
Russia wanted Ukraine to keep to the Minsk agreement and wanted Ukraine not to consider joining NATO: a red line that Russia was serious about.
Nothing happened and the puppet regime of Ukraine started to prepare for military operations on the rebel states with the help of CIA trained neo-Nazis and NATO controlled Ukraine army.
Russia had to act; so she did.
Russia recognised the rebel states and signed treaties with them.
Now it has gone into Ukraine to get rid of puppets / neo-Nazis and secure Ukraine as a neutral state and secure the Russian dominated East Ukraine.

 

Therefore, in the light of the opposing and clearly complex views of the situation, Mr Putin has opened the floodgates. 

Mr Putin’s style of diplomacy however leaves a lot to be desired. By his constant refrain that he had no intention whatsoever of invading Ukraine, that it was only a military exercise; his apparent agreement with President Macron that he would be withdrawing troops, whilst in fact increasing them; his claim that he was supporting Russian Ukrainians from genocide by Ukrainian neo-Nazis, and recognising their rights as citizens of the independent countries of Donetsk and Luhansk and that he would only send in a peace keeping force; are statements that the turn of events has shown to be blatant lies.  His full scale attack on the country is nothing less than an invasion and one that has been planned for some considerable time. 

In doing this he has alienated almost the entire world. He has lost any credibility he might have had had he carefully explained his misgivings over what had been going on in the Ukraine from the Euromaidan protests beginning in November 2013. Proper and considered diplomatic dialogue and compromise would more likely have improved the situation rather than a build up of suspicion, fear, resentment, anger and revenge. 

The cold war was meant to have ceased in 1989, with the coming down of the iron curtain, but for some obscure reason, there seems to be a shatter belt running between middle and eastern Europe from Narva in Estonia weaving its way through the regions all the way to Istanbul. It is like a new net curtain slung across the continent, and because it is flimsy is open to periods of aggression. 

What Mr Putin has achieved is turn himself into a monster and a simple comic president into a hero fighting for world democratic freedom.

Not a good look on the world stage for Putin, but as to Zelensky:

FEEL THE ANGER

On hearing the news of war when I woke up in the morning, I felt an instant sinking feeling of dread in my stomach. I am not alone in this. I have heard the same from friends who experience the same anxiety. I was born during the second world war. Many of my friends were as well. Some have some slight memories of the war, but on the whole were too young to experience the full horror.  I have grown up in an area of the world which has, for the most part maintained a semblance of peace. Governments have come and gone, but there has been a steady trend towards democracy and civility. The rule of law and duty of care has been at the forefront of most societies. There had been a coming together of nations to form groups in solidarity against aggression and uncivilised brutal behaviour. The International Court of justice was established at The Hague in the Netherlands to deal appropriately with miscreants. In short there has been a steady trend towards creating a civilised planet, more so now because of the ecological threat to its very existence.

 

We now have amongst us a man of unspeakable evil. He has been allowed to turn the Russian people into an obsequious citizenry.  He has around him a formidable military and a militaristic police force, ready and willing to do his bidding to arrest and incarcerate any and all dissenting citizens.  The slightest criticism is stifled and anyone that he feels might get out of hand is killed. He has people to do this for him. There are clearly many willing participants that allow him to stay in power and do his bidding.

 

The clear televised evidence of his current administration sitting silently in ranks whilst he spues out lies, deception, threats and violence is remarkable and terrifying.  What is his hold on them? The corruption of the Russian State is of singular magnitude.

 

What strikes me is that this tragedy enfolds all the while the world is reaching its greatest triumph, a greater respect for civilisation and the rule of law than Mr Putin understands, or perhaps because he understands too well, that Nations are moving beyond violence. What Mr Putin sees as weakness has allowed him to exploit his brutality in the full knowledge that no civilised nation will violently interfere. He has issued warnings that should anyone do so, he will unleash Armageddon. No doubt he will.

 

The civilised world now knows full well that he has no shame and cares not one jot for humanity. Also there is no doubt that the European Nations and the Americas have more than sufficient military power to engulf Mr Putin in a world of hurt. Unfortunately that hurt will extend across the world and the resultant casualties do not bear thinking about. The hope is that down the line he will come to an end and that blanking him, and sadly his country, from the rest of the world through sanctions will redress the situation and some new peace will grow out of the current carnage.

 

That is the civilised approach. Mr Putin has gambled on it, and so far, for him, it has paid off. He knows no one wants to start a world war and he will bully his way round as long as he is able. He doesn’t care. So long as he remains in power he couldn’t give a shit. This attitude has not surprisingly received adulation from the likes of Donald Trump and Fox News pundit Tucker Carlson. This is something else the Americas must contend with. But I digress, how do we, in the meantime cope with what we have?

 

Sadly whatever armed forces that exist in the Civilised world, must be ready at the slightest move by Mr Putin to expand his war. He is more than capable of doing so. I abhor that thought, but as I survey the tragedy in the Ukraine, now bleeding, I am reminded of the words of Mark Antony. Read it to yourself slowly and aloud. I never thought that I could ever utter those words in earnest, but I have never felt such anger:

 

O, pardon me, thou bleeding piece of earth,
That I am meek and gentle with these butchers!
Thou art the ruins of the noblest man
That ever lived in the tide of times.
Woe to the hand that shed this costly blood!
Over thy wounds now do I prophesy,--
Which, like dumb mouths, do ope their ruby lips,
To beg the voice and utterance of my tongue--
A curse shall light upon the limbs of men;
Domestic fury and fierce civil strife
Shall cumber all the parts of Italy;
Blood and destruction shall be so in use
And dreadful objects so familiar
That mothers shall but smile when they behold
Their infants quarter'd with the hands of war;
All pity choked with custom of fell deeds:
And Caesar's spirit, ranging for revenge,
With Ate by his side come hot from hell,
Shall in these confines with a monarch's voice
Cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war;
That this foul deed shall smell above the earth
With carrion men, groaning for burial.

WHERE ARE WE NOW ?

On this palindrome day 22-02-2022, there appears to be an unwholesome nationalist miasma pervading around the globe. Despite the Olympic Movement’s winter games being splashed across the media, its principles (as stated by IOC President Bach, that “Solidarity fuels our mission to make the world a better place through sport. We can only go faster, we can only aim higher, we can only become stronger by standing together – in solidarity”) are being undermined, daily, by unfortunate squabbles within its ranks, as well as the current suspect human rights record of the host country.

On top of that, the poisonous cloud obscures any thought of world solidarity towards making itself a better place, owing to the situation surrounding the Ukraine, brought about by a demagogue who persistently lies to his citizens,  the continuing assault on democracy in the United States, brought about by a would be demagogue who persistently lies to the citizens, the systematic failures of the current UK Government brought about by a would be populist demagogue who persistently lies to his citizens, and many other lies being promulgated in national governments across the world.  

Whatever excuses proffered by Mr Putin for the annexation of the Ukraine back into the “Russian Union” are exaggerations and manufactured slights. Latvia and Estonia, NATO member states since 2004 have bordered Russia for 18 years and there has been no aggressive move towards Russia in all that time. So any anxieties Mr Putin claims, about having NATO member states on his borders, seem hollow. As far as I know, there has been no gathering of forces along the Latvian and Estonian border with Russia. By annexing the Ukraine he will add NATO members Poland, Slovakia, Hungary and Romania on his border; or, is he after regaining control of what was once the Warsaw Pact? Who can say what is on his mind?

Herewith an interesting interview with Arturs Krišjānis Kariņš, Prime Minister of Latvia:

 

What Mr Putin should be asking himself is why, within 5 years of the Berlin Wall coming down, all those countries decided to join NATO? Instead, however, he has moved away from worries about NATO to the grand gesture, in flagrant breach of International Law, of recognising two provinces of the Ukraine as independent sovereign countries in need of a peace keeping force of prodigious proportions.

There are difficult days ahead of us. The world’s attention has been grabbed by the situation in eastern Europe and it is obscuring other areas of equally great concern i.e. Ethiopia, Afghanistan, Yemen, the continuing saga of the Middle East, Haiti, Myanmar, Islamist militancy in Africa and generally relations between the United States/Europe and China/Taiwan/Israel/Iran quite apart from Russia.

It is also giving Boris a second chance to deflect from the ongoing problem of his resignation. Whilst he still inhabits the office of Prime Minister and purports to be performing on the global stage vis a vis Putin, together with other European Ministers, he appears to be protected by the importance of the situation. That does not make him any the less incompetent, unqualified and undeserving to serve in that office. He has lied and mislead Parliament. His place on the world stage can easily be replaced by another more truthful and competent individual, who would command greater respect from European Ministers of State. The UK does not have to be lumbered with him and MPs should take the time to correct the mistake of Boris Johnson. He is not essential to events. To claim it is not the time is nonsense. I would have thought the British public and its political representatives were capable of multi-tasking e.g. dealing with foreign affairs and getting rid of Boris Johnson. If that is not the case, and they are incapable of walking and chewing gum at the same time, then woe betide the country.

In effect, just as any concerned citizen should not be befuddled by the current state of world and domestic affairs, the same must apply to our representatives; however, I confess the miasmic mist that surrounds us is getting pretty thick, and it becomes difficult to find the way in this fog. Stay alert and stay safe is about as much as one can hope for. It’s about now that one hopes for a thunderbolt of clear light to strike the Kremlin and lead us out of the darkness.

Oh, and a few sparks to ignite the Trumpian horror to oblivion.

Peace in our time? Where have I heard that?

MULLING OVER KNOWLEDGE

Things being mulled over:

There are numerous quiz programs on radio, television and on line.  The amount of surplus knowledge or trivia people have stored in their brain is quite phenomenal. On examining the word -

 

Knowledge:

 

American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition. Copyright © 2016 by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. All rights reserved.

1. The state or fact of knowing:

2. Familiarity, awareness, or understanding gained through experience or study:

3. The sum or range of what has been perceived, discovered, or learned:

4. Archaic Carnal knowledge.

 

Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged, 12th Edition 2014 © HarperCollins Publishers

1. the facts, feelings, or experiences known by a person or group of people

2. the state of knowing

3. awareness, consciousness, or familiarity gained by experience or learning

4. erudition or informed learning

5. specific information about a subject

6. (Law) sexual intercourse (obsolete except in the legal phrase carnal knowledge)

7. come to one's knowledge to become known to one

8. to my knowledge

a. as I understand it

b. as I know

9. grow out of one's knowledge Irish to behave in a presumptuous or conceited manner

 

Random House Kernerman Webster's College Dictionary, © 2010 K Dictionaries Ltd.

1. acquaintance with facts, truths, or principles.

2. familiarity or conversance, as by study or experience:

3. the fact or state of knowing; clear and certain mental apprehension.

4. awareness, as of a fact or circumstance.

5. something that is or may be known; information.

6. the body of truths or facts accumulated in the course of time.

7. the sum of what is known:

8. Archaic. sexual intercourse.

Idioms:

to one's knowledge, according to the information available to one:

 

Compact Oxford English Dictionary, 3^rd edition revised 2008

1-Information and skills gained through experience or education

2-The total of what one knows

3-Awareness of or familiarity with a fact or situation

Phrase: to (the best of) my knowledge: 1- so far as I know:  2- as I know for certain -

 

- it would appear that awareness of, or familiarity with, facts is the key, either through education or experience.

 

What is surprising constantly, to me, is the lack of awareness or familiarity with certain facts which seem self-evident. The sort of fact one assumes every person who purports to enter a particular quiz would be aware of or familiar with.

 

I was listening to the last broadcast of Counterpoint, the music quiz on Radio 4, hosted by Paul Gambaccini. One of the questions involved the ‘Au fond du temple saint” duet from the Pearl Fishers by George Bizet. A short excerpt was played. It is perhaps one the most played duet on radio. It is one of the most popular numbers in western opera. It has appeared on seven of the Classic 100 Countdowns of several radio stations round the world. Yet, none of the three contestants knew it. One of the contestants a, Ms Sarah Trevarthan from Manchester, scored a magnificent 31 points, which according to Gambaccini was the most anyone has scored since he has been presenting the program. Her knowledge was indeed extensive, and impressive; however, for someone with her store of surfeit knowledge of music and related questions, not to know the duet from The Pearl Fishers was puzzling to say the least. For all three contestants to be nescient of the piece was striking. At least, so far as I was concerned. It is almost like asking does 2 x 2 = 4? But perhaps not.

I do enjoy a quiz, as it tends to increase one’s store of information, and it is instrumental in retrieving some of those stored bits and pieces hovering round the hippocampi. It’s fun. One is sometimes taken aback when no one is able to answer certain questions, but that usually tends to be about some fairly recent historical or biographical fact, or event, which occurred before the contestants were born. It is only known by one’s self, because one lived through the event at the time. Age is very often a factor in matters of general knowledge. That is the ‘through experience’ part of the definition.

Indeed as one gets older, one is non plussed frequently by the fact that one can be talking to someone who has no idea what you might be referring to, because they have no frame of reference to the subject.  It is completely pointless asking someone “Where were you when Kennedy was shot?” if they are only 60 years old. One tends to forget how old one actually is. You see grey hair and you assume a certain synchronicity of experience that just isn’t there.

 

By contrast, particularly when watching University Challenge (College Bowl in US), one is astonished at the stuff some of these young people have knowledge of.  This is a good thing, as on the one hand we are comforted by the fact that we know stuff they do not, and are able to swiftly recall the knowledge (swift recall being the key) and we are able to learn things along the way. The brain still sparks and functions, if only kept alive by this surplus knowledge or trivia.

 

Keeping the brain alive and functioning with swift recall is very much of consequence. It can sometimes be a trifle challenging, but I believe it is important to pursue.  Albert Einstein commented that "The pursuit of knowledge is more valuable than its possession"

 

“Such is always the pursuit of knowledge. The celestial fruits, the golden apples of the Hesperides, are ever guarded by a hundred-headed dragon which never sleeps, so that it is an Herculean labour to pluck them.”— Henry David Thoreau

 

A bit florid and perhaps too much time spent on the pond. 

 

Thomas Jefferson stated:

These are but three quotes involving that endeavour, it is clearly not something to let go. In particular following truth and reason, which the United States could well do with ramming down Trump’s throat. He could use a bit of bearding, as could Boris Johnson, Vladimir Putin, Alexander Lukashenko, Victor Orban and countless other demagogs.

DON'T TELL ME THE SCORE !!

You’ve all seen the scenario of sports fans trying not to know the score of a particular match so they can watch a replay or a recording, in order to keep the suspense of the game alive. In is not an uncommon situation. Indeed, on some news casts, when it comes to reporting the sports news, the reporter will say “If you don’t want to know the score, look away now”. A very decent and correct thing to do. It is a situation with which we are all acquainted and it is very sensitive of the reporter to understand the psychology.

The difficulty is, of course, avoiding any possible reporting of the game. The inadvertent comment overheard in a restaurant, or a shop, from the radio, television, from just passers-by in the street, or even, indeed, amongst one’s friends.  The spoiler alert sign looms large over one’s head to no avail. It is definitely not an easy task.

You would think that, so far as the American Superbowl is concerned, in the United Kingdom, it would be relatively simple to manage. Granted, the BBC must now think that there is a sufficiently large audience for the Corporation to pay the premium to broadcast the Superbowl live from the US.  The NFL show with Jason Bell and Osi Umenyiora, has been a regular fixture for a couple of years now and there clearly has been a reasonable, and perhaps increasing, fan base for the BBC to keep it going. Their commentary and analysis of the NFL over the season is a joy to watch and listen to. Consequently, the ups and downs of the leagues and the players become familiar.

In the leadup to the game on Sunday, much was discussed of the defence and offence of both teams, the growing skills of the young Joe Burrow (the possible successor to the GOAT Tom Brady), the great success of the young Sean McVay (now youngest head coach to win the Superbowl), the competitiveness of Aaron Donald and any number of facts and historical football lore. During the course of the season, the fan’s such as myself, have been able to keep abreast of the goings on.

As to the Superbowl being shown in the UK and round the world, the timing of the broadcast can be difficult. The time difference between London and Los Angeles, on this occasion, meant that it would be shown between 11:30 PM and 3 AM which would mean staying up till the small hours of the morning. In my younger days that would not have been a problem, a couple of beers, popcorn or slices of pizza would see one through. Nowadays that is more difficult. Technology however is a saviour. One can easily record the game on one’s new ultra-high definition tele and watch it during the course of Monday afternoon. Not too difficult to avoid the score as American Football, although becoming popular, is not the headline news it might be in the United States.

So you can imagine my surprise on opening an email this morning from Bob in California beginning: Surprise!!! Rams won!!

Followed by:

They controlled the ball enough in the 4^th Quarter so that their defence didn’t have to get back on the field for 15 plays. At the end the Bengals had under two minutes and one time out left, but the Rams defence showed up and stopped them with All Pro defensive tackle Aaron Donald accounting for stops in the last two Bengal offensive plays.  Whew!! 

It’s been about 71 years since the LA Rams won a professional football championship while playing in Los Angeles (the one in 1951 was an NFL Championship before the Super Bowl was created.  Compare this with the Pittsburgh Steelers and the New England Patriots with 6 Super Bowl wins each!  The Super Bowl was created in 1967. Of the teams that have won the Super Bowl, the LA Rams have the fewest wins at 1!  The LA Raiders won Super Bowl 18 in 1984. The Raiders now play in Las Vegas.

I realise he was just being kind and informative to those in distant lands where the NFL does not seem to have a presence, but surprisingly it does.  So, In case anyone is interested here are the highlights reduced to 16 mins. You can watch it on You Tube, just follow link.

 

REQUIRED: PEOPLE WITH VISION AND IMAGINATION

There is a program on Radio Four under the title “More Or Less” which is at:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m00146b6

The notes relating to this particular broadcast are as follows:

Released On: 09 Feb 2022 - Available for over a year - Boris Johnson has been ticked off for misleading Parliament on jobs and on crime. He claimed that the number of people in employment has been rising - when it’s been falling. And he made a claim that crime has fallen - when it’s risen. We discuss the truth, and what Parliament can do to defend it.

It is worth a listen to. In effect it comes back to the Seven Principles of Public Life, and the Ministerial Code, that a Member of Parliament must not mislead the House. Mr Johnson has done so on a number of occasions. Despite having been informed of his false claims, and exactly why he is in error, he continues to repeat his falsehoods. He does not seem to care at all, so long as he can bluster about playing the bullish and up beat Prime Minister. He carries on as of nothing has happened. More tragically those on the benches behind him seem to be doing the same. What it is taking so long for the Conservative Party to develop some selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness and honesty when it comes to leadership? It is beyond me, or anyone else for that matter.

Fresh photographs from the Police investigation seem to have no effect whatever.  This is not word of mouth evidence; this is factual documentation of wrongdoing. I presume they are operating on the Lenny Bruce advice to cheating partner’s defence: 

“Even if they’ve got pictures deny it. Just say – we were just lying down next to each other to see who was taller”

What is apparent and clear, the longer this goes on, the more damaging it becomes.  One now has the spectacle of a Prime Minister seeking to promote himself on the world stage, together with his absurd choice of Foreign Secretary, both of whom have been ridiculed, in particular by Russia, and generally around the world. It is not as if their antics are unknown, what with headlines in Russian newspapers “Bye Bye Boris” and the Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov, referring to Liz Truss’s effort as mere slogans and like having a conversation ‘of the mute with the deaf’.  This charade of a government is subject to serious ridicule across the globe. The pretence of a ‘Great Britain’ has long been blown with a leadership being propped up by a party that has lost all sense of reality, decency and connection with truth.

 

 

A government that demands respect, must uphold the basic tenets of its corps values. This is something the current Conservative Government have singularly failed to do. It sidesteps and obfuscates any legitimate calling to account, and proclaims they are getting on with the job, a job they are manifestly incapable of doing.

 

Mr. Johnson should take the hint and the example of Ms Cressida Dick. The Commissioner made a classic mistake of totally believing in the incorruptibility of her police force. She was well liked by her officers because she let them get on with the job and backed them all the way. She felt the glitches were just ‘bad apples’ which she could do little about. Like most commanders, she was of the view that she could protect her men and belief in the force.  They would do their job; they know what they’re doing. The blips are just rare occurrences. She trusted her officers. She has come to realise that some blips are fatal to the security of the organisation. 

Her job was to protect the public, not the force. Her job was to ensure that the force was educated, trained, fit and dedicated to protecting the public. She was to see to it that the people under her watch were doing their job based, primarily, on the same Seven Principles of Public Life, with the addition of Patience, Understanding and Professionalism. Being a Police Officer is not easy. It requires serious training, given the responsibility it entails. She forgot what she was meant to be concentrating on. Protecting the public requires equal treatment of every member of the public. A scrupulous adherence to honesty and a complete and thorough lack of prejudice of any kind.

 

Ms Dick resigned because she failed to provide the structure to revitalise a police department that is bordering on complacency and lacking the internal determination to keep its officers up to the mark. She was too much concerned with Public Relations than in a relationship with the public, and so trust eroded. It’s not in the image, it’s in the doing. She was not helped by a home office that is equally obsessed with public relations.  Appearing to be tough on crime and legislating for greater powers for the police, is not solving the social issues that create crime. Such repressive action only alienates those who come into contact with the officers on the ground who are insufficiently trained to deal with the public in general.  

 

So now we have Ms Priti Patel, a classic example of someone ill-suited to the job, deciding on who will be her replacement.  Given her makeup she will be looking for a hard liner, not a person with the skills and imagination to restructure and rebuild a force trusted and accessible to the citizen. Rebuilding trust is not just about, stop and search and arresting people. Arresting people is not stopping crime. It follows that if you stop crime you are arresting fewer people; but, it is up to the police force to enforce the law and protect the public, whilst is up to the civilian authority, the respective elected representatives, to create the conditions that reduce the commission of crime, not the other way round.

 

So Boris Johnson continually repeating that crime is on the decrease, when in fact it has increased by spectacular figures as regards fraud and dishonesty, is misleading Parliament and the public. For that alone he should resign.

 

When Members of Parliament stop concentrating on their careers and concentrate of actually doing their job, then perhaps something will be achieved. The first thing they can do is enforce the seven principles and codes of conduct of members and insist on the resignation of the current incumbent at number 10. They must find people, amongst their ranks, with the imagination and vision to bring a floundering country back from entropy. The current lot haven’t a clue.

 

It is ultimately up to the electorate, and one can only hope that such people as are required will put themselves forward for genuine public service. I know they exist as many of them work for the NHS. What is needed are political candidates with the same sense of dedication as the doctors and nurses I encountered in my own dealings with the NHS, which because of the current government is in serious danger of collapse itself.

 

Much has happened in this last week that makes my head spin. I continue to rant. I don’t know if any of the people in the United States, who might read this stuff, can follow my train of thought, but I do hope so. They have their own problems with the ‘gazpacho queen’, Taylor Greene, and the various gun toting members of congress, and Trumpzilla roaming the country out of the everglades of Florida.

MY LETTER TO THE GUARDIAN

I have today sent the following letter to the Guardian Newspaper:

To the Editor:

The hypocrisy of Chris Philps Undersecretary of State for Tech and the Digital Economy is symptomatic of every defender of Boris Johnson lamentable behaviour and duplicity. How they can make up excuses for calculated falsifications of facts in a vain attempt to excuse their own actions and those of their leader is uncanny. When asked this morning on the Today morning news program by Nick Robinson why Boris Johnson, who brought up the matter of Jimmy Saville in the House, suggesting the leader of the opposition failed to prosecute him, which was a lie, and which has caused outrageous thuggish action in the street threatening Mr Starmer, should not apologies and categorically withdraw the accusation.

Mr Philps claimed he should not and had no need to, as Mr Johnson later clarified his comment, stating that he did not mean that Mr Starmer was personally responsible but he was in charge of the CPS at the time. When pressed, why bring it up in the first place, Mr Philps went on to say that politicians bring up their opponents past record all the time, it's part and parcel of political sparring. Mr Philps again repeated that Mr Starmer was head of the CPS at the time of the Savile incident, and that at some point Mr Starmer even apologised on behalf of the whole CPS for not having taken action.  As the person in charge he was responsible for the CPS.  He also repeated that Mr Johnson had clarified his statement. He kept saying this as if it was an answer to the question, why did Boris Johnson mention it in the first place?

Was Mr Philps seriously equating the actions of the personnel in the prime minister’s office, with those of the inactivity of certain lawyers at the CPS. Was he seriously suggesting that there is no difference between Keir Starmer’s role at CPS head office, and his own at 10 Downing Street? They both have a shared responsibility, is that it? If Mr Starmer did not resign, why should he? Is this what it was about?

I wasn’t aware that there are pictures of Mr Starmer, together with his wife and his lawyer colleagues, having a work’s drink over the Savile file. I was not aware the Mr Starmer had some of those same lawyers come to his house with a birthday cake. I wasn’t aware that those same lawyers sent out for a suitcase of drink and had a quiz with Mr Starmer. I am clearly missing some vital information.

I am also unaware of a report on the matter claiming there was a serious failure of leadership at the CPS at the time. There certainly were failures by the police, to whom complaints were made, to take any action, and failures by some CPS officials to take action. Mr Starmer, although far removed from the situation, did the decent thing and apologised on behalf of the CPS and Police for its failures.

Mr Johnson, on the other hand, is right in the thick of it. He participated in and was party to the party, but behaves as if he wasn’t there at all. The serious failures of leadership mentioned by Ms Gray, seemingly have nothing to do with him.  He claims he “gets it” and will institute a changing of the guard, as if it is all down to those subordinates around him. He apologies for everyone else’s disfunction save his own, which he clearly does not “Get”.

So while his cabinet and supporters demean themselves with tortuous excuses and nonsensical explanations in attempts to ‘move on’, deflecting serious questions on integrity, accountability, objectivity, openness, honesty and leadership, he carries on as if it is all too silly and meaningless in the grand scheme of his getting on with the job of government.

The fact that he is incapable and incompetent, mendacious and arrogant almost in the manner of a Donald Trump, seem to have escaped him and his simpering colleagues who assume that by offering their pusillanimous support, they will keep their jobs.  A general election cannot come too soon. A serious campaign to oust these perfidious members of parliament is an imperative if this country is ever to regain any respect in the world.