Woolworths: Zero Hour

Our local Woolworths closed today. You would need to have a heart of stone not to feel some sadness walking round the battered shelves knowing that all those who worked there would be without a job at 5.30pm. What began over 99 year ago is now ending. A shop that in its prime was valued by millions of Britons. Although it declined since then and no longer offered anything that other shops couldn't offer better, it is still part of the fabric of the British town with branches in over 800 towns.

Over two hundered Woolworth branches closed today. The remainder will follow in the next week or so.

The atmosphere in our local Woolworths was both sad but resigned. The staff seems remarkably cheery. It is good that they seem to be able to keep things in perspective. One can only hope that they are offered a job by another shop or go onto better things. Our local Woolworths like many others occupies a "prime" location on the High Street.

When Napoleon dismissed Britain as a "nation of shopkeepers" it was meant as an insult. What he failed to realise was that many Britons saw it as a compliment. A shop, amongst other things, is a place of service and community.

The photos below were all taken today and record the passing of a British retail institution:
By the end prices were 90 % off everything. However there was little to buy.

Battered shelves

Empty shelves

A scene of desolation in the heart of a British retail institution

Even the shelves are all fittings were for sale

Everything has been sold

There is not much left apart from the notices

Prime retail real estate on the High Street

A cold dreary day just after Christmas sees the end of Woolworths

Last orders

The day started with 70 % reductions. By the end it was 90 % off everything

The shelves that have sold greetings cards marking occasions for most of the last century are finally empty

Woolworths just missed it's 100th birthday. It goes after 99 years on the British High Street.

Christmas with the Ahmadinejads

Just when you thought there was a limit to political correctness, Channel 4 (the Channel that gave the world such delights as Big Brother and Celebrity Big Brother) goes and proves you wrong.

Channel 4 consider the Queen's Christmas message to be far too conventional. So, as a change, they have decided to invite an overseas Head of State to give a Christmas talk. That in itself may be unusual but we're not talking President Sarkozy, Chancellor Merkel or even Prime Minister Putin here. Viewers in the UK will tomorrow be addressed by President Ahmadinejad, the same one who wants to wipe Israel off the map. There will apparently be an independent explanation before President A speaks. I am not sure that one will be needed.

Not for the first time, you really couldn't make it up !

An Englishman's home is no longer his castle

When I read stories like this (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5375668.ece), I think I have had my eye off the ball for too long. Liberty seems to be being eroded so fast and in so many areas that we are in danger of only realising when it is far too late.

Not only do we live in an over-regulated, over-taxed country but it seems that one of the last areas of freedom, your own home, is no longer free. The old cliche of an Englishman's home is his castle is sadly wrong.

The threat is that private bailiffs will be able to break into a house and "use reasonable force" to recover private debts. Up until now, as far as I knew, such action could only be taken with police support and court orders.

Several risks come immediately to mind, even for those who do not build up debts they cannot pay:

1) The bailiffs may simply get the wrong address. Who pays for a new door when the mistake is realised ? (not to mention the distress of it happening).

2) Identity fraud, previous occupants and other members of the same family all offer routes by which an "innocent" could be targeted at the "correct address" for the debts of others.

3) What is "reasonable force" ? English case law has taken centuries to determine this. I doubt a hired thug would be able to grasp the precise boundaries too quickly.

4) What happens if the alleged debtor fights back ? Deos the reasonable force escalate ?

5) What happens if the alleged debtor keels over from a heart attack or other cause ? Is using reasonable force to recover a debt a defence to manslaughter or murder ?

The Government has clearly not thought this through (not for the first time) but what is more concerning is that this is not some obscure issue. It effects everyone who lives in Britain.

Having had dealings with such delightful people as wheel clampers in my time, I dread to think that similar could be given the power to break into private houses and use force to recover parking fines, catalogue debts and similar.

This truly seems dreadful and the comments to the Times article suggest I am not alone in this.

Afghanistan: The mounting toll

Last evening, I watched the Russian film "9th Company" which portrayed a group of Soviet conscripts going to Afghanistan in 1988. As someone who has watched most of the better known Vietnam war films, the basic structure of the film was remarkably similar. A group of fresh faced conscripts with different backgrounds and personalities undergo training from a rather brutal commander before going onto the far worse horrors of the front line.

The soldiers were basically ordinary chaps in extraordinary circumstances. They were hardly driven by ideology but more a desire to survive. After all as it was noted towards the end of the film, as they battled the Mujahadeen in New Year 1989, they were fighting for a country that would not exist in 2 years.

Their political educuation was basic but one line stood out:

"In all of history, no one has ever managed to conquer Afghanistan. No one ever".

Certainly two countries failed to do so. First Britain failed in the Nineteenth century. Even Sherlock Holmes' assistant Dr. Watson was an Afghanistan veteran. Second, the Soviet Union failed, a defeat that arguably hastened its collapse in the 1980s. Both the defeat of Britain and the Soviet Union a century later followed a similar pattern. Afghanistan is quite easy to occupy but much more difficult to hold.

Now the international coalition, as always with the largest contribution coming from the US, is facing mounting casualties after a relatively easy occupation seven years ago.

It is worth noting that at present this is truly an international force with contributions from the US, UK, Canada, Australia and several European nations including France, Germany, Spain, Denmark and the Netherlands.

All those countries have paid for their contribution with lives lost.

Total allied casualties now amount to around 1,036 killed. The breakdown by nationality is shown below (courtesy of http://icasualties.org/OEF/Default.aspx) .

Although heavily weighted towards the US, it is also noticeable that the contribution in Afghanistan is significantly spread amongst other countries with around 40 % of fatalities coming from other countries.

Of greater concern is the rising trend of casualties as shown below. 2008 will be the worst year for virtually every nation involved in Afghanistan. This ties in with the Soviet experience where the worst casualties were experienced in the mid to late eighties following the 1979 invasion.

Another British casualty was announced this evening, the seventh Briton to die this month alone. Denmark and Canada are both countries that have recently suffered casualties disporportionately high compared to their total presence in Afghanistan.

I still do believe there is a fight worth fighting in Afghanistan. The alternative is withdrawal and to give a whole nation to the Taleban which would effectively create a massive training camp for global jihad. If I didn't believe that then clearly I would see no point in a war in a country that has never been successfully conquered.

As we approach Christmas, it is humbling to remember the sacrifices that troops from many nations are making in ever increasing numbers in Afghanistan. The toll started small compared to other conflicts but will be close to 300 this year with every sign of continuing to increase next year.

The battle in Afghanistan is clearly not to be under-estimated.

Saving the World

Sometimes no further comment is needed. Here is Gordon Brown making a slip of the tongue and perhaps revealling his real inflated view of his own abilities:

The slow death of a corporation

A forlorn shelf in a forlorn shop on the brink of closure. This is not a scene from some developing country in an early stage of development. It was the scene today at our local Woolworths.

Woolworths is closing down which will leave 815 gaps in British high streets and 30,000 people without a job.

Walking around our local Woolworths today, it would have been hard not to feel a bit sad. This is a shop with a presence on British high streets for 99 years. Everyone knows Woolworths and it is known affectionately as "Woolies".

However Woolies has lost its way of late so although sad, its demise cannot be seen as wholy unexpected. Twenty years ago Woolworths was the place a lot of people would go to buy nails, a tin of paint or a new lamp. In fact its strength was that it really stocked most things. Of late it has focused on confectionery, CDs and DVDs, toys and children's clothes. These are all areas in demand but they are also areas that other shops do a lot better. There was no special reason to go to Woolworths. It had no area of particular strength.

It was a tired old giant trading on its name and former glories. However in the face of the gathering storm it has crashed to the ground, like a rotten tree in a forest.

I actually heard someone in my office this week, saying they hoped the government would "bail out Woolies". The mania for bail outs seems to know no limits.

While it is sad that an old chain of department stores is closing, that is not reason enough for the government to commit more millions (and probably billions) to support a business that has failed to supply anything that anyone really wants anymore. Of course those that lose their jobs may feel differently but that is to overlook the thousands who have gained jobs in Woolworths' competitors over recent year. In a free market, the price of failure has to be closure or it would cease to be a free market. If badly managed businesses cannot be allowed to fail, then there is much less hope for well managed businesses.

On a similar theme, but a much bigger scale, the fate of the "big 3" American auto companies should ultimately be determined on the basis of whether they are capable of providing products that people would really want to buy in a free market. While I would feel tremendously sad if any of the three companies failed (I once worked for the European operations of one and my Father worked for another), they should not be bailed out to postpone the inevitable. Otherwise money is being wasted that could be invested in other businesses with futures.

The free market is hard on failure but it is the free market that has allowed businesses such a Woolworths to flourish for so long. If they fail now, they are not failing solely as a result of the recession. They are failing after years of decline. Their death is not sudden but has been slow. They are only actually dying now because the recession is the wind in the forest that gets rid of the rotten trees. Only if we allow that wind to work its course will there be a fair chance of strong new trees growing in years to come.

This weekend I felt like I was bidding a sad farewell to a shop I have known all my life. The gloomy shelves scattered with rubbish and tacky products are a sad shadow of the Woolworths that once was so relied upon by millions of Britons. There is no pleasure in its demise but its management have been the authors of its decline. Where business is concerned we should not seek to protect failures but focus on how best to encourage future successes.

Suburban winter

Just to note that I am still here, despite rather busy times in the run up to Christmas.

London is cold and frosty with a northern wind. This was the rather frosty and slightly desolate scene in the outer suburbs of London this morning.

Global Jihad: Why is Britain a net exporter ?

Signs of the times: Just another speculative headline about the role of Britons in Global Jihad

As some of the facts surrounding the terrorist attacks in Mumbai become a little clearer, it seems doubtful whether any of the terrorists were British citizens or had significant connections with Britain.

That a connection with Britain could be assumed following a terrorist attrocity in India, says something about the role of Britain in Global Jihad. No one would jump to that conclusion about many other western countries. Any country can suffer terrorism but Britain is one of the few countries to be a net exporter of islamic terrorism and possibly unique amongst western nations in that respect. What I mean by "net exporter" is that Britain plays a role in more overseas terrorist incidents than are carried out on its own soil by foreigners or by its own citizens.

How did Britain reach this unenviable status ?

There are many reasons but I will try to summarise what I see as the main causes:

1) A long history of political tolerance. Britain and especially London has long been a place where disidents and radicals could come and express their views freely. A walk round London's Speakers' Corner will show that Islamic fundementalists, Zionists, cocmmunists, fascists and just about any lunatic who wants to speak can be heard speaking at some time or another. Everyone from Karl Marx to "out of favour" contemporary Russian oligachs has found London a good place to come and speak and operate freely, something that wouldn't be possible in many other countries. Free speech is something that has seemed somewhat threatened lately but it is something I am always keen to defend. On its own Britain's openess and valuing of freedom has not resulted in its role in Jihad, but it is a necessary condition.




2) Britain's colonial history. The fact that Britain colonised somewhere on every continent at various times in its history has resulted in people from every continent coming to Britain. A much repeated line, that I couldn't prove, is that 300 languages are spoken in London. There are certainly a lot. Again, widescale immigration could not alone account for Britain's status as a centre for Jihad, but it is a necessary condition.


3) Britain's "multicultural" approach. Since major immigration began in the 1950's Britain has general taken a multicultural approach. This means it does not expect all its immigrants to become like native Brits but that each nationality and religion should be respected for their differences. Putting it like that it sounds harmless enough and probably started for sincere enough reasons. Until recently Britain had no oath of allegiance, we are rather embarrased by too much flag waiving and we argue amongst ourselves about how European we should become.


The smaller nations of the UK, notably Scotland and Wales have in contrast always been very proud and patriotic. England as by far the largest nation has always been more reticent about its merits. Northern Ireland was divided, but that is another issue.


Multiculturalism in practise meant that schools celebrated Eid or Diwali alongside Christmas. This is despite Britain having an established Church and offiicially being a Christian country. All religions were celebrated in schools which generally meant that they were seen as equally important or unimportant as the case may be. Britain as a whole has long been on a secular route in contrast to some of its minority groups who are as devout as ever. Therefore Britain was an officially Christian country, secular in reality but recognising all religions as equally valid while smaller groups, Muslims and Catholics included, became more numerous than the number of practising Christians in the Church of England. The great majority are not athiests but keep their religion and spirituality to something that could be found on the "Mind, Body Spirit" shelves of WH Smith.


The worst example of bland, embarrased multiculturalism was Birmingham City Council's decision to abolish Christmas in favour of "Winterval" a festival that celebrated all major religious festivals from Eid, to Hannakah to Diwali. Thankfully this has since been reversed but it gives an indication of the cultural and spiritual state of the nation.



Multiculturism made everything it touched bland and meaningless. Is it therefore surprising that with Britain's long history of free speech, its wide ethnic mix especially of peoples from the Indian sub-continent, that other forces were able to inhabit the vacuum left where British national pride and Christianity had given up ?


The City that gave us Winterval ultimately gave the world Rashif Rauf, a 27 year-old implicated in the 2006 plot to bring down many transatlantic airliners between London and North America using liquid explosives in soft drink bottles. Rashid Rauf was recently killed by an American airstrike in north west Pakistan.


The 2005 London Bomb attacks (both 7/7 which killed 52 people and the failed 21st July attacks) were perpetrated by home grown jihadis. The suicide bomber, a phenomenon thought limited to Israel, Iraq and similar places suffering the extremes of terrorism was brought to the streets of London by British passport holders. The leader of the 7/7 attacks , Mohammed Sidique Khan was himself an example of multiculturalism. He worked with recent immigrant school children, as a "learning mentor". He visited the House of Commons with his school and his Mother-in-Law attended a garden party at Buckingham Palace in recognition of her work with the muslim community.


Other British Jihadis have included:



Richard Reid, from Bromley, failed shoe bomber of an American Airlines flight between Paris and Miami in December 2001.



Asif Mohammed Hanif, from London, who killed three people by blowing himself up in a pub in Tel Aviv in 2003.



Moutaz Almallah Dabas who was arrested in Berkshire for his alleged role in planning the Madrid train bombings of 2004 that killed 191 people.



Abu Hamza, who openly preached Jihad in London.


Nicky Reiley, a low level muslim convert, who attempted a rather amateurish and failed suicide bomb attack on a restaurant in Exeter in May 2008.


The two doctors who attempted the Central London and Glasgow Airport car bombings in June 2007 had both been working in the UK and one was British born.


It seems that Britain is punching above its weight in terms of Jihad.

When I was at university in London in the mid-90s, organisations such as Hizb ut-Tahrir were just another student society. To be perfectly honest, I never gave them a second thought. They were clearly quite serious muslims and used to advertise discussions on subjects like Kashmir and the Palestinians. However university is a place for free speech and many views and nothing seemed unusual. It was only when the leader of Hizb-ut-Tahir, Omar Bakri Mohammed, praised the 9/11 hikackers as the "magnificent 19" that people began to take notice. In 2005, after 7/7, the organisation was banned in the UK. However in the 10-15 years before many UK students had been members. It is likely that many of those former students will hold views sympathetic to Islamic terrorism.

It will be interesting to see if there are any British links with the Mumbai attacks.

Britain has taken an unfortunate lead in the supply of participants in Global Jihad. British forces have reported hearing Yorkshire and Midlands accents when intercepting Taleban radio messages in Afghanistan. Multiculturism has not lead to inclusiveness. It has lead to ghettoisation. Within some of those cultural ghettoes some pretty extreme ideologies have developed. Since 9/11 we have begun to see the fruits of some rather unpleasant seeds start to emerge.

While not wanting everyone to be the same, we would do well to encourage the acceptance of some fundemental values in this country. Without them we may go on exporting Jihad for some time to come.

British Jihadis ?

The Telegraph is reporting:

"As Indian troops cleared the last terrorists from buildings across Mumbai this morning, UK authorities were following up reports on local news channel NDTV that the terrorists included 'British citizens of Pakistani origin' ".

I have been meaning to write about the phenomenon of the "British Jihadi" for a little while. If there was "British" involvement in these attacks, it is certainly not the first time.

Every Year

I was thinking today that terrorism is pretty much a fact of life the world over.

Understandably people focus on 9/11 due to its sheer scale and horror. However since 2001 there have been numerous terrorist attrocities like the one in Mumbai overnight, often involving British victims:

October 2002- Bali- 202 deaths including 24 Brits

November 2003- Istanbul- a branch of HSBC Bank and the British High Commission were bombed killing 30 people including the British Consul General and a number of other Brits.

March 2004- Madrid- 190 deaths in an attrocity that arguably changed the result of the subsequent Spanish general election.
2004 also saw a dreadful upsurge in Iraqi terrorism including the kidnapping and beheading of Ken Bigley and Margaret Hassan, English and Irish respectively.

July 2005- the "7/7" bombings in London resulting in 52 deaths on the underground and a London bus. A subsequent plot on 21st July 2005 failed resulting in no serious injuries.

August 2006- the plot to bring down numerous transatlantic flights between London and the USA was uncovered and stopped. A plot to bomb German trains also failed.

June 2007- failed car bombings in central London and an attack on Glasgow Airport by terrorists who also happened to be qualified doctors. Fortunately the only death was one of the perpetrators.

May 2008- a failed suicide attack on a restaurant in Exeter, a more typically English town it is hard to imagine. The perpetrator was a muslim convert called Nicky Reilly.

November 2008- Mumbai attacks targeting Indians but also singling out Brits and Americans. At least one British man has been killed.

This is but a snapshot of all the attacks accross the globe and the numerous attempts that are prevented each year.

In relation to terrorism it is more a question of "when" rather than "if".....

The Global Scourge

It has been a busy time at work. The VAT changes have caused a big headache due to the very short time available to implement them. I have had no real time to devote to this blog.

However such issues are surely put in perspective when events such as those in Mumbai this evening occur.

As fate would have it one of the senior partners of the firm I work for was visiting Mumbai with two colleagues. They were staying in one of the hotels attacked this evening but good fortune was smiling on them as they checked out this morning and flew to Dehli.

The reality is that terrorism can strike anywhere. It certainly has in London.

I have been meaning to write for sometime about the fact that so many of the terrorist attacks on British soil (whether successful or attempted) have been perpetrated by people "born and bred" in this country. Time has been against me but for now I am just thinking of all those caught up by events in India.

Brits are certainly always a desirable target for terrorists and there are reports this evening of British and American passport holders being looked for by the terrorists.

The style of the attack, using guns in multiple locations, is a new development and shows the dreadful creativity of terrorism to evolve as security evolves.

Whereever we are it seems terrorism is a global scourge.

Chaos

To change the rate of VAT in less than a week is, quite simply going to cause chaos for many businesses accross the country.

Of course, a tax cut should be welcome but the changes announced today do not seem at all well thought out.

Worse still are the dreadful borrowing figures with figures next year set to reach £118 billion.

Déjà vu ?

Does this weekend's almost confirmed appointment mean a Clinton will once again be leading the "Free World" ? If nothing else, they appear to be getting closer.

The cartoon below is from the Times (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/cartoon/) . With apologies to those who feel this blog is rather more transatlantic than its title suggests.........

Being Prepared ?

It is perhaps my recent viewing of "Spooks", the lightweight but highly entertaining BBC drama on the British security services that has heightened my imagination when walking about London. Most of the plot in the latest series of Spooks has been around the security services battling to stop various Al Quaeda plots in London.

Like millions of people, my journey to work was interrupted during the last major terrorist attack in London on July 7th, 2005. I count myself fortunate to have been nowhere near any of the four bombs that day. However even nearly 3 and a half years on, I find myself edgy on my thankfully infrequent underground journeys around anyone who looks both to be obviously muslim and carrying significant baggage. Of course it is prejudice but I don't feel it is entirely irrational. For instance, I would be completely at ease sharing a tube carriage with a sikh carrying a large rucksack or indeed a muslim carrying nothing more than the morning paper. My unease is very specific and depends upon at least 2 conditions being met.

On Friday, I took a lunchtime walk out to Bishopsgate in the City. A large group of school children were blocking access to the pedestrian crossing I wanted to use and then an arab looking man, complete with full beard apppeared with a large black "hold-all" bag which he proceeded to rummage in. Despite being out in the open, the fact I was stuck waiting for the school party to clear while a man with the "right" criteria started rummaging in a large bag immediately put me into an episode of "Spooks". The stupidity of the situation was that I was not sufficiently convinced of my fears to:

a) Do anything towards the arab looking man
b) try to move the school group along more quickly or
c) get out of the way myself.

In reality I knew that, despite my fear, this man was unlikely to pose a threat. Nonetheless I was slightly alerted. When the school group cleared, I crossed the road and saw the same arab looking man crossing with me, still fiddling in his bag. I made a beeline into Tescos where I was aiming to go all along and was relieved the man did not come in too.

At the last minute, I saw his rummage rewarded, and he produced a bottle of Lucozade from the bag. My fears, such as they were, being proved misguided. However I doubt I am the only Londoner who thinks like that.

It is stories like this which warn of the potential for a major terrorist incident in the "Obama transition" period that keep the fear levels bubbling away. Three and a bit years ago, before I started this blog London suffered significant terrorism. There is every reason to think that it could happen again sometime. Therefore, tolerant as most Londoners are, I think many people in this city still get a bit nervous when stuck next people that fit their personal mental image of what a terrorist looks like. Spooks isn't helping either !

Suffer the little children

If the media coverage this week could be seen as in any way representative of how children get treated in Britain, it could only be concluded that this is a dreadful country.

At least four separate and unrelated cases stand out within the last week:

1) A mother is on trial for faking the kidnap of and drugging her own daughter which lead to one of the biggest ever police investigations in the country.

2) Two very young boys were killed by their mentally disturbed mother in Manchester.

3) The investigation into abuse at a Jersey children's home continues, albeit with some positive news suggest no murders occured in the "home".

4) Receiving most media coverage and political attention is the dreadful killing of "baby P" a 17 month old baby tortured and killed at the hands of his mother, her "boyfriend" and a lodger at their home in Haringey, North London. Tabloid coverage seems to consist of a competion to describe ever more depraved aspects of the people involved.

It is difficult to understand if these cases are symptomatic of some wider malaise in society (one common thread is that all the children involved did not have their natural father featuring actively in their lives) or if they are just uniquely awful cases that happen to reported around the same time.

The failure of the authorities to prevent the baby's death has rightly received much attention but one cannot overlook the responsibility of those directly involved in the baby's death. Due to the destruction of evidence and the difficulties of proving who in the house ultimately killed the baby, all three have been found guildty of "causing the death" of the baby rather than murder. It is a legal technicality but in reality means a much lighter sentence.

It seems like they have got away with murder. However they must surely face justice for what they have done to an innocent. As the words of Jesus speaking about children are written in the Bible:

"Whoever harms one of these little ones that believes in me, it would be better for him if a millstone were tied around his neck and he were drowned in the depths of the ocean." Matthew 18:6

There is no denying the evil of those who seek to harm children. Our laws and our society would do well to recognise that further than it does at the moment. I do not believe these cases are representative of the country in general but for each case that such horrors do occur in, the country is shamed nonetheless.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7706598.stm

Remembrance Sunday

Today is Remembrance Sunday and Tuesday will mark 90 years since the end of the First World War, the war in which Britain suffered its worst ever casualties (significantly worse than the Second World War).

Remarkably there are still a tiny band of surviving veterans from the First World War and I understand three were at the march past at the Cenotaph in London today.

The fields of northern France and Belgium are scattered with British cemeteries and these always make moving places to visit. Some are even visible from the speeding Eurostar train between London and Paris. I once visited the forests around Verdun in France and found the rusting shell of a hand grenade from the First World War. That physical link made the war all seem very real. I wondered if anyone had been killed or injured by the hand grenade that I held in my hand.

In that war the British were also in action in Turkey which was an ally of Germany. The plan was to attack a German ally to the south and end the stalemate to the north in Europe. The British forces together with very significant numbers of Australian and New Zealander forces landed on the end of the Gallipoli penninsular.

The history of the Gallipoli landings is the subject of countless books and a number of films. Put simply, it was a military diaster for the British and their allies. In 9 months of occupation the allies lost over 40,000 men with with 100,000 injured. The never gained significant ground and were eventually forced to withdraw. The military strength of the Turks was a great surprise to the British and their commander Mustafa Kemal (later known as Atatürk) went onto lead his nation a few years later. The British First Lord of the Admirality, one Winston Churchill, ended up being demoted for the disaster. History went on to show that he did also have some strengths !

We visited Gallipoli two years ago and it is beautiful, haunting strip of land overlooking the Dardenelles. Below is a photo we took at Helles Point, the initial site for the allied landings. A British memorial and cemetery can be found there today.

Helles Point Gallipoli, Turkey

For anyone interested in the Gallipoli campaign, a 2005 film based on the letters of soldiers from all sides is strongly recommended. The trailer below gives a flavour although do not be put off by the Hollywood tones. The film is better and more subtle than the trailer suggests. (There are several films with the title Gallipoli but the one I am recommending was made in 2005 and is factually based).



Today with the British and others still fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan and the commitment of further forces to the latter being an overlooked aspect of the Obama manifesto (overlooked at least for the most "luvvie" of his supporters. I doubt Oprah , Dimbleby et al will be volunteering for the front line !), it seems sadly certain that we will will have more troops to remember next year.

We remember all those who have died for our freedoms.

The bodies of 5 British soldiers preparing to return home from Afghanistan in June this year having paid the highest price. (photo from Daily Telegraph website)

Remember, remember

well, it seems to be the eighth of November this year.

All over London it sounds like a war has broken out as fireworks explode everywhere.

As the nearest Saturday to November 5th most people and most official firework displays are taking place today. For anyone reading who is unfamiliar with this festival this is how we remember the failed attempt by Guy Fawkes and his co-conspirators to blow up Parliament in 1605. He was apprehended on November 5th.

We are in essence celebrating the saving of Parliament. I guess that is still something worth celebrating (just about :-)).

The short clip is our own very modest bonfire. Bonfires and one year olds don't really mix. The fireworks exploding all of south London tonight should be audible in the background.

Of Mutts and Living Presidents

This is the great hope of the world (according to the media at least).

Sometimes you just couldn't make it up :-)

Helping Yourself

I wanted to use a quote from Janet Daley in my last post but I couldn't find somewhere that it fitted well.

Therefore I will post it on its own. I think it is of relevance both to those who feel very fearful at the election of an unknown quantity and also to those with unrealistically high expectations of Obama. We should not expect too much from Obama and if we expect the worst we can still do some things about it. In the end, we may just need to help ourselves.

After all Obama is just a man and just a poltician:

"..........Little wonder that his candidacy is being mistaken for the Second Coming.

What will this mean for the future? What if, as will almost certainly be the case, the great deliverance fails to deliver? The disillusion and sense of betrayal may create divisions in American society that will be greater and deeper than any we have seen for a generation. The sense of hopelessness and bitter disappointment may well be - as Americans say - toxic. Then again, maybe American politics will simply get the grown-up message that no one mortal is the final answer: that the fulfilment of the American dream must always lie within the individual and not with the government. To be fair, Obama himself suggests this when he tells the crowds, "It's not about me - it's about you."

The full article can be found here.

President Obama

Not superman but for better or worse he is American President

A few final thoughts on the election of Barack Obama, before we start turning to "real life" again:

1) Whatever one thinks of him, he appears to have won a genuine mandate from the majority of American people. This was no "landslide" as some are calling it. At least 52 % to 47 % is not a landslide in my book. You don't have to look far back to find bigger margins in the popular vote. 1996 saw 49 % to 40 % in Clinton against Dole. Nonetheless the margin was sufficient to make all reported cases of local incidents of intimidation and fraud (as I noted yesterday) not relevant to the overall final result.

2) It is a significant milestone to have a black President (in not wishing to totally forget that he happened to have a white mother !). America leads the world in opportunities for its minority groups. A black Democrat president follows on from two black Republican Secretaries of State. This is the culmination of a wider trend. This shows to be a myth the allegation that America is a particularly "racist country". Instead we should reflect that America is unique in having a minority ethnic group leader. It is difficult to see the same happening in other countries with significant minority groups. There is no sign this will happen anytime soon in Brazil, Canada, France, Australia or Britain to name just a few.

3) His biggest obvious strength by a mile is oratory. His other talents are unproven.

4) His policies are vague and tend towards the "redistribution of wealth" rather than the creation of wealth. He has made trade protectionist noises. If these two traits are reflected in the reality of his policy it would be bad news for the American and world economies.

5) His promises to reduce military expenditure are unfortunate in their timing when the world needs a stronger American military more than ever. Which other nation can stand up to oppressors on the continent of Obama's father ?(Congo and Somalia are pressing issues with the latter a base for Islamic militants so presenting security as well as humanitarian concerns). Which other nation can subdue potential threats from Iran,keep the lids on Iraq and Afghanistan and prevent total collapse in Pakistan ? Which other nation can act as a counter weight to a resurgent Russia that today announced it was moving missiles to the Polish border ? Which other country will deter any crazy actions from North Korea under its ailing leader ?
All these issues are threats to people around the world and ultimately to us all. We would do well to think a little more widely before cheering in a leader promising "Change" and not much else.


6) His regime will be strong but not completely unfettered. The Republicans will control over 40 seats in the Senate so may have some chance of delaying or curbing any plans that are too damaging.

7) He has two years to prove himself before America's next major vote in the mid-term elections in 2010.

Finally, he is not the candidate I preferred but this is not the first time I have supported the losing side in an election (I suspect it won't be the last either !). For now he is President Elect of the USA and there is nothing else to do than wish him success and hope he proves his doubters' worst fears wrong. He has two years with an enviably free hand to achieve something great for his country and the world. What he does in that time will prove his real character and motives once and for all.