At the end, you know all machines are feminine: the whole bloody lot. The names that they are given are irrelevant, they are all girls. I used to touch the deck things on the RV Sergey Vavivlov but I still thought of her as my girl. No different from bells. Emmanuel, the heaviest full circle ringing bell in the world may well be named after Christ but she is still a girl. All bells are girls. When you start to ring bells, you start with the lightest and you say (to tell the others to be prepared), ‘Treble’s going, she’s gone,’ for that is the moment of commitment.
Look at the launch of a ship. The champagne bottle crashes into the bows and the words come out, ‘May God bless her and all who sail in her,’ etc etc.
Why? I simply do not know. One reason may be that we trust machinery to help and protect us as we would with our mothers. Another may be that we know they are capricious and awkward at times.
They all fit. I love machinery and I love women.
Tuesday 19 January 2010
Monday 18 January 2010
David
This is my name, the Christian name my parents gave to me. I don’t know when but it was probably soon after I was born so I have carried it almost all of my life. I like it. Somewhere I once read that it was Hebrew and meant ‘lullaby’ or ‘darling.’ I don’t think either description fits with me but I am OK with it.
Somewhere in the marketing text books, it was said that your Christian name was the sweetest sound you could ever hear. I’ll buy that. Likewise, I did read once that your name to a degree conditioned your personality. There seems no logic in that but I do agree to a certain extent. I won’t be nasty here but I do recognise traits in personalities and names. Xxxxxn’s are generally boring while Xxxxx’s are usually robust characters. I could go on and on.
Then you get to the diminutive – Dave. Hate it. One of my own brothers uses it. Dave’s are not David’s. Dave’s are altogether shallower people. David’s are strong. Dave did not kill Goliath: David did. The interesting thing here is that some people seem instinctively to call me ‘David’ whilst others do the same with ‘Dave.’ That in itself tells me something, ‘They don’t all bloody watch me.’
I am a David; I always have been and I always will be.
Somewhere in the marketing text books, it was said that your Christian name was the sweetest sound you could ever hear. I’ll buy that. Likewise, I did read once that your name to a degree conditioned your personality. There seems no logic in that but I do agree to a certain extent. I won’t be nasty here but I do recognise traits in personalities and names. Xxxxxn’s are generally boring while Xxxxx’s are usually robust characters. I could go on and on.
Then you get to the diminutive – Dave. Hate it. One of my own brothers uses it. Dave’s are not David’s. Dave’s are altogether shallower people. David’s are strong. Dave did not kill Goliath: David did. The interesting thing here is that some people seem instinctively to call me ‘David’ whilst others do the same with ‘Dave.’ That in itself tells me something, ‘They don’t all bloody watch me.’
I am a David; I always have been and I always will be.
Sunday 17 January 2010
Herald of Free Enterprise
This was a car ferry that sank in 1987 killing 193 people as it left the Belgian port of Zeebrugge. I have used it on that crossing with no mishap. However on the fateful night, they left the sea doors open apparently to clear exhaust fumes from the vehicle deck. Water came in, the ship listed and unchained vehicles slid about and aggravated the list. So it sank.
I was nowhere near all this, sitting in the comfort of my home but it changed my life. At the time and at the insistence of my daughter, I was learning to swim. So the following week, our swimming instructor told us to bring everyday clothes to the lesson. And there he taught us how to undress underwater and get to the surface.
It's like the 'know your escape route' about which I wrote earlier. You have to think about survival. It is not all about luck.
I was nowhere near all this, sitting in the comfort of my home but it changed my life. At the time and at the insistence of my daughter, I was learning to swim. So the following week, our swimming instructor told us to bring everyday clothes to the lesson. And there he taught us how to undress underwater and get to the surface.
It's like the 'know your escape route' about which I wrote earlier. You have to think about survival. It is not all about luck.
Animal intelligence
The Sunday Times today publishes an article on animal intelligence. Here is the link if you wish to read it:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/biology_evolution/article6991028.ece
The conclusion is that there is no digital divide between the intelligence of humans and the rest of the animal world. Am I surprised? No. You only have to watch your fellow men to see that a spectrum of intelligence already exists there so why not carry this on to the animals?
Many, many years ago, late 60's I think, I got the usual knock on the door from the Jehovah's Witnesses. They gave me a book about creation. Read it and marked it up but they never came back so I could not argue with them. One picture I remember well showed human beings on a cliff top and across the canyon, the rest of the animal world. It was meant to portray that we were uniquely created by God and that the animals were our servants. Thought it was bollocks then and think it more so today.
As I have grown older, I have travelled more and watched animals more and that has lead me to believe that intelligence is a continuum. Who knows what dolphins could do if they had hands?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/biology_evolution/article6991028.ece
The conclusion is that there is no digital divide between the intelligence of humans and the rest of the animal world. Am I surprised? No. You only have to watch your fellow men to see that a spectrum of intelligence already exists there so why not carry this on to the animals?
Many, many years ago, late 60's I think, I got the usual knock on the door from the Jehovah's Witnesses. They gave me a book about creation. Read it and marked it up but they never came back so I could not argue with them. One picture I remember well showed human beings on a cliff top and across the canyon, the rest of the animal world. It was meant to portray that we were uniquely created by God and that the animals were our servants. Thought it was bollocks then and think it more so today.
As I have grown older, I have travelled more and watched animals more and that has lead me to believe that intelligence is a continuum. Who knows what dolphins could do if they had hands?
Saturday 16 January 2010
Ultimate success
Do what you wish in this world unless it is harmful. Go for anything you wish and feel good when you have achieved it. The magnitude of your desires is irrelevant in the eyes of others; it's the magnitude in your own eyes which counts.
But if you wish for ultimate success, something that exceeds every hope and desire you ever had, then look at your children. For if they succeed then you have success beyond compare. Nothing you have ever done will beat that.
But if you wish for ultimate success, something that exceeds every hope and desire you ever had, then look at your children. For if they succeed then you have success beyond compare. Nothing you have ever done will beat that.
Chinese horoscopes
We all know that the chinese classify year of birth by animal names - tiger, rat, monkey etc. Fewer people know that the animal of your year of birth is classified by one of five elements - metal, water, wood, fire and earth. So with a cycle of 12 years and 5 elements, the specific type only comes up every 60 years.
Being born in 1944, I am a wood monkey. This is what they say about them:
Wood Monkeys are sharp, witty individuals. They are practical and sharp and possess a general knowledge of how things work. They have a knack for communicating with others and excel in languages and information technology. These Monkeys can deal with all types of people with ease and grace. They work hard and apply their practicality to their work.
And then again:
A real dynamo, this one! The Wood Monkey wants to do things and never likes to sit around doing nothing. No video watching, instead this one will climb the highest mountains, go on the grand safari, and have one adventure after another, with great creativity and imagination. Whew! Often pioneers in new undertakings, they are sharp and ambitious and make big deals happen. These Gentle Giants can be in charge of all the details and no one ever thinks them bossy or pushy. They are good communicators and give direction without ruffling feathers. Workaholics all the way, they really need to learn to relax a little so their family life does not suffer. When they do take time out to breathe, they are so sympathetic and caring, never leaving their friends and family in the lurch. Love life can be a roller coaster of ups and downs, ranging from a conservative holding back to the unleashing of wild passion.
Famous Monkey people: Elizabeth Taylor, Charles Dickens, Lyndon Johnson, Eleanor Roosevelt, Nelson Rockefeller, Leonardo da Vinci, Simone de Beauvoir, Isaac Stern, George Lucas
So you have been really lucky to have known me.
Being born in 1944, I am a wood monkey. This is what they say about them:
Wood Monkeys are sharp, witty individuals. They are practical and sharp and possess a general knowledge of how things work. They have a knack for communicating with others and excel in languages and information technology. These Monkeys can deal with all types of people with ease and grace. They work hard and apply their practicality to their work.
And then again:
A real dynamo, this one! The Wood Monkey wants to do things and never likes to sit around doing nothing. No video watching, instead this one will climb the highest mountains, go on the grand safari, and have one adventure after another, with great creativity and imagination. Whew! Often pioneers in new undertakings, they are sharp and ambitious and make big deals happen. These Gentle Giants can be in charge of all the details and no one ever thinks them bossy or pushy. They are good communicators and give direction without ruffling feathers. Workaholics all the way, they really need to learn to relax a little so their family life does not suffer. When they do take time out to breathe, they are so sympathetic and caring, never leaving their friends and family in the lurch. Love life can be a roller coaster of ups and downs, ranging from a conservative holding back to the unleashing of wild passion.
Famous Monkey people: Elizabeth Taylor, Charles Dickens, Lyndon Johnson, Eleanor Roosevelt, Nelson Rockefeller, Leonardo da Vinci, Simone de Beauvoir, Isaac Stern, George Lucas
So you have been really lucky to have known me.
Friday 15 January 2010
Shit - usage of the word
A simple little word simultaneously offensive and versatile. Think of me as you will but I do use it a lot. I was asked many years ago to write down all the examples of the word's usage. Never got around to it until yesterday. So for better or for worse, try this:
Shit – faeces or excrement – the basic meaning of the word
Piece of shit – referring to a person – uncomplimentary comment. But when referring to something written or spoken, it means rubbish or nonsense. Can also be applied to a task or problem when it means easy.
Bullshit – as above when referring to something written or spoken
Bull shitting – subtly different – speaking something which is not true, possibly in a flamboyant way and with a purpose to impress or persuade. Or may just refer who has no knowledge of the subject on which they are speaking but talking on the subject regardless and trying to sound knowledgeable.
Shit! – as an exclamation – Damn!
It’s a penny to a piece of shit – the odds of something happening – pretty certain in this case
Shithead/shitface – term of abuse
Couldn’t give a shit – don’t care
Up shit creek without a paddle – in trouble and no way out
In the shit – in trouble
Deep shit – in serious trouble
Shit street – a place where you are in trouble
Pile of shit – referring to a person – term of abuse. But adaptable – could refer to an unreliable product, a meal, a report, pretty much anything you see as bad, worthless etc
Tastes like shit – refers to poor food or drink
Go eat shit – go away and do something really unpleasant for you
The shit has hit the fan – big trouble for everyone
Jack Shit – nothing – as in ‘You know Jack Shit,’ or ‘I don’t care Jack Shit.’
Little shit – term of abuse, the word ‘little’ just adds emphasis. Usually means worthless but could be applied to someone who has betrayed you in some way or even just embarrassed you.
No shit? – a question to the talker meaning something like ‘Really, you are not kidding (jesting) with me?’
Holy shit! – an expletive about an event or happening, usually not bad.
Full of shit – refers to a person whom you think is constantly talking bullshit (see above)
Flyshit/Chicken shit – something of no significance whatsoever
Shit happens – a dismissive response when someone tells you of a misfortune and you don’t really care. In person you might just shrug your shoulders as you say it.
No shit, Sherlock? – Americanism which I don’t use. A response to being told some very obvious. The addition of Sherlock only adds to the sarcasm being a reference to Sherlock Holmes so it tells the speaker that his observation is really clever which it isn’t.
Shit – faeces or excrement – the basic meaning of the word
Piece of shit – referring to a person – uncomplimentary comment. But when referring to something written or spoken, it means rubbish or nonsense. Can also be applied to a task or problem when it means easy.
Bullshit – as above when referring to something written or spoken
Bull shitting – subtly different – speaking something which is not true, possibly in a flamboyant way and with a purpose to impress or persuade. Or may just refer who has no knowledge of the subject on which they are speaking but talking on the subject regardless and trying to sound knowledgeable.
Shit! – as an exclamation – Damn!
It’s a penny to a piece of shit – the odds of something happening – pretty certain in this case
Shithead/shitface – term of abuse
Couldn’t give a shit – don’t care
Up shit creek without a paddle – in trouble and no way out
In the shit – in trouble
Deep shit – in serious trouble
Shit street – a place where you are in trouble
Pile of shit – referring to a person – term of abuse. But adaptable – could refer to an unreliable product, a meal, a report, pretty much anything you see as bad, worthless etc
Tastes like shit – refers to poor food or drink
Go eat shit – go away and do something really unpleasant for you
The shit has hit the fan – big trouble for everyone
Jack Shit – nothing – as in ‘You know Jack Shit,’ or ‘I don’t care Jack Shit.’
Little shit – term of abuse, the word ‘little’ just adds emphasis. Usually means worthless but could be applied to someone who has betrayed you in some way or even just embarrassed you.
No shit? – a question to the talker meaning something like ‘Really, you are not kidding (jesting) with me?’
Holy shit! – an expletive about an event or happening, usually not bad.
Full of shit – refers to a person whom you think is constantly talking bullshit (see above)
Flyshit/Chicken shit – something of no significance whatsoever
Shit happens – a dismissive response when someone tells you of a misfortune and you don’t really care. In person you might just shrug your shoulders as you say it.
No shit, Sherlock? – Americanism which I don’t use. A response to being told some very obvious. The addition of Sherlock only adds to the sarcasm being a reference to Sherlock Holmes so it tells the speaker that his observation is really clever which it isn’t.
Thursday 14 January 2010
Just wars
This is off the top of my head. I have looked nothing up apart from reading the newspaper.
I read today that our Armed Forces Minister believes that we in Britain are 'growing so risk averse that the public may no longer tolerate deployment of the military.' The article about his speech last night rambles on and inevitably makes reference to Afghanistan. I think he misses the point. Whilst we honour the dead of Afghanistan as the bodies are brought home, it doesn't mean that we are happy with the war.
My own opinion is that we, the British people, do not think it is a 'just war.' If the Channel Islands were invaded by the French tomorrow, this nation would rise as one. (As if we needed any excuse to bash the French.) Protection of the Channel Islands would be a just war: fighting in Afghanistan is not.
All wars are just in the eye of the belligerent but that doesn't make them so. I'd say the basic qualification for the epithet 'just' in the eye of the defender is the liberation of one or more countries which have been peaceful but invaded by others. Yes the invaded countries may have been annoying but so long as they did not invade anyone, then you have no right to invade them. (Might make an exception here in the case of France but that is another matter.)
WWI and WWII seem to me to be just wars as was the Desert War which liberated Kuwait. I think the same about the Falklands even though Argentina may disagree. Tough, we didn't invite them and they were not welcome by the indigenous population.
But were Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, the wars of the Austrian and Spanish Succession just wars? I think not. They were/are simple interference in the affairs of others. And as I have said before, Afghanistan is sheer lunacy given the history of foreign intrusion into that country.
Then we get the middle ground like the War of American Independence and civil wars. Well, if you don't like your ruler, it seems OK to me to having a go at changing him. But the justness of such a war is in eyes of the local people not the rest of us.
Shouldn't really have started this subject for I have not really thought it through. However, I do not believe for one second that the British have lost their stomach for war overall. Back in pre-imperial Rome, according to Livy, people bemoaned the fact that the teenagers of the day were idle layabouts and would be useless in times of war. And then of course, they and their successors founded an empire.
No, Mr Armed Forces Minister, we are not interested because we don't care and don't feel that we or those we hold dear are threatened.
There you go, me musing again.
I read today that our Armed Forces Minister believes that we in Britain are 'growing so risk averse that the public may no longer tolerate deployment of the military.' The article about his speech last night rambles on and inevitably makes reference to Afghanistan. I think he misses the point. Whilst we honour the dead of Afghanistan as the bodies are brought home, it doesn't mean that we are happy with the war.
My own opinion is that we, the British people, do not think it is a 'just war.' If the Channel Islands were invaded by the French tomorrow, this nation would rise as one. (As if we needed any excuse to bash the French.) Protection of the Channel Islands would be a just war: fighting in Afghanistan is not.
All wars are just in the eye of the belligerent but that doesn't make them so. I'd say the basic qualification for the epithet 'just' in the eye of the defender is the liberation of one or more countries which have been peaceful but invaded by others. Yes the invaded countries may have been annoying but so long as they did not invade anyone, then you have no right to invade them. (Might make an exception here in the case of France but that is another matter.)
WWI and WWII seem to me to be just wars as was the Desert War which liberated Kuwait. I think the same about the Falklands even though Argentina may disagree. Tough, we didn't invite them and they were not welcome by the indigenous population.
But were Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, the wars of the Austrian and Spanish Succession just wars? I think not. They were/are simple interference in the affairs of others. And as I have said before, Afghanistan is sheer lunacy given the history of foreign intrusion into that country.
Then we get the middle ground like the War of American Independence and civil wars. Well, if you don't like your ruler, it seems OK to me to having a go at changing him. But the justness of such a war is in eyes of the local people not the rest of us.
Shouldn't really have started this subject for I have not really thought it through. However, I do not believe for one second that the British have lost their stomach for war overall. Back in pre-imperial Rome, according to Livy, people bemoaned the fact that the teenagers of the day were idle layabouts and would be useless in times of war. And then of course, they and their successors founded an empire.
No, Mr Armed Forces Minister, we are not interested because we don't care and don't feel that we or those we hold dear are threatened.
There you go, me musing again.
Tuesday 12 January 2010
BBC Democracy Live
This a channel entirely devoted to proceedings in our various governmental bodies. We have a lot of these, far too many in my opinion - House of Commons, House of Lords, Welsh Assembly, Scottish Parliament, Northern Ireland Parliament, European Parliament plus Select Committees which discuss the price of cat food or the aid we should give to Dharfur in equally shallow but polite ways.
The House of Commons is generally pretty empty apart from Prime Minister's Question Time for that is an opportunity to taunt him. The Lords is usually well packed. They, of course, have nothing else to do - no electorate to respond to for they were not democratically elected. There are about 735 of them, about 10% due to lineage and birth. The rest are there because some Prime Minister wanted to pack the place with his cronies.
The regional assemblies are quite funny in their self importance and irrelevance but unlike the Commons and the Lords, they are modern and each representative has a laptop. That really frees them up from the tedious matter of listening to whatever is being talked about. Watched Jane Hutt this afternoon ignoring her First Minister, playing with her mouse and typing things in. What is she up to - Facebook, YouTube, emails or the price of fish? I hope its emails for she has a lot of catching up to do - she hasn't responded to one of mine from last summer.
Select Committees are a body of MP's who call in individuals to explore ostensibly serious issues. But it's all rather genteel and nobody gets a hammering. We need a bit more shouting like 'WTF did you carry on trading when you knew you were bankrupt?' But we won't and the outcome will be just another piece of legislation on the price of sausages.
In the European Parliament, as I write, Bulgaria's Foreign Minister is rambling on about humanitarian aid. She does however seem to more interested in telling everyone that Bulgaria has bought two aircraft to fight forest fires. I suppose I should be grateful that they are not discussing the standardisation of fonts on all European newspapers or new regulations on the size of cauliflowers.
There is one single abiding conclusion from watching all of them. They are all talking froth. When trying to make a serious point, one representative recites an anecdotal tale about one of his constituents, aged 81 with a broken leg, who has to hop 3 miles to the hospital for treatment. Unfortunate but statistically irrelevant.
And that leads me to the conclusion that none of these assemblies actually changes things in all this chit-chat. The changes come from proposals of their civil servants and all the politicians do is rubber stamp them or maybe, if they have paid some attention, rubber stamp them after making a few minor alterations.
The House of Commons is generally pretty empty apart from Prime Minister's Question Time for that is an opportunity to taunt him. The Lords is usually well packed. They, of course, have nothing else to do - no electorate to respond to for they were not democratically elected. There are about 735 of them, about 10% due to lineage and birth. The rest are there because some Prime Minister wanted to pack the place with his cronies.
The regional assemblies are quite funny in their self importance and irrelevance but unlike the Commons and the Lords, they are modern and each representative has a laptop. That really frees them up from the tedious matter of listening to whatever is being talked about. Watched Jane Hutt this afternoon ignoring her First Minister, playing with her mouse and typing things in. What is she up to - Facebook, YouTube, emails or the price of fish? I hope its emails for she has a lot of catching up to do - she hasn't responded to one of mine from last summer.
Select Committees are a body of MP's who call in individuals to explore ostensibly serious issues. But it's all rather genteel and nobody gets a hammering. We need a bit more shouting like 'WTF did you carry on trading when you knew you were bankrupt?' But we won't and the outcome will be just another piece of legislation on the price of sausages.
In the European Parliament, as I write, Bulgaria's Foreign Minister is rambling on about humanitarian aid. She does however seem to more interested in telling everyone that Bulgaria has bought two aircraft to fight forest fires. I suppose I should be grateful that they are not discussing the standardisation of fonts on all European newspapers or new regulations on the size of cauliflowers.
There is one single abiding conclusion from watching all of them. They are all talking froth. When trying to make a serious point, one representative recites an anecdotal tale about one of his constituents, aged 81 with a broken leg, who has to hop 3 miles to the hospital for treatment. Unfortunate but statistically irrelevant.
And that leads me to the conclusion that none of these assemblies actually changes things in all this chit-chat. The changes come from proposals of their civil servants and all the politicians do is rubber stamp them or maybe, if they have paid some attention, rubber stamp them after making a few minor alterations.
Tuesday 5 January 2010
1994 Chinook crash
Back in 1994, a Chinook helicopter, flying from Northern Ireland to Scotland, crashed on the Mull of Kintyre killing all 29 people aboard. Of these 29, it was said that 25 of them of were the UK's most senior intelligence experts on the 'Troubles' in Northern Ireland. The crash was blamed on pilot error but in the last few days, it has emerged that 'leaked evidence' suggests that the helicopter may not have been airworthy. The Ministry of Defence in its inimitable way rejects this and says it will not open a new inquiry.
Fair enough, who am I to know?
But three questions stick in my head from that day to this:
Why were so many Northern Irish top brass flying to Scotland anyway? If they needed a conference then why not fly others into Northern Ireland? Internet gossip suggests they were flying for a round of golf. I found that quite plausible.
Why not use a private jet? They are faster and fly above the weather most of the time. Now this would fit with the golf trip theory for the cost of the jet would have shown up and have to be justified.
Why were 25 of the top brass collected together on the same flight? I find this the most reprehensible of all. 20 years before this incident, my employer, Lucas Industries, had a policy that no more than 3 senior executives could take the same flight on the principle that in the event of an accident, you could seriously damage the effectiveness of a section of the company. I adopted the same principle when I was in charge at AB.
So 29 died in that crash. You have to wonder how many more died in Northern Ireland given the damage this must have done to our intelligence gathering.
Fair enough, who am I to know?
But three questions stick in my head from that day to this:
Why were so many Northern Irish top brass flying to Scotland anyway? If they needed a conference then why not fly others into Northern Ireland? Internet gossip suggests they were flying for a round of golf. I found that quite plausible.
Why not use a private jet? They are faster and fly above the weather most of the time. Now this would fit with the golf trip theory for the cost of the jet would have shown up and have to be justified.
Why were 25 of the top brass collected together on the same flight? I find this the most reprehensible of all. 20 years before this incident, my employer, Lucas Industries, had a policy that no more than 3 senior executives could take the same flight on the principle that in the event of an accident, you could seriously damage the effectiveness of a section of the company. I adopted the same principle when I was in charge at AB.
So 29 died in that crash. You have to wonder how many more died in Northern Ireland given the damage this must have done to our intelligence gathering.
Farting
Yes, of course I know that many will think that this is a vulgar subject but it is as a natural subject as sneezing. Maybe the mild revulsion showed to the word is just like the ones I talked about in an earlier blog, 'Bad words.' A few observations:
Many men find the subject a matter of fun especially in jokes and in my observation men generally enjoy farting themselves. Women maintain an air of decorum and pretend not to talk about it.
Then we have the fact that men actually enjoy breaking wind. We recognise the social niceities but it's a great experience to let rip in private. I suspect women just release their gastric gas in a more controlled manner. If you let loose in the bath then the bubbles tickle your testicles; never asked a woman what she experienced under such circumstances.
Billy Connolly, a great Scottish comedian, once came up with the phrase, 'About as welcome as a fart in a spacesuit.' Very funny but inconsistent with reality isn't it? Never knew anyone who objected to his/her own farts whilst finding those of others to be quite obnoxious. And it's certainly really unpleasant in a confined space such as an aircraft. But then, I have been told that the air in your average aircraft cabin is similar to about 7,000 feet so that would increase the farting chances.
It must all be down to small quantities of special molecules for the majority constituent is Nitrogen, CO2, Oxygen and a bit of methane.
Back at the turn of the 19th/20th centuries, there was a French music hall artiste called Le Petomane who could fart at will. Got a little paperback on him somewhere in this house. As I recall, one of his specialities was playing La Marseillaise whith a trumpet up his arse. Brilliant.
Many men find the subject a matter of fun especially in jokes and in my observation men generally enjoy farting themselves. Women maintain an air of decorum and pretend not to talk about it.
Then we have the fact that men actually enjoy breaking wind. We recognise the social niceities but it's a great experience to let rip in private. I suspect women just release their gastric gas in a more controlled manner. If you let loose in the bath then the bubbles tickle your testicles; never asked a woman what she experienced under such circumstances.
Billy Connolly, a great Scottish comedian, once came up with the phrase, 'About as welcome as a fart in a spacesuit.' Very funny but inconsistent with reality isn't it? Never knew anyone who objected to his/her own farts whilst finding those of others to be quite obnoxious. And it's certainly really unpleasant in a confined space such as an aircraft. But then, I have been told that the air in your average aircraft cabin is similar to about 7,000 feet so that would increase the farting chances.
It must all be down to small quantities of special molecules for the majority constituent is Nitrogen, CO2, Oxygen and a bit of methane.
Back at the turn of the 19th/20th centuries, there was a French music hall artiste called Le Petomane who could fart at will. Got a little paperback on him somewhere in this house. As I recall, one of his specialities was playing La Marseillaise whith a trumpet up his arse. Brilliant.
Saturday 2 January 2010
Terrorism
Suspect this one will land me in trouble here.
Terrorism of the individual kind does not of itself threaten our way of life. Yes, it’s very nasty to have a plane destroyed or a bomb planted in a public place. People get killed and that cruelly affects their families but it does not disrupt the way most people go about their daily life.
No, what does affect our lives is the reaction to the most recent incident and our seemingly lamentable failure to act on intelligence. The latest incident of course is the failed bomb attempt on NW253 from Amsterdam to Detroit. The guy was known but not considered a particularly high risk and no one has even speculated about why he picked that particular flight. If I’d have been him, I’d have caught a later flight for NW253 is very early.
And now of course, we find the guy was trained in Yemen so the spotlight has moved to there – a country neglected by the West for so many years.
The outcome will of course be further security checks and increased delays for millions of ordinary folks. Air travel has already got to the point where the flying time is but a fraction of the total travelling time. Whatever next I wonder, x-ray checks at the bus stop? It’s all ‘shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted.’
Time and time again, we get the post facto news that the individuals involved were known to the security authorities. You only have to read the 9/11 report to wonder why a bunch of Arab/Muslim lads taking up flying lessons did not attract more attention from the FBI. But then as the report says, there was little coordination between the various security agencies.
A good start would be an increased focus on possible suspects and a suspension of all this egalitarian/PC shit at security. Face up to this. When was the last time you heard that a bomber was dressed like a nun, a Western businessman or a young dolly bird wearing jeans and high heeled shoes? So let’s go for the swarthy and bearded and quit giving the likes of Prince Harry (or was it William?) a full security check. As I said, earlier in this blog, it’s the blokes with tea towels on their heads and brown paper parcels under their arms that we have to worry about.
Naturally, there would be outrage at implementing policies like the above. Well, the USA and Britain are already in deep shit on the international stage so it can’t get much worse. If Egypt or Chechniya objects, we should just say ‘look mate, we haven’t seen any threat from grey haired pensioners of Cardiff.’ This may sound racist but it's not meant to be. However the inescapable fact is that these terrorist attacks can be profiled and by so doing we would relieve the majority of society of the tedium and inconvenience of unnecessary checks.
And finally, let’s think about taking away for the reason for all this crap. Let’s stop meddling in Iraq and Afghanistan and face up to the fact that Israel (for 40 years) has shown itself to be quite able to defend itself. (Oh sure we can sell them weapons as do the French but they don’t get so much approbation because they sell weapons to anyone – because they do it for money.) Leave the buggers to killing themselves and not us. We should have learned that lesson in Northern Ireland.
Postscript: Since I wrote this, many people in the media have also raised the issue of profiling. Obama has even extended his list of countries from which citizens might be suspect. 'Ridiculous,' says The Times and I agree. It's not their nationality on which we must focus but their behaviour and style plus of course any intelligence gathered from elsewhere.
Terrorism of the individual kind does not of itself threaten our way of life. Yes, it’s very nasty to have a plane destroyed or a bomb planted in a public place. People get killed and that cruelly affects their families but it does not disrupt the way most people go about their daily life.
No, what does affect our lives is the reaction to the most recent incident and our seemingly lamentable failure to act on intelligence. The latest incident of course is the failed bomb attempt on NW253 from Amsterdam to Detroit. The guy was known but not considered a particularly high risk and no one has even speculated about why he picked that particular flight. If I’d have been him, I’d have caught a later flight for NW253 is very early.
And now of course, we find the guy was trained in Yemen so the spotlight has moved to there – a country neglected by the West for so many years.
The outcome will of course be further security checks and increased delays for millions of ordinary folks. Air travel has already got to the point where the flying time is but a fraction of the total travelling time. Whatever next I wonder, x-ray checks at the bus stop? It’s all ‘shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted.’
Time and time again, we get the post facto news that the individuals involved were known to the security authorities. You only have to read the 9/11 report to wonder why a bunch of Arab/Muslim lads taking up flying lessons did not attract more attention from the FBI. But then as the report says, there was little coordination between the various security agencies.
A good start would be an increased focus on possible suspects and a suspension of all this egalitarian/PC shit at security. Face up to this. When was the last time you heard that a bomber was dressed like a nun, a Western businessman or a young dolly bird wearing jeans and high heeled shoes? So let’s go for the swarthy and bearded and quit giving the likes of Prince Harry (or was it William?) a full security check. As I said, earlier in this blog, it’s the blokes with tea towels on their heads and brown paper parcels under their arms that we have to worry about.
Naturally, there would be outrage at implementing policies like the above. Well, the USA and Britain are already in deep shit on the international stage so it can’t get much worse. If Egypt or Chechniya objects, we should just say ‘look mate, we haven’t seen any threat from grey haired pensioners of Cardiff.’ This may sound racist but it's not meant to be. However the inescapable fact is that these terrorist attacks can be profiled and by so doing we would relieve the majority of society of the tedium and inconvenience of unnecessary checks.
And finally, let’s think about taking away for the reason for all this crap. Let’s stop meddling in Iraq and Afghanistan and face up to the fact that Israel (for 40 years) has shown itself to be quite able to defend itself. (Oh sure we can sell them weapons as do the French but they don’t get so much approbation because they sell weapons to anyone – because they do it for money.) Leave the buggers to killing themselves and not us. We should have learned that lesson in Northern Ireland.
Postscript: Since I wrote this, many people in the media have also raised the issue of profiling. Obama has even extended his list of countries from which citizens might be suspect. 'Ridiculous,' says The Times and I agree. It's not their nationality on which we must focus but their behaviour and style plus of course any intelligence gathered from elsewhere.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
