Note - MY world. Be aware it is that of a very dogmatic old man who is still thinking like he did back then but prepared to listen to today
Saturday, 31 July 2010
Status schmatus
Participants in a recent panel discussion organised by thinktank the Henry Jackson Society were in agreement that any cuts would effectively force some significant restructuring in the armed forces. There was also agreement that this defence review could have a major impact on the UK's world standing.
'major impact on the UK's world standing'? I have not seen any debate on what our world standing should be, Is there any assessment as to what it now is so that cost of re-eatablishing us as a leader can be properly determined? Is there any vox pop as to we want or need to be in the forefront? Back in the days of Empire we needed a strong Navy and Army but surely that situation no longer pertains. If we take the example of US expenditure on maintaining superiority, we would never be able to sustain our status. The UN is supposed to be a parliament of equals and we are members of that. Can anyone point to any benefit we have obtained from being part of the Security Council where membership is related to status.
What is currently happening now in Afghanistan demonstrates the cost of playing alongside the big boys - cost in financial terms, in lives lost or ruined and diminution of our moral standards as in the tactics we adopt.
I for one care nothing as to our place in the world. This is not because of any lack of pride in GB but because status brings no return but demands much to uphold. If £x buys ten rifle rounds or one month's treatment for cancer, I know where I want my taxes to go.
Cameron is a great advocate for public involvement in decision making but seems to have overlooked this aspect of work that should be settled before we decide how much we will pay to be in the forefront of world powers. I have lived in a number of countries that were outside top ten and they had some very good levels of care for the sick and elderly, low unemployment and general standards of living and enjoyment of life. We have too many inequalities and general neglect that should be sorted before we worry about status. We should concentrate in cleansing our own stables before worrying about someone else's midden.
I really care nothing for holding a position where we can kill many innocent people very efficiently just because we feel a need to do so. If we do wish to maintain that ability, we owe it to our armed forces to ensure that they never again have to worry where the helicopters are, what medical treatment they will receive when maimed physically or mentally and whether Doris and the kids at home are properly accommodated.
I refrain from doing book reviews. Not that I do not have books to review - 100 plus on Afghanistan and Iraq alone - but I lack confidence in my critical skills and impartiality. Because of recent events though I am going to mention a book that I think deserves mention.
Snake Bite was written by an imbed journalist It grows from his concerns at a single action early in his stay from The Sunday Times and is an account of time spent with a joint US and UK force mentoring the Afghan National Army. His doubts as to the value of operations reads:
The attack had been a diversion, a feint as they call it. The aim was to deceive the Taliban into believing that our main attack would come from the South and South-West; the same direction from which the Soviets had attacked twenty-four years ago. As we had withdrawn, the real attack came in from the North. Hundreds of American paratroopers were dropped by helicopter. The plan called for the US to surround and beat the Taliban on the outskirts of the town. If all went well their enemy would realise it was out-gunned and overwhelmed and then flee. We would then enter and secure the town with the Afghan National Army. The operation would be announced to the world as an Afghan success. The Americans told us the aim was not just a tactical win but an Information Operations win - a IO Victory. What had happened would have been a public relations disaster. It almost was. Except that, at the time, rather lost in my own personal drama, I hadn't done a great job in collecting the facts. I was to report that two civilians were killed in the fight. But, reporting on the front line in a fast-paced environment, I didn't really have the chance to get the full story. I later discovered that that many more innocent people were killed, including the two children. As the operation unfolded my under estimate of the numbers of civilians killed seemed to become the official word. Right up to Kabul and up the command chain the word was given out: just two civilians died in the operation to recapture Musa Qala.
So, if more people had read Snake Bite what we now know from the WarLogs would have been common knowledge a long while ago - the book was published in 2009. Grey ponders who was responsible for all the bloodshed and what purpose did it serve? He sees that the battle is not just for the hearts and minds of Afghans but between soldiers and spies, between commanders in the field and officials in Whitehall and between allies sharply divided by purpose.
We have had various reasons advanced as to why we went into that sorry place. From defending the streets of London to stopping Taliban pulling out the toe nails of little girls because they wore nail varnish by way of stopping the evils of the drug trade. I will be generous and accept these were genuinely held at the time even though they are now being described as otherwise. I know well that war is hell but I question the morality of our 'leaders' when high ideals were claimed for a programme of mass misinformation, misleading statements and downright lies. We hear much of the evils of the Taliban but what of our own conduct? All is fair in love and war? We have implanted our own cancer. And for what - does anyone really believe that whatever we claim to have achieved when we do eventually withdraw will be anything permanent?
If the details circulated by wikileaks cause any rethink on our tactics and policies, they will be worth it. I take the point that lives are put at risk but not that anything in those papers will, solely and in isolation, be responsible. The informants were paid and will not have been able to disguise any new-found wealth. The Taliban knew very well who was talking with American and British soldiers and did not wait for any Old Bailey verdict to act on that knowledge. The information would have been made available to any anyone planning an operation and therefore become known to our Afghan 'allies'. The same allies who turn upon us would have been told "don't shoot Ali Rashid in such and such a compound - he is an informant" What wikileaks did was spread the news a little further. Any correction arising must be good.
Not much of a review I suppose but if the intention of a review is to draw wider attention to something written - I have achieved my aim.
"Accuracy first," I used to tell the writers. "We must never lie by accident, or through slovenliness, only deliberately!"
And as we put out news bulletin after news bulletin and service programme after service programme an entire system of subversive campaigns developed.
We are waging against Hitler a kind of total war of wits. Anything goes, so long as it serves to bring nearer the end of the war and Hitler's defeat. If you [Otto John] are at all squeamish about what you may be called upon to do against your own countrymen you must say so now. I shall understand it. In that case, however, you will be no good to us and no doubt some other job will be found for you. But if you feel like joining me, I must warn you that in my unit we are up to all the dirty tricks we can devise. No holes are barred. The dirtier the better. Lies treachery, everything"
Those are the words of Sefton Delmer who,during WW2, ran a undercover operation known as Black Boomerang. The measures used were extreme:
"The first consisted of posting letters to the relatives of German soldiers who had recently died in German military hospitals in Italy. Fortunately for us the German hospital directors made a practice of sending radio telegrams en clair to the local party authorities in Germany asking them to break the news to the relatives. These telegrams were intercepted and passed on to me. And they gave us all the information we needed – the soldier's name, the address of his relatives and the name of the hospital.
We now concocted a moving letter, written out in German longhand script on notepaper bearing the letter heading of the German hospital. Ostensibly the letter came either from a nurse or from a comrade of the dead man who had entrusted it for posting to someone going to Germany on leave. Whoever was the writer, he or she had been with the dead man during his last hours, and was now writing to comfort his relatives...
On other occasions we used the same technique to tell the relatives that their soldier had not died of wounds, but had been given a lethal injection. The Nazi doctor at the hospital, we explained through our nurse, had considered the man had no chance of becoming fighting fit again before the war was finished. The doctor had required the man's bed for soldiers with a better chance of rapid recovery.
Next I decided to fake a letter allegedly written by Mölders expatiating on the doubts he and his comrades felt about fighting for the atheist Hitler... For it was in keeping with the character of young Mölders to have written such a letter. He alone could have denounced it convincingly, and he was dead – murdered, so everyone believed, by the Nazis themselves. To lighten my conscience a little – and help on our desertion campaign at the same time – I also arranged for food parcels to be sent to those relatives of dead soldiers whom we had hoaxed so cruelly with our 'Red Circle' letters. To reinforce their belief that the dead man was not dead at all but a deserter earning good money in a safe refuge abroad we gave the alleged sender of the food parcel the dead man's Christian name.
What Black Boomerang did was to put an official gloss on the false reports so that the listeners to the radio station he established would have no doubts that they were listening to a genuine broadcast. What they heard was based upon common knowledge but re-written so as to have an insidious effect upon the troops and the factory workers.
So there may be no doubt about what will follow, this is what I accept as the meaning of Black Propaganda:
Black propaganda is false information and material that purports to be from a source on one side of a conflict, but is actually from the opposing side. It is typically used to vilify, embarrass or misrepresent the enemy. Black propaganda contrasts with grey propaganda, the source of which is not identified, and white propaganda, in which the real source is declared and usually more accurate information is given, if also slanted or distorted.
Black propaganda purports to emanate from a source other than the true source. This type of propaganda is associated with covert psychological operations. Sometimes the source is concealed or credited to a false authority and spreads lies, fabrications, and deceptions. Black propaganda is the "big lie," including all types of creative deceit.
Ultimately, black propaganda relies on the willingness of the receiver to accept the credibility of the source. If the creators or senders of the black propaganda message do not adequately understand their intended audience, the message may be misunderstood, seem suspicious, or fail altogether.
Governments will generally conduct black propaganda operations for two different reasons. First, by utilizing black propaganda a government is more likely to succeed in convincing their target audience that the information that they are seeking to influence them with is disguised, and that its motivations are not apparent. Second, there are diplomatic reasons behind the use of black propaganda. Black propaganda is necessary in order to obfuscate a government's involvement in activities that may be detrimental to its foreign policies.
We are involved in a Black Boomerange exercise right now. All of the 'official' spokesmen are stressing that the public release of the Afghan War Logs will result in murders of those Nationals who have collaborated with coalition forced. They claim this will be easily accomplished as the material now made public includes, in plain and un-coded language, the names and addresses of the informants.
These claims of pending murders are intended to throw dirt on the owner of Wikileaks and to create resentment that anyone would act in such a uncaring manner motivated by profit. If or when the whistle-blower is identified his character and motives are already compromised. And, it is working - see the comments at just one web siteThere are many other similar comments but the 'bleep' machine would have to work overtime.
Those who are against war on moral grounds will gather their own propaganda from this just as will the hawks who can claim that putting the names into the common arena will jeopardise recruitment of further civint sources.
The scope of the information that is shown in the leaked papers is very detailed. Forenames, family name, father's name and their village. Now, just ask where this all came from? Is it likely that wikileaks created or discovered it by legwork and investigation? If you think so, to what end?
No - it was all in the original documents.The one cardinal rule when dealing with informants, of course, is PROTECT YOUR ASSET!! In law enforcement, if your CI is identified or "burned" it can be devastating, not only to your case but to the safety of your CI and his/her family. This, clearly, was not a concern of those who maintained the files but seems to have escaped notice of anyone who may have used them. There could be a case that wikileaks should have redacted the information. What there is is something about the size of the documentation in the Saville (Bloody Sunday) Inquiry. That took about four years after the actual hearings ceased so how long would it have been before the War Logs saw the light of day.
Think back about the other subjects where public suspicion does not line up with official claims and explanations. Shortage of helicopters? No - we have given the commanders on the ground all they have asked for. Numbers of grievously wounded? Calculations differ. Incidence of mental stress and PTSD amongst returning troops? Fudged.
So - we cannot accuse our leaders of pursuing Boomerang tactics on a wide front. They just lie. "Tell them anything to keep them quiet. The radio station is ours"
In my estimation, the most significant parts of the release of The Afghan Papers are those which reveal just how much was kept from us - the ultimate payers of the butcher's bills. All of those taken from us have been portrayed as heroes fighting for the highest moral reasons but it seems possible that some at least of the Coalition forces and their operational tactics were tainted goods. The mission of Army etc. PR has been to show we were winning and were a universal benefit to all Afghans - even the enemy who would turn aside from their evil ways and become true democrats with a small d. We have been conned into following the leads of the politicians and high ranking Service chiefs by propaganda that we were winning. Hearts and minds figure in every think piece or amplifications of military tactics.
But we have not been achieving anything. The enemy has been able to extend its strength and assets with little resistance from our forces. Their refusal to accept us foreigners on their soil has been strengthened. We have not gained their hearts and most certainly not their minds.
There has been a greater price we have had to pay. Young and innocent soldiers must have been changed by what our politicians and their service leaders have demanded of them. It is not natural to direct deadly gunfire upon a bus load of civilians. Firing high explosive shells in the general direction of an inhabitated compound is not conduct that is born in us. Indoctrination to killing has always been a factor of military training but never on the scale or context we are now experiencing. We may be seeing the price of this change in the increased levels and severity of PTSD in those surviving physical harm and returning home.
I have a problem here. We are told that there exists groups of hunter-killer personnel who track and kill high value targets. Responsible to what level in the chain of command we do not know, they move around tactical areas screened even to their compatriots. Every time they saddle up and move on out like some 21st century posse they know that they will kill another human being before their duty is done. Their quarry will be gunned down with no suggestion that they be taken prisoner - extricating the hit squad post-engagement will be hazardous even without the presence of an un-cooperative prisoner. Anyone close to TargetMan will be caught up in a hail of bullets. There are indications in some reports where NATO-cartridge cases were found in amongst the dead that the troops had moved in close and finished off any witnesses or survivors.
What reason or justification do we have for what we did to the hearts and minds of these men? No Magnificent Seven high ideals here are there? What can we offer these men when their days as executioners are done? I write 'executioner' but at least those who function as such in society know that their subject had a fair trial and recourse to justice.
I appreciate that the objective of terrorism is to terrorise and that a terrorist will achieve much quicker results where they are feared rather than merely seen as defenders of a country and a religion. Pussy-footing around in dealing with such an enemy demands considerable levels of patience and may well not succeed anyway. All too easy to win the battle and lose the war. I do support interrogation when pursuing an objective. Even levels of questioning that cause severe pain, disorientation or mental stress. 'My' terrorist has to terrorise 'their' terrorist. It is a narrow line but I justify it because valuable intelligence may be obtained that will obviate deploying a hunter-killer group. But the questioners can do their work with a background that the person left on the floor of the cell is still alive. Or have we reached such levels of depravity that he too will be finished off when no longer useful? Given what I read and deduce from the Afghan Papers I cannot be sure of that even. Do the Ends justify the Means? Just where do the Ends achieved cancel out any benefit from the Means that were deployed?
I am left with an even more strong belief that we should end whatever we are doing in Afghanistan. We now know we went there for an unjustifiable reason. Even if it were ever justifiable it is no longer sustainable. Out now with no prevarication or bargaining of any form. Whatever claim we may make along the lines that we what we did or are doing is good is totally destroyed by consideration of what it is costing to continue the charade.
There is in place now widespread action to trace the whistle-blower and it is not intended to praise or reward him. Surely there can be no greater proof that our bosses are guilty of the most despicable conduct than this? If they are suffused with any idea that what they did was right, why this concern that their methods have been revealed? This is no way to counter evil.
This wedding of my daughter Caroline to Dan took us down to the Kent coast last week-end. It was second time for both of them but the 40-somethings had organised it all just as if they were star-struck teenagers. Caroline - as befits her parentage - is an organiser and innovator par excellence and we all had a really wonderful time at a very impressive service.
In the pre-match programme we were advised that it would be a Humanist Ceremony. This threw me a bit as the Humanist concept suggested cardboard coffins and earth closets. Not at all the sort of thing my luxury loving offspring would support at all. There did not seem much guidance in my Dummies Guide to World Religions so I consulted my religious guru. His explanation reassured me - thanks Robin - and I had the best suit pressed rather than having a fresh non-leather sole applied to the sandals and new orange dye for the Buddhist gown.
Both had worked at the ceremony and it reflected their attitudes to life in general as much as to each other. This may be why I felt it to be more convincing than a "Dearly Beloved, we are gathered here...." plighting of troths. We - the onlookers - were invited to join in at various stages; I had to restrict my urge to shout Alleluia and wave my hands in the air a couple of times. About half an hour so - just the right length. Then champers on the lawn whilst the photographers - amateur and professional - did their thing. There again, the individuality of what we were doing shone through as Caroline had 'persuaded' a friend - a professional who normally avoids wedding work - to catch important and charming moments.
We then boarded a old Route Master bus and off to the Romney, Hythe and Dymchurch railway. A narrow gauge effort that took us to the breakfast at the end of the line. I think we must have done two full circuits of Hythe giving pedestrians full benefit of the sing along a'iPod choir - mainly 70s hits given the age of the majority of the guests.
We had a superb day and the journey through the countryside was really beautiful. Breakfast over it was time for speeches and here again the routine had been pushed aside. We had a speech from the daughter of the groom, my effort and then a closing effort from his nine year old son Tom which gave the lie to all those claims that children of today cannot read. And not just read - spoken with expression and understanding. We then had a musical soiree with a group led by new husband Dan who, I understand, taught himself to play the guitar just so he could play at his wedding. The commitment showed. Then back on the train and a run through the night back to Hythe and dispersal.
There was another dimension to our trip. It must be all of eight years since I have driven down from the top of England to the lower reaches and then around what must be a fairly typical English town. There is absolutely now way I can see myself moving out of Scotland. There is a frenetic air almost everywhere; an ants nest recently disturbed was a good description. All seemingly aimless and with no common purpose. The majority of buildings were unkempt, hedges not trimmed and gardens overgrown - nothing to extremes but none of the pride and the wish to conform I see locally North of the Borders. Far too much graffiti and stained road signs in need of a wash. The traffic was of the style that seemed always on the edge of Road Rage. I cannot recall a single smile or nod of the head from anyone - a feature that struck us here from the moment we arrived.
No England - you had your chance to shine but you blew it.
"When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.
"Four Democrat senators are demanding an investigation into whether BP played any role in the release of Megrahi. If the slightest evidence to that effect surfaces, BP is toast. The Obama administration will take it out. That would make Obama look strong again, it would provide a useful distraction from his other failures and it would be the first initiative by him that would enthuse redneck Republicans."
I find this article strangely at odds with the normal balance one might expect from the Telegraph. Earlier in the self same article, Warner says "BP’s role in pressing for a decision on the prisoner transfer agreement with Libya, to facilitate its acquiring oil exploration rights from the Gaddafi regime, is now common knowledge".
Cannot have something common knowledge and if slightest evidence at the same time Gerald.
We also get considerable barrage at the fact that the ex-prisoner is still with us. Has the learned and world wise correspondent never heard of remission? "Complete remission means that the cancer or leukaemia can't be detected on scans, X-rays, or blood tests etc.Doctors sometimes call this a complete response.
Partial remission means the treatment has killed some of the cells, but not all. The cancer has shrunk, but can still be seen on scans and doesn't appear to be growing.. The treatment may have stopped the cancer from growing. Or made it smaller so that other treatments are more likely to help, such as surgery or radiotherapy. This is sometimes called a partial response."
I am not able to say whether this remission has visited Abdelbaset Ali Mohmet al-Megrahi but then neither is Warner. He bases his vituperation on al-Megrahi having lasted so long after release on some put-up jon when remission is just as likely. A prognosis is not a guaranteed outcome. al-Megrahi's situation was examined by numerous experts and I am not aware of any who have said he was in full health. The debate as to whether or not al-Meghari did it seems superfluous when the complaint is that political expediency was involved in his release.
Certainly the whole matter is being used as another stick to beat BP. The Americans quite like a shady deal. If one wants one in an oil context - have a look at Love Canal.If doubt lingers - just pop over to Vietnam history. The idea that some Britishers might swing something over Uncle Sam has rendered many incandescent. My mother always used to say one should not judge; I stick with people in glass houses should not throw stones. The people who complain that passengers in that ill-fated PanAm flight didn't get to go home free seem to forget the blasting out of the sky of an Iranian jet by a US warship.
Whilst I can appreciate that the posing by US politicians, all paragons of virtue, may inflame the situation I cannot truly understand why they are ranting on as they are. If they feel they were hard done by, why not go down the good old American route of litigation? Some court somewhere has jurisdiction to hear an appeal. It can then see where it goes - or does the US recognise just what a waste of time, money and effort the UN really is? Trying the case in the media does nothing except encourage rabble rousing based on false premise such as the Telegraph has wasted wood pulp on today. I might be prejudiced but I keep coming back to this.
Late on Thursday evening, Gloria, who has lived in the UK for more than 14 years, was deported.
No one has a complete picture of Gloria's life. She was "clearly vulnerable" according to the UK Border Agency official who interviewed her when she applied for asylum, and might have learning difficulties too. She has mental health problems for which she has been receiving treatment.
Yes, a very sad story. My end conclusion is that it was a shame no one at the Borders Agency thought to have put Gloria's case file to the bottom of the pile and left it there. They will say that the case was plainly one where her continued presence was not in accordance with the laws of this land. The law is the law and one must start somewhere.
It would be interesting to know where this took place and then look at the record of the Agency responsible for that area. Was this a case where justice was demanded or was it an easy catch to bump up the statistics. I tend to agree with Blunkett that we risk being swamped by incomers.
We have reports that there is resentment at illegal immigration on the grounds that it is taking jobs away from those born here. Debating this is complicated because we seem to have no effective means of establishing how many UK-born persons are out of work in a particular area purely because there is no work available. Are they on the dole because it is more profitable for them to live on benefit? Are they the product of an education system so perverted that it's graduates did everything but gain an education that would fit them for gainful employment?
If we are to recover from the dire straits in which we now live, it will be necessary for everyone to contribute. All hands to the oars and no passengers. If someone can contribute, I see no reason why we should not recognise their presence here and get them to contribute on the same footing as the UK True Brit segment.
I could accept a system where employers acted as a sponsor for anyone - regardless of their residency status. If Majuba Saluba or Edward s/o William can do a job, give it to them. All the while they stay employed, they are exempt from Borders agency actions. They could transfer employment if they wished but any time spent unemployed would render them liable to consideration for deportation. The sponsorship documentation would include certification from the company that they had advertised the job for a number of weeks and had no better applicant than the person now nominated.
In return for this protected status, they would undertake to maintain a low background. No demands that we knock St Paul's cathedral down and build a mosque. Nothing about their females becoming mobile mail bags. Sharia law goes down the Sharia No Way. Those practices which are truly adjuncts of their religion would be permitted; what they might wish to do in interpretation of a religious edict would be subject to investigation and a ruling made.
This would allow them to contribute and would, if properly implemented and controlled, defeat those who claim that incomers are spoiling things for everybody.
The question as to what happens when those sponsored reach the end of work span could be solved along the lines that, after X years of gainful employment, the individual was regarded and treated exactly as a UK citizen.
The Agency should continue to investigate all immigrants. Those who were sponsored should be recorded. Those who have actively sought employment would have to demonstrate what efforts they had made to gain employment. This will separate the sheep from the goats. Those who get caught on the filters must be put outside the country without delay or prolonged debate. What may happen to them in their homeland is immaterial; we did not create the despots and the travellers would be well aware of the outcome if they came here and failed to integrate.
This eviction procedure will attract opposition from numerous countries. We will hear much talk of humanity and human rights. We here in UK have our rights and these do not include any form of having to give aid and succour to those who come here with the intention of soaking up aid like a sponge. It cannot really be humane to perpetuate any situation where an immigrant is forced to live a sub-human life as someone on the run. Life is hard for all of us but our salvation must demand that,in the first place, we help ourselves.
I do not regard any of this as racist. We are not arranging anything in the way of persecution or especial treatment. Those deemed UK citizens are going to be subjected to investigation and action where deemed as benefit scroungers or work shy.
In conjunction with all this, we would devote far more time to dealing with those who facilitate people smuggling. Really severe punishment must be introduced to take them out of circulation; fines are a waste of time given the rewards that they get for their dirty work. Fining transport companies is all very well but the prime control of what happens on a HGV is the driver. He needs to face lengthy imprisonment.
Knowing who comes and goes is a major task. Knowing who does what within a community is not easy. We hear much of anti-terrorist measures and these two 'knowings' must surely be part of such protocols.
There has been a rise in the number of think-pieces in the media on the question of withdrawal from Afghanistan. In part, this will have been sparked off by the murder of 3 of our soldiers by someone allegedly on the same side as they were. The indignation which which this was met died down fairly quickly. I suspect that the general public now accept that our brand-new government is already dismissive of their overwhelming majority calling for the troops to be recalled. That same authority has been busy talking-up the effects of cuts and these are far closer to home.
Another factor must be the fudge that we and America enter into when they do discuss leaving. We get dates but they are conditioned "troops will start to return" or "some troops will be left for training purposes" These are weasel words par excellence. Once the early returnees get on the 'plane, the opposition will be strengthened in their will and raise the level of attacks. The troops left behind for 'training' will be in the same weakened position and the trainers may well need guards. Given the treachery of which the locals are capable, it would be unwise to leave this to the students and graduates. The desired force level of Afghan Army and police seems to change on a daily basis and the deserters remain high.
I have been looking at an article written the last time we lost men to our own forces. Just a few extracts will indicate how little has changed in the intervening nine months. This is how things were seen back then by a respected contributor:
I was in an office in Kabul this summer being lectured by a mid-ranking official about the successful work of the government. "Completely off the record, what do you really think of this government?" I asked him, not expecting a very interesting reply.
"So long as you promise not to reveal my identity, I can tell you that this government is made up of killers and crooks," answered the official with scarcely a pause. He gave some examples of government-inspired killings and corruption.
In this tradition of carefully calculated treachery, the shooting dead of five British soldiers by an Afghan policeman operating with them is hardly surprising. Afghan leaders have long been notorious for concealing their true loyalties and changing sides. But the potential political consequences are very serious. The US and British strategy to build up the Afghan security forces to as many as 400,000 may prove impossible because the state is too weak and too poor and commands the loyalty of too few Afghans.
And then there is the question of loyalty:
The reputation of Afghans for always defeating their enemies is based in part on the speed with which they join the winner. The Taliban advances in the 1990s were notable less for military victories than local warlords defecting to them after receiving a large bribe. In the US war to overthrow the Taliban in 2001, the same process went into reverse as the CIA bought off the same warlords who then sent their men home without a fight.
Nor is this the first time that Western forces have been turned on by their Afghan colleagues. In Kunduz province north of Kabul earlier this summer, a policeman shot eight of his colleagues and turned his police post over to the Taliban. An American military trainer was shot and wounded by one of the men he was training when he drank water in front of them when they were fasting during Ramadan.
The shaky loyalty of the Afghan police and, to a lesser extent, the army to their own government undermines US and British plans to hold the line against the Taliban while a strong local security force is built up. US political leaders speak of a force of 240,000 soldiers and 160,000 police to be trained in the next few years. In reality, though, nobody knows the current size of the Afghan security forces.
The army is supposedly 90,000 strong, but this figure may be grossly over-stated. "My educated guess is that such an army simply does not exist," writes Ann Jones, an American specialist on Afghanistan. "I knew men who repeatedly went through ANA [Afghan National Army] training to get the promised Kalashnikov and the pay. Then they went home for a while and often returned some weeks later to enlist under a different name."
Even so, the reputation of the army among ordinary Afghans is much better than that of the police. Some of these are paid a pittance for a very dangerous job. They are often stationed in vulnerable outposts and checkpoints. Their training is frequently almost non-existent. Before the presidential election in August, policemen being trained by a US security firm who had been receiving eight weeks' training saw this reduced to three weeks, so they could be sent to guard polling stations in southern Afghanistan.
The US leadership is clearly divided on the merits of staying in Afghanistan, but cannot work out how to withdraw without too great a loss of face. It reached the same conclusion over Iraq, but there the situation was easier. The anti-US insurgents came from the Sunni community – which made up only 20 per cent of Iraqis – who were under intense pressure from the Shia government, the armed forces, militias and death squads. The insurgency in Afghanistan is drawn from the Pashtun community, 42 per cent of the population, and so far shows no sign of splitting. With Iraq, it was enough that US voters got the impression they had won. A retreat could be conducted with no US objectives achieved, but nobody could be accused of cutting and running. This was the achievement of General Petraeus, now the military commander in Afghanistan. But political and military conditions are wholly different there. Dressing up a withdrawal as some sort of success will be far more difficult in Afghanistan.
I suspect Cameron has realised he has no influence over what Obama chooses to do; we will not be consulted on any final solution but merely told 'this is what I'm doing'. If he has no say or influence it is pointless his forming a policy of his own and he keeps his breath to cool a different bowl of soup.
It is difficult to see just what benefit would come from any Review of Defence. If we cannot know what we are required to do, we cannot determine how many troops and what other assets will be needed. We cannot hope for any backbone from the senior officers; their lack of spine was demonstrated in the recent Times investigation. So - soldier on would seem to be the most likely outcome, They mat do something when the recital of deaths at commencement of parliamentary business may cut down on the time they need to debate their own well-ordered and pig-trough policies.
Remember the explosion that killed 29 miners in West Virginia earlier this year? Sure you do. Now the investigation is proceeding apace.
Remember back when it happened that many miners and family members of those miners who died were quoted saying things like Massey Energy, the owner, put profits ahead of everything, even their safety and lives, and the miners weren't surprised in the least that this sort of thing happened, and Massey denied all this and thundered that nothing came before safety?
What is now coming to the surface is a serious breach of safety precautions. Not just being a bit adventurous with procedures but deliberate by-passing of safety devices intended to prevent methane accumulations which can lead to explosions. As was the case in West Virginia. The explosion was not a one-off isolated incident.
According to records from the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), the mine had about 500 violations issued against it last year (many of which are being contested). Nearly 200 of the violations were deemed “significant and substantial,” and about 50 were tagged as "unwarrantable failure" to comply – among the most serious citations that can be issued.
The Mexican Gulf problems of BP have attracted lots of heat where there are allegations about their allegedly cavalier attitude to safety procedures and working procedures. At one point, the U.S. threatened to block its dividend payments and there was increasing speculation it could be taken over.
Conservative Mayor of London Mr Johnson and former trade and industry secretary Lord Tebbit both openly attacked Mr Obama's anti-BP rhetoric, accusing him of 'petulance' and trying to shift the blame.
Experts have accused him of having his 'boot on the throat' of British pensioners because the company is such a major contributor to UK pension schemes. U.S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar has also now told the Senate it will be asked to repay salaries to workers laid off because of the six-month ban on deepwater drilling imposed since the spill. In a further sign of public fury across the Atlantic, the windows of a BP petrol station in Memphis were shot out.
Mr Obama's attacks - in the past week he has said he wants to know whose 'ass to kick' at BP and said its chief executive Tony Hayward should be sacked - have only fuelled concern for the firm. He has also sparked anger in the UK by insisting on using BP's former name - British Petroleum - which was axed back in 1998.
The President and his administration do not seem to be maintaining their crusading attitude towards BP in the case of the matter in their own back yard. Maybe he is irked at knowledge that he cannot win in Afghanistan and is seeking to bolster his credentials by attacking an old ally. The seeming success in blocking off the leak in the Gulf will deprive him of an opportunity to further showboat in his meeting with the Boy Dave in the coming week. This relaxation in tensions should allow proper debate and planning on the real problem - the elephant in the Oval Office must be about doing a Vietnam in Afghanistan.
Thought occurs to me that the rush to reform by Dave and the wee feller carries significant risks. Some changes now proposed were not in the Manifesto so we cannot know how much consideration went into them before being released to the general public. Some of the advertised changes are already being modified or totally changed and abandoned.
I can accept the possibility that some amendments have been forced upon our new government by what they found to be the true state on getting eyes on the accounts. Pretty poor set of researchers they must have employed eh? We have no way of knowing if 'the cupboard was more bare than we knew' standard excuse was really true. Let us be charitable and give them the respect that they did not know. This would certainly be a factor in explaining the missing measures and the amended courses of action.
If they cannot press ahead with Plan A, then they must devise Plan B. In a hurry - maybe even a panic where the Labour defalcations were especially severe. Whatever they decide will cost money and we do not have a lot of that and must be leveraged enough to move the world. If something from the hurriedly cobbled together Plan B fails we are up that famous creek sans paddle. The seed corn has fallen on stony ground and the planting cycle has been missed as we lacked the means to buy replacement Plan B seeds,
The consequences of this would be very severe. Say we were half-way through the NHS revision and suddenly woke up to the fact that they are wrong. A NHS scheme that is neither one thing or another. We undertake a defence review and slash our assets just to find a new threat coming down the track - an alliance between Chine and the worst extremists of the Middle East maybe. Dispose of all those police helmets just as civil unrest breaks out over a half-baked NHS, a useless army and law and order in the hands of a few thousand PCSO and the odd Dixon.
Maybe I'd better buy a Millett's tent and camp out in the field of the white sheep?
First field one comes to on leaving the village is about 100 acres. Slopes gently and then quite sharply. The road runs along the profile of the highest point. The scenery there is always wonderful and I take every opportunity to use that route.
This morning as I looked about, I thought we had had a sudden crop of white daisies. The whole field had white dots scattered across like confetti. I stopped and then realised that the dots were sheep - flock of about hundred I reckon.
The last couple of days have seen very heavy falls of rain. Strong enough yesterday afternoon that the crops and vegetation were so flattened I thought we were having a hail storm. This had got right into the lanolin layer of the fleeces and acted like finest Persil (or is Oxy-Vanish the bench mark?).
I've previously noted the shampooing that comes with rain but never before as effective as this. I suppose it is a factor of the clean air here; elsewhere the dirt in the atmosphere gets trapped in the wool during the rinsing process. However, we do not have dirty air. Fine way to spend 20 minutes - watching the clouds move and tracking their shadows as well as seeing the different shapes of the flock as they all did their own thing.
How annoying to think of all those wasted years when I lived elsewhere!
Make no mistake about what follows. It is not my own work. Well, I suppose in a sort of way it is. I paid to get it. It is behind a paywall of the Times. I disagree with this new idea and publish this in this manner to see what happens.
The historian Michael Howard noted that “the important thing when you are going to do something brave is to have someone on hand to witness it”.
At a recent bullfight, the Mexican matador Christian Hernandez stood before thousands of witnesses but when a half-tonne bull was released into the ring, Hernandez ran away and was eventually arrested for cowardice and “breach of contract”.
In Mexico City, bullfighting - the corrida de toros - makes heavy demands of the bullfighter. In Spain it’s illegal for anyone under 16 to become a bullfighter but in Mexico children as young as ten enter the ring without any worry that a squad of health and safety inspectors will screech up in siren-blaring cars.
Hernandez initially confronted the large bull at the Plaza Mexico but then had second thoughts. The nervous matador dropped his cape, fled to the edge of the ring and dived over the wall. If he thought the bull was frightening he hadn’t bargained for the reaction of his managers and the bullfight organisers – they were livid and after a short while with them he re-entered the ring.
He fled again, though, just as swiftly. Opting for barbed reviews in preference to impalement on horns he jumped back over the wall into the crowd. Explaining his retreat, the 22-year-old novice bullfighter said: “I did not have the balls.”
Oddly, though, while that is now true for some of his savagely injured matador confreres, the anatomical disclaimer isn’t true for Hernandez as he leaves the corrida in tact.
In most jurisdictions, neither cowardice nor breach of contract is a criminal offence but in Mexico the police, under guidance from the bullfight organisers, gouged Hernandez with both those legal horns. He has since paid a fine and further proceedings have been dropped. This isn’t the first bizarre bovine case to arise in contract law. One case began as fiction but ended up as fact. In 1967, BBC television broadcast a drama about the fictional case Board of Inland Revenue v Haddock – “the case of the negotiable cow”. Angry at the way he’d been treated by the tax authorities, Albert Haddock, a character invented by A. P.Herbert in 1924, tried to settle his tax by writing a £57 cheque on the side of a cow and leading the animal to the office of the Collector of Taxes.
A few weeks after the programme, an American paper, the Memphis Press-Scimitar, published an article headed “A Check Can Be Written on a Cow”. Without reference to the BBC or A. P. Herbert’s story, the article recited the case as a real precedent from “19th century English law”. The case was later referred to in American legal writing.
In court, Albert Haddock argued that cheques written on napkins and wine labels had been successfully drawn on banks. So, he said, his instructions to his bank stencilled in red on the side of a white cow were legal. He won his case having argued there were in his account “sufficient funds to meet the cow” and that if the tax collectors didn’t like it they could “do the other thing”.
A programme of dramatic change, promising to free the English health service from bureaucracy, put family doctors in the driving seat and hand power to patients was disclosed by Andrew Lansley, the Health Secretary
The health white paper opens the door to the comprehensive privatisation of healthcare and the end of the NHS as a national service. If the plans are taken to their logical conclusion, by 2015 the NHS will be little more than a brand. From a major public service with a million employees, it will have become a central fund with a minimal workforce, commissioning services from a string of private companies in a fully-fledged healthcare market.
I was involved in outsourcing facilities and services for a couple of the large London Health Trusts. It was a very easy way for my employer to make considerable profit. The specifications of the work and services to be undertaken were extremely loosely drafted; it seemed as if the drafter had no idea of what was being done by the directly employed personnel. Those who tendered were able to meet the demands by doing little more than reducing the levels of service. Just what is this driving seat that doctors will occupy? If what they want to prescribe is not included in the outsource documentation it will be charged as a one-off extra. That is where already juicy profit becomes exorbitant blackmail.
What power will be handed to patients? They cannot know what they actually require and will make choices on recommendations made to them. The best presenter gets the work so all the tricks of salesmanship will come into play. What if the desired treatment or drug is not available in this country? The existing organisation NICE is castigated for some of its decisions but it does ensure that there is some sense in drug procurement and dispensing. Just what will it take to convince the patient with his new found driving opportunities to accept 'Sorry. This bus not in Service' They will soon find out that cheaper equals inferior.
Why should anyone worry who provides healthcare? Because the weight of evidence is that private markets in health bring exorbitant administrative costs, lead to cherry-picking of the more profitable patients, increase inequity and the postcode lottery gap, generate conflicts of interest, are unaccountable, and increase pressure for top-up payments and "care package" limits.
No wonder the government is already ditching patient rights over GP and hospital appointments, and David Cameron was dithering yesterday about whether to maintain the right for cancer patients to see a specialist within a fortnight. The prime minister also struggled to explain why this upheaval in the NHS would avoid the increased costs that has attended every other reform.
He may think that costs will be reduced where NHS staff who end up being employed by the new foundation trusts or private companies have their pay slashed. There used to be protection for such employees who were guaranteed the offer of employment by the contractor at rates no lower than they were paid by NHS. I have seen nothing about this transfer of undertakings legislation being abandoned.
When it comes to spin and honeyed words, the Cameron-Clegg show is already putting Tony Blair and Peter Mandelson in the shade. However extreme or cock-eyed the policy, from savage benefit cuts for the poorest to the chaotic scrapping of school building projects, a gentle gloss or a winning apology from a coalition front-man and critics go weak at the knees.
The deaths yesterday at the hands of a so-called ally in Afghanistan should mark a turning point.
We went into the country looking for one man; some sort of criminal mastermind. No one seems to have foreseen that it was like finding a non-existent needle in a million haystacks. Only the land of the avenging cowboy posse could ever have thought it would succeed. No one gave heed to his associates and how we might deal with them and what the locals might think about what seemed like an invasion from a foreign power. Foreign in every way possible. Religion, life style and values, resources - everything.
When the arch-criminal was not found, the cowboy in the white hat decided that more was necessary and the fiction that we were fighting to save the world was invented. Never again a terrorist attack on American soil. Fight them in Afghanistan and not in London. How short-sighted was that? We have now spread the infection to Pakistan, Somalia and the Yemen for sure and, potentially, any country where religion can be used as a basis for gaining a following.
So, when it proved we could not inflict a military defeat on what was not human but a belief, we decided that we needed to change the country. Show them a better way. Democracy. Mom's apple pie and cream. We ignored the facts of history that so clearly showed that change would be resisted and forestalled.
The fact that the murders involved a Gurkha unit showed just how little perception we have. The story-tale writers of PR land told us that there was a special rapport between these two Nations of hillsmen. Well, Private Abdul of the 1st Sangin Irregulars certainly blew that apart with his cowardly actions yesterday. The long history of inter-tribal, even compound vs compound, disputes was not learned. There can be no trusting of the Afghan. Not his fault really any more than one could blame a lion killing you if you climb into it's cage. We have tried to find a way out that preserves some national dignity. Why? I do not know. Our allies will sympathise with us anyway and our enemies will think what they choose to think. We have done too much harm already to think of reconciliation. The talk is of military solutions. That again is a nonsense. It matters almost nothing at all what General we put in charge. The US President is in charge and the General does as he is told - or 'resigns'.
The delaying tactic advanced is that we will go when we have trained enough locals to defend themselves and control the country. What tosh! The claim is that there are 120,000 military and a significant number of police. Problem is that the vetting is rubbish, the raw product is likely to be corrupt, drug-using and illiterate likely to run away as soon as the sores on his feet from wearing boots have healed. With him will go his rifle and ammunition.
He will inspire others of his ilk to come down out of the hills and cash in as he did. The writers of Alice in Afghanland claim that these new model Army soldiers and Policemen will be very effective but those who actually know the place talk of inter-tribal rivalries and war lord militia. I hesitate to begin to work out how an illiterate policeman operates anyway. Surely we have at least conned a few of the 120,000 to stay - why cannot training of reinforcements be assigned to them? That lets us off the hook of training a constantly shrinking mob of corrupt and illiterate junkies.
It is not as if it is going to work anyway. The same principles were applied in Iraq and the Yanks say they can go. Things are far from right there. We have a long colonial history of waiting for a seeming truce and then dashing off to the docks and home. Those we leave in 'power' are soon overthrown or reach new heights of corruption and oppression. Blair claimed we had peace in Northern Ireland - wonder if he was watching the TV reports last night?
Even if we were to believe the 'fight them there and not here' bull, it would make little change. Our government is stupid when it suits them but even they would see that we cannot risk altering our anti-terrorist stance here in UK. Making weapons of destruction is simple and there are plenty of willing martyrs on the streets of Birminghamstan.
No - it is not just a question of us having a tiger by the tail. We are holding onto this tiger in a cage full of equally dangerous tigers and there are more tails than there are willing hands.
I realise it is easy to criticise without offering an alternative. So - we come out of Afghanistan. Make much of the fact that it is a proud nation and capable of determining its own destiny. Blah Blah Blah. Recognise that we cannot really determine what goes on there and in fellow Nations/co-religionists. Make a proper appreciation of what is needed for internal defence of our own country and set that up.
If someone can really prove that ID cards, 42 day detention, rules that let us determine what sort of ragtail bobtail foreigners we allow in and any other rule - however seemingly undemocratic and human-rights limiting this may all seem - will make this a safe place then put them into force. The message should be that we will leave you alone unless you seek to do us harm but, should you change your attitude, we will come down like a ton of bricks on your bases. Your communities in UK and in your homeland. Little point in being a nuclear power and not using the full weight of what that means.
Some very chilling photographs from a independent reporter. I am not too sure about this level of disclosure of what goes on. I have seen what high explosive does to human tissue and when I hear that x people were killed by a suicide bomber I have no need to see what it was like. I cannot see what it would add to anyone who has had a more sheltered life; wanting to view photographs as included in this guy's blog strikes me as in some way sick or disturbed. A morbid curiosity. The other aspect is that these might be seen by someone who has a husband or son in a war zone. They can do nothing but add to the apprehension and concern. Another opinion is that, sadly, the populace, in general, have become desensitised to images of dead and dismembered, thanks in part to gory video games, films and such like. A great many people find it hard to relate the real images to reality, as opposed to the special effects that are so often used in entertainment. A common criticism or argument used about the violence so prevalent in society is this de-sensitisation, and the fact that young people have difficulty in distinguishing between what is real and what is not. Think of the war in Vietnam which also illustrates a counter argument for showing these images. The intrusion by the nightly news into the comfortable life of Americans and the regular film of body bags, wounded and dying soldiers was credited with eroding the will of the people, and congress over the war. This was, in effect, the first war fought in the full glare of the media spotlight, thanks to the modernisation of broadcasting techniques and technical advancements, and the images in full colour and sound had the effect of destroying the myths that had previously surrounded the forces fighting abilities. No doubt at all, it is a double edged sword. On the one hand, it is to the benefit of the coalition to show their successes, but detrimental to show the dead and wounded from our own side. If not sure you want to explore the post, try yourself on the image at the start of this post. If it offends or disturbs, don't hit the link.
Our local paper has a feature where they reprint items of news from 25, 50 and 100 years ago. This is from the section dealing with 1905:
“In a report on the health of Berwickshire, Mr. McCrae, sanitary inspector, forwarded his observations on the change in dietary which has in recent years been largely adopted by the working classes, wherein tea and white bread form so large a portion of the daily ration, to the exclusion of other articles of diet so much more nourishing and better suited to build up the muscle and sinew of the physically healthy race we ought to have in a country such as this. At our annual hiring fairs it is only in reduced numbers that we see the type of man for which the Merse was so famous. Bad teeth, nervous eyes, pale faces are everywhere in evidence. We have given up beer and taken to whisky; we have given up milk and taken to tea.”
So, ladies, if you want your S/O to be hunky and chunky – take note of the perils of white bread and tea. Also interesting that even so far back as 100 years ago people were lecturing others regarding their diet. Mind you, Nigella does it so much better!
I have been testing the provisions of the Data Protection act where one is able to ask an organisation for copies of your records that they may have on file. It is free. I asked the Army for my history files. They turned up this morning and it is amazing what detail they contain. The Army had a bad habit of circulating little billet-douz and did not always reveal these to the subject. I find that people I didn’t trust were not so bad after all. I had quite forgotten glandular fever in 1954. Sadly, there seems to be nothing there on which to base some compensation claim. It will add to the files I keep here and maybe one day some yet to be born great-great-grandson will write a book about me. Most of it is done actually as I wrote my own and it is there in the archives.
Great consternation on the local beach this morning. The air ambulance helicopter lands on a small hill just amongst the dunes. It is also right alongside the Nth hole of a golf club. Two ladies of a certain age were doing whatever one does at a hole as the chopper approached. The rotor downdraught blew woolly bonnet off head of one aged dame. Whether they were scared about proximity of this large and noisy item or were trying to garner up the hat I don’t know but they started dashing about in circles with kilts blowing and arms waving. The chopper had to withdraw and let them settle down. I suppose they may have thought it was a bird and were trying to throw bread to it?
Feeling a bit bullish today. I think I might try a small joke.
Young girl gets job in factory where they make children's toys and dolls. Main product is a doll called Tommy Tickle. Tommy is his name and Tickle is because when tickled he laughs and waves his arms. She starts in the area where they check the Tommy Tickle dolls before packing them in boxes for despatch. After a few hours, the foreman goes to the Personnel officer and asks for his help. The new employee is delaying the whole production line.
They go to the test area. The girl has a needle and thread and some material. She makes a small bag from the cloth and inserts two rice seeds before sewing the material to the doll. "What are you doing?" says the HR guy. "What you told me" she says
The manager thinks for a moment and then, laughing, says, "I told you to give Tommy two test tickles!"
“What sort of diary should I like mine to be? Something loose knit and yet not slovenly; so elastic that it will embrace anything, solemn, slight or beautiful that comes into my mind. I should like it to resemble some deep old desk, or capacious hold-all, in which one flings a mass of odds and ends without looking them through. I should like to come back, after a year or two, and find that the collection had sorted itself and refined itself and coalesced, as such deposits so mysteriously do, into a mould, transparent enough to reflect the light of our life, and yet steady, tranquil compounds with the aloofness of a work of art. The main requisite, I think on re-reading my old volumes, is not to play the part of censor, but to write as the mood comes or of anything whatever; sine I was curious to find how I went for things put in haphazard, and found the significance to lie where I never saw it at the time.”
Virginia Woolf 1919
Well that seems to sum it up quite well for me. I was reading VW but aware that I should start to get on with my bit of ‘something loose knit’ when I came across the writing above. Ah! Inspiration, or, as we say today, A Mission Statement. Nothing can be said to have been properly undertaken unless the MS has been defined, refined, tuned, parsed and then stated in letters of fire in the work cells of all involved. What rubbish – but the funny thing is I can still write about MS even after all these years of retirement. Perhaps we could all work until we are 70 after all.
The ‘what happens next’ theme of the past couple of days has been replaced by the ‘what happened then’ of the day when the 1939-1945 war in Europe ended. I have very clear and copious recollection of then that I doubt would be with me in 2065 about the last Election should I live until then. I don’t like that last sentence – something grammatically wrong somewhere. Still, in furtherance of the MS, I fling it in without looking it through. In May 1945, I was at the thick end of eleven years old; my twelfth birthday not coming until August. The actual day of the German surrender was sketched in with the radio reports; there were no TV transmissions. We had quite a few military camps around us and apparently Romford was quite hectic.
My first bit of ‘post-war’ was the VE Day street party when all the kids had a slap up meal in a big marquee at the top of Tudor Drive. I have a photo taken then. I’m at the forefront of the long table. Much Brylcreem in evidence, a smart jacket – Dunns maybe? And collar and tie – properly buttoned up. My father had long had a 56 pound tin of corned beef as a reserve in the event of invasion by Germans. This was donated to the party. We had large quantities of chocolate and fizzy drinks. A piano had been manoeuvred into the street and games and dancing ensued.
Another thing that is in my mind concerned the black-out. It had long been mandatory, punished by fine and often imprisonment, to have any exterior lighting or interior lights shining through thick curtains or board screens. On the night of the party this was all ignored. Every house had every light on, no drawn curtains, front and back doors open. After all the years of total darkness, this was something that has proved very memorable.
That is enough of 60 years ago. Not my recollection – that is very full but enough for this time and place.
Driving back today we passed a field where they were sowing potatoes. Well, no, not actually past. I was so amazed at all the machinery in the field that I parked up and had a quick peep over the hedge. When I was a farm worker – part time only thank goodness – back in the late 40s and early 50s, potato sowing was a simple thing. Two horses, a cart and a seed box really. What I saw today was machinery that dug the trench, dropped the spuds and banked up the furrow afterwards. There were low loaders with more seed ‘taters and some specialised machinery that was not in use whilst I watched. All this of course is basically down to the introduction of very large fields – almost prairie – which allows efficient mechanisation. My days of doing it we had five or ten acre fields and it took a while to deal with them. Losing the horses was a blow. They could be controlled by word of mouth almost as much as through the tack. I never did any tractor driving on the farm but I could handle horses well. Some of the old horse men did not bother with the change to tractors but went into other work on the land. The work I saw in progress today was obviously carried out by contractors as only a massive farm could afford the specialised equipment that would only be lightly used. That again must cause scheduling problems as no farmer likes putting heavy machinery on really wet land.
I cannot believe that a lingering death such as this fox experienced is better than a quick chomp across the rib cage from a well motivated hound. Those who can attribute human senses and feelings to a wild animal and say that a hound kill inflicts terror and pain might care to explain why this vermin had to suffer from the shock of a bullet and the lingering pain whilst life ebbed slowly away.
During today, I had cause to reflect on the 4 Noble Truths which lie at the heart of Buddhist belief. Never mind why I went back to them. However, they gave me some benefit. I reproduce them below - with some explnation - on the off-chance that they strike a chord or response in anyone who reads this. You may need to go through the explanations more than once. Parrot fashion understanding is not required. The ideal would to remember the 4 Noble Truths themselves and then reflect on what they say to you.
To live means to suffer, because the human nature is not perfect and neither is the world we live in. During our lifetime, we inevitably have to endure physical suffering such as pain, sickness, injury, tiredness, old age, and eventually death; and we have to endure psychological suffering like sadness, fear, frustration, disappointment, and depression. Although there are different degrees of suffering and there are also positive experiences in life that we perceive as the opposite of suffering, such as ease, comfort and happiness, life in its totality is imperfect and incomplete, because our world is subject to impermanence. This means we are never able to keep permanently what we strive for, and just as happy moments pass by, we ourselves and our loved ones will pass away one day, too.
2. The origin of suffering is attachment.
The origin of suffering is attachment to transient things and the ignorance thereof. Transient things do not only include the physical objects that surround us, but also ideas, and -in a greater sense- all objects of our perception. Ignorance is the lack of understanding of how our mind is attached to impermanent things. The reasons for suffering are desire, passion, ardor, pursue of wealth and prestige, striving for fame and popularity, or in short: craving and clinging. Because the objects of our attachment are transient, their loss is inevitable, thus suffering will necessarily follow. Objects of attachment also include the idea of a "self" which is a delusion, because there is no abiding self. What we call "self" is just an imagined entity, and we are merely a part of the ceaseless becoming of the universe.
3. The cessation of suffering is attainable.
The cessation of suffering can be attained through nirodha. Nirodha means the unmaking of sensual craving and conceptual attachment. The third noble truth expresses the idea that suffering can be ended by attaining dispassion. Nirodha extinguishes all forms of clinging and attachment. This means that suffering can be overcome through human activity, simply by removing the cause of suffering. Attaining and perfecting dispassion is a process of many levels that ultimately results in the state of Nirvana. Nirvana means freedom from all worries, troubles, complexes, fabrications and ideas. Nirvana is not comprehensible for those who have not attained it.
4. The path to the cessation of suffering.
There is a path to the end of suffering - a gradual path of self-improvement, which is described more detailed in the Eightfold Path. It is the middle way between the two extremes of excessive self-indulgence (hedonism) and excessive self-mortification (asceticism); and it leads to the end of the cycle of rebirth. The latter quality discerns it from other paths which are merely "wandering on the wheel of becoming", because these do not have a final object. The path to the end of suffering can extend over many lifetimes, throughout which every individual rebirth is subject to karmic conditioning. Craving, ignorance, delusions, and its effects will disappear gradually, as progress is made on the path.
I have just been watching the debate on The Politics Show about the forthcoming (two years away) Mayoral election. Livingstone was there with Oona King. They had to have a bit of a go at each other - traditional Socialist blame someone else policies. What came across was that this very large responsibility was run as a political fiefdom. The council was led to deal with whatever was the popular talking point of the time. Knife crime? Oh yes - lets drop everything and deal with that. Transport? Off we go and sort that out. They may have had some defined plan of action (manifesto?) in the run up to the election but it seems that was thrown to one side once the election was won.
This line of thought took me to comparing things in the way London was ruled with processes on the wider stage. Our National government gets distracted by things - like some sort of Magpie confronted by shiny gewgaw. Short term advantage - go! Score points over opposition - we're off. A lack of anything that seemed planning. In this, they are supported by the fact that the document we had to rely upon was a Manifesto that was imprecise in the extreme and only touched on matters that they were comfortable to debate and where the Party Line for answers was firmly in place.
No private company would or could function in this manner. The policies and ethos would be enshrined in manuals and Lord help anyone who failed to take them into consideration. The CEO and his cohorts would have a list of aims and things to be accomplished. Maybe something as simple as 'produce 1 million widgets and make a profit of 7% from selling those' As complex as 'establish a presence in China'. They are supervised internally in respect of costs and marketing and manufacture and externally by the regulating authorities and shareholders. Do the job or 'consider your future' memoranda arrive.
I arrived in commerce quite aged at 42 and was appointed to a fairly senior post within the premises and services administration area. This was luck really, my c.v. arrived in HR at the same time as a report from an external management advisory group recommended the post be filled by a senior Army retiree. I made the point at interview that my lack of private industry was not significant. In those days, the general would say 'I want to be at the top of that hill by tonight' and stroll away. Those below him would decide who and how many would be needed. The colonels of the battalions would depute companies A,B and Support to undertake the task and the company commanders delegated responsibilities such that the prime mover - the poor bloody infantryman - was told to get out of bed at 0'dark hours and line up ready to go. From general downwards, all knew that what had to be done was feasible and, short of a disaster of Somme proportions, would be done in the spirit of can do/do or die. I ran my department on military lines (less a bit of the f'ing and barring) and my annual assessments were fine so it must have worked - for the bosses and my staff.
So, why cannot we have a government set up the same way? They may say that quangos fill some positions but they are politically composed. All actions are subservient to political imperatives and the best solution is not always the one adopted. The public is excluded from any decision once they have passed through the sheepublic process of the election. We in positions closely akin to shareholders have no real recourse when we see things going astray. Just think, when were you personally ever asked - for example - how much financial aid we should give to a country that seems to have great resources already?When was anyone you know asked the same question? Have you ever been asked for an opinion on overseas aid of any form?
So, it seems that our present style of running a country is far from ideal? How likely is it that we would ever be asked for an opinion on this? Surely, the extremely unlikely supposition of either is it's own answer.
The incident that ended at Rothbury in the early hours of today was really only the expected result. Mentally, Moat was a thin shell waiting to crack. The police had a serious array of expertise and the necessary assets so that they were able to watch and wait for the public appearance of a man who was seeking publicity. Lest this all sound dismissive, I think they did a very good job handling the incident. The public and media were kept well advised of what was happening and were given opportunities to question those directly in charge of the case with no police PR interference.
There were mistakes made but these were of detail only; the media will try and set hares running. However, it would make sense for some detailed internal scrutiny to be undertaken. We have had armed stand-offs with hostages involved. I think mainly of Spaghetti House and Balcombe Street. The first related to criminal action whilst Balcombe Street was an IRA-related event. In both, watch and wait was the ingredient that got the hostages out alive and those responsible arrested alive and well. The surrender at Balcombe Street followed release of plans to pas the matter over to SAS. The siege at the Iranian Embassy was a different matter; the building was attacked by SAS. Hostages were killed as part of the negotiations and all of the intruders bar one ended up dead. There was much at the time to indicate his survival was a mistake; he hid amongst female hostages and left the premises with them. SAS and other special forces figured in most of the hostage situations after the Embassy affair and an almost common factor was the absence of negotiation and the deaths of the hostage takers. When this certain death aspect was queried the explanation most often given was that any survivor would have been able to reveal the tactics of the military. This seemed to be an Israeli philosophy as in Mossad actions at Entebbe.
This difference in style between Police and Army will become relevant once we pull out of Afghanistan. Our government - coalition and opposition - claim that we will not leave until there is no risk of Islamic terrorists returning to our streets here in UK. Political expedience could lead to our using it as a reason to withdraw before that situation were true. There is also the possibility that the forces we put in place will not be up to the job and allow some terror organisation to base themselves there and fight here. It is, of course, open to the Taliban or al Qaeda to attack from some other Muslim country in the Middle East. Dealing with any siege or making arrests of the sort of member of those organisations would be a very different kettle of fish to the Spaghetti House/Balcombe Street situation.
CO19 would be prime movers in anything like a police-led solution. They supplied officers and equipment to the Rothbury investigators who were also reinforced by some heavyweight specialists in dealing with counter-terrorism. Indeed, a cynic could say that the Home Office used Rothbury as a real live exercise to test tactics and assets. It might be significant that there was no mention of SAS being added to the equation. SAS do not 'do' police and rely upon first class military skills in any confrontation. The Government were maybe not keen to have their shock troops committed in the light of public reaction to the killing of the Brazilian and so soon after release of a critical Saville Report. The Brazilian on the Tube demonstrated that the Met police were quite capable of killing but had problems in the back office and the work of Gold and Silver Commanders. It is an area where the rank and file would not like to go as evidenced by their rejection of a proposal to arm all officers all of the time. The general public seem not to like strong arm policing but tolerate the same from the special forces.The reaction to the ambushes in Gibraltar could have been much more critical and such as leaks out from what they do in Afghanistan is seen being part of an all is fair in love and war philosophy.
So, if there was any element of rehearsal or training in Rothbury that is all to the good. It is unlikely that police would want to pass their role to SAS and there is no great indication that SAS would welcome any joint operation.
Hemingway commented when he quoted from John Donne’s Meditation XVII, “No man is an Island, entire of itself." Ernest evokes the reality of the human condition. None of us, in spite of what we may believe, or have been told, is ever alone. In turn, Donne's opinion follows upon his better known assertion "Any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind."
This illustrates just how far I personally have withdrawn from what one may think of as the norm. We have just had one of those flashes of media outrage at what we were told was to be the fate of an Iranian woman. Stoned to death. The great and the good, along with I suspect, may plain old attention whores dropped their knitting and rushed to the barricades. It had an effect as Iran was forced into making a statement that stoning did not figure in the list of acceptable ways of killing recognised by Islam. That in itself is a chilling statement. How does a merciful God endorse killing in his name? I must restraining myself here - I cannot accept the doctrine that whatever happens is the will of some Deity and is intended as a cross to be borne.
The world spoke out against the barbaric sentence for an Iranian woman sentenced to death by stoning for adultery, and it seems Iran has listened.
"She will not be executed by stoning punishment," the Iranian embassy said in a statement to London's Channel 4 news Thursday, commenting on reports that Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani would be stoned to death for "illicit relationships" conducted after the death of her husband. The embassy claims that, despite international reports, the violent punishment was never actually on the table. "This mission denies the false news aired in this respect," the embassy said in the statement. The Embassy of the Islamic Republic of Iran highly recommends that news and reports should not be taken for granted and considered a reliable source of information for official statements or misjudgements"
But it is not clear whether they have lifted the death sentence on a woman who has been in prison in Tabriz since 2006. The 43-year-old had already been punished with flogging for an "illicit relationship" outside marriage when another court tried her for adultery. There again, a strange concept as other reports claim that her husband was dead at the time she went over the side. I happily accepted 'till death us do part' but a prohibition such as Iran's would have troubled me.
My feeling of isolation arises from the fact that I cannot find anything incredibly wrong with the situation that the woman was to die in the barbaric way that had been rumoured. The death - Yes. The manner of her departure - No. We cannot know how many 43 year old women die every day in this world. There is famine, fatal illness, other forms of honour killing and just plain old vanilla deaths from violence or neglect. Every one of those deaths is as significant to the about-to-die and her friends and relatives but no one speaks for them. I cannot do anything for them other than give a passing few minutes of reflection as are taken by writing this blog. Just what would that do for her? What impact does it have on her and her executioners that I find myself unable to campaign on her behalf and in aid of the hundreds who depart in the same unjustified and cruel manner.
Maybe I am an island? But there is another possibility - "If a man loses pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured, or far away" I have to console myself with the drum idea as I cannot face the possibility that my milk of human kindness has turned sour or that I have emptied the jug.
What we need is more of this. We defeated Hitler by referring to his testicular deficiency. Washing on the Seigfried Line was amusing and a general air of Laugh rather Than Cry got us through.
Any self-respecting soldier will have a stock of funny but amusing ditties. They may be in need of updating from the concept that Queen Farida was pleasured by dogs but the same concept would apply.
Way way back I had to work out what to do about a crowd of young Worthy Oriental Gentlemen who deemed it funny to expose themselves to the bus taking the WRAC clerks and secretaries into work each morning. A quick evening's class in colloquial Arabic and the next morning, instead of slowing, the driver stopped. The exhibition was given but this time the females all cried out such as observations as 'midget dick' 'tiny tiny boy' and 'Try it on your sister' whilst wiggling their little fingers. Never saw the lads again.
A change in the way that the war in Afghanistan is fought could be on the way.
The new commander of US-led forces in Afghanistan, Gen David Petraeus, is suggesting that he will review the rules of engagement. Some troops have complained that the restraints, which curb the use of air power and heavy weapons if Afghan civilians are at risk, are putting Western forces in greater danger. They also, it is claimed, make it harder to defeat the Taliban.
The phrase that seems to occur often is 'self-defence' as a criteria for the use of force. No mention of aggression then? It is very clear that a large number of the people of Afghanistan do not want us there such that persuasion achieves little. Certainly not much that lasts as our forces deploy to another location and the Taliban tide washes back in. If we want change, we will have to make it compulsory and find a mechanism of making it permanent. That is never going to be achieved by 'self-defence' where out enemy has the initiative and plays the game by their rules.
If the powers that be really held the self-defence opinion then our tactic is very simple indeed. Withdraw completely and re-form back in England. No risk of any confrontation where one of our units does a Bloody Sunday in some fly-ridden compound. Those with the animus to continue the dispute would need to travel here. We are on a much better wicket. Any incomer would - marginally I agree - stand out as being of a particular ethnicity. Maybe we should be enforcing the dress for them of hair covered and white dish dasha robes?
Our intelligence would have the benefit of many more eyes. Neighbourhood Watch par excellence. Proper roads inhibit placement of IED. Savings in the supply train reduction. Also, a much stronger moral justification where attacker deliberately comes to us to cause us harm; why then complain when sent off to the land of the transvestite virgins?
Also, it is still self-defence regardless of where the assailant is based. Whether they come from Afghanistan, Somalia, Yemen or any other Mad Mullah dependency is all the same to us.
Yep - more I think about it, the more I like it. Instead of a Glorious Twelfth for birds we could declare an open season for extremist fundamentalists. Sell tickets - whole new world of environmentally friendly hunting so old Foxy could rest in peace.
Once again we have a dangerous and armed criminal loose in the community. Already, one murder and serious injuries.It seems that the killer was motivated by his girl friend's association with a police officer - the dead man - and has transferred his hatred to all policemen as evidenced by his attack on the uniformed patrol.
A likely outcome will be repeated calls for all of our police to be armed when on duty. Events in Cumbrian could well add to that debate. The last major debate was back in 2005 when a female police officer was shot whilst on duty. The general public seem to accept officers having firearms, think of our airports and the situation in Northern Ireland. However, the officers themselves rejected the idea with a majority of over 80% not wishing to be armed. They hold that the existing special units can do all that is required and they do not wish to do anything that destroys the image that policing is done by consent and not armed force.
That is a nice cosy view of the way things are. However, it does not cover the situation where someone suddenly runs amok in clear rejection of the consent idea. I wish my police to be in a position to protect me. If some disturbed individual is intent on doing me harm, I am not prepared to tell him to hold off or rely upon his good nature or forbearance. I am all for Newton's Law that that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction - if he wishes to open fire then a PC must be immediately available to react.
I care not for any law officer's wish. He is there to maintain law and order and if he is not prepared to be trained in the use of firearms and to then carry a weapon then he has no place in a police force. The idea of consent seems to be overlooked when it comes to their latest iteration of the wooden baton. The asp is quite capable of causing death. The same outcome may occur where Taser weapons are deployed. Even the cs gas spray can be dangerous and is not indicative of policing by consent.
The will be some who say that arming the police will result in the criminals upping their game and taking weapons with them of their illegal actions. The fact that the latest offender was able to obtain a deadly weapon within hours of release from prison shows our gun control is weak. Knives are very easily available so just what extra risk there could be cannot be established. To me, the reaction is immaterial - if Bill Sykes chooses to be armed then he has signed on for swift retribution in the event he uses it.
