Tuesday, November 8, 2011

Armistice Day


Very soon, it will be November 11th. Armistice Day. A day of remembrance, for those who have fallen in conflict defending those that they loved.

A day during which people wear a poppy to honour their actions, honour their memories, and honour those who continue to serve today, carrying on their legacy. 


The poppy came about from the red flowers found growing on the fields of Flanders. An area soaked in the blood of the fallen during World War 1. During a time of remembrance, the public wear then on lapels. Also, many sports organisations get them stitched onto shirts. 


They have featured on football shirts of teams in Englands Premier League, as well as on England and Australia national team rugby shirts (amongst others).


They have also been stitched on to England's national football teams shirt, and sold to raise money for The Royal British Legion. A charity that raises money to pay for the care of wounded soldiers, as well as helping the families for those soldiers who dont return.


So, last weekend, the FA allowed teams playing in England the right to stitch a poppy on to their shirts.

And England asked for permission to place a poppy on the England shirt for the friendly game against Spain played on November 11, Armistice Day. 

FIFA declined to allow England to do so. It is part of their rules that teams cannot place symbols which are commercial (sponsorship), religious, or political in nature. They said that to allow England would open the doors to further such demands, and end up with symbols on all sorts of shirts, representing all sorts of events.

Whilst FIFA can protest about protecting the neutrality of Football, they are on a hiding to nothing over this. Whatever happens, FIFA looks bad (Not that they do that themselves anyway!).

Lets look at the rules. So, we cannot place commercial logo's on a shirt (other than kit manufacturer). Well, the Royal British Legion is a charity. Religious logos. Royal British Legion looks after injured soldiers and their families, no matter what religion. Political logos. Well, they will take donations from any political hue! And politicians of all colours wear poppies. So, it aint political.

Is it England specific? No. The Scots and Welsh also wear poppies (its a British thing). The poppy is not exclusive to The UK, either. Poppies play a (small) part in Veterans day in the US. Poppies are also worn in New Zealand, Australia, as well as many other Commonwealth nations. The Poppy factory in London exports all over the world.


I understand FIFA's fear, that this could open the door to all sorts of claims, but surely, given that Armistice day (and related) is a multi-national thing, there is space to allow it. Maybe even allow every nation to have 1 day to honour something. Just one. 

Besides, FIFA place patches on shirts to promote their own campaigns. Such as the "Fair Play" campaign, as well as UEFA's "Respect" campaign.


Why not allow nations to Respect those who gave their all for the rest of us?

Friday, October 21, 2011

Gaddafi

Warning: Some images are not that pleasant.

OK. So, after bitter fighting since February, Libya is now finally free of Gaddafi and his tyrannical rule. How? Well, he is dead. The NTC forces finally found him in his home city of Sirte, and now the guy has met a very ignoble end. Dragged from a drain pipe, rambling, and probably close to insane. 


There is a lot of confusion over how he met his end. Was he executed? Was he killed in a crossfire? Or was he "mercifully" killed by his bodyguard to spare him the humility of being captured? The truth may very well never come out. 

After all, history is written by the victors.


So, the man who wanted to lead the Arab world, and failed. The man who became an international pariah, and managed to fashion himself as a leader of Africa. And was named as "King of Kings" by African tribal leaders.


The man who famously hated flying, and pitched his tent rather than stay in a hotel. The man who had an amazingly flamboyant style. Switching between multicultural tribal robes, and ever more flamboyant military garb he designed.


A man who said he was not the leader of Libya, despite concentrating power in his hands. A man surrounded by a personal bodyguard of hand-picked beautiful ladies (who WHERE his bodyguard, not eye candy!) 


A man who, with his family, raped and pillaged his nation.

The debate now rages on about whether he should have stood trial for his crimes. Well, for me, it is a pointless argument. He was arrested, with blood pouring from his head, and in the confusion he later died. How he died should be the matter of an investigation. 

How he died will probably never be revealed. 

Should he have stood trial? In my view, yes. He should. However, if he where to be put on trial in Libya it would have been nothing more than a show-trial. Libya after all has NO judicial system to speak of, since the previous system was designed to be subservient to Gaddafi himself! 

In reality, he should have been sent to the ICC (International Criminal Court). A venue where he would have been tried in relative impartiality. However, the ICC process would have ground on and taken YEARS for any resolution. And given Gaddafi's predilection for rambling, it could have taken EVEN longer!


As it is, given his 42 year rule, and the preponderance of evidence against the guy, he would have ended up guilty at the ICC. He DEFINITELY would have ended up guilty if tried in Libya, and most likely dead. What has happened to him has essentially circumvented the process that would have ended in the same outcome.


Sunday, August 14, 2011

Big machines that go fast!


OK, so Britain is looking at building the High Speed 2 line initially to run from London to Birmingham. But what about the rolling stock that is to go ON the line? Well, that is going to be the next big debate. Britain really does not have the ability to build these trains itself. Indeed, with the awarding of a contract to Siemens for the expansion of British rail rolling stock, Britain's last main train building factory is being significantly downsized!

So, where are we going to get the new stuff from, if we cant do it ourselves? Well, there are basically 4 countries touting their services in order to win the bid. France, Germany, Japan, and China. So, which one should Britain go for?

Well, lets have a look at the railways involved. However, this is going to be totally un-scientific!


Lets start with China. Its first alphabetically.

China has nearly 10,000 km of high speed line, with 3,500 being rated for services in excess of 330kph. A lot of this has sprung up within the last 10 years of construction, with the first line being opened in 2007. China enjoys ridership 290,540,000 people a year. 

However, this year was the year of the Crash.China's breakneck charge into high speed rail has cast a dim light on the network itself, with worries of sub-standard quality control, corruption, and poor design. Indeed, most of the technology involved is essentially re-engineered German or Japanese technology. Some might say, re-engineered poorly. 

With only 4 years of operation, China has already had a deadly smash up.


Should Britain buy Chinese? Well, it would probably work out cheaper, but we are dealing with massive machines travelling at stupid speeds. Somewhat different from a kids plastic toy. China's railways are unproven, and this smash casts a pall over it. I'd put them well down the list.


Next up, France. 

The French introduced its first high speed rail way back in the 60's, not long after Japan. And, like Japan, runs its TGV on dedicated lines. France's network is nearly 2000km long, and has 93 million people a year. 

Now, The TGV does enjoy an excellent record, 3 derailments, with no major incidents, and no fatalities.


Should Britain buy French? Well, they are our neighbours, and we already use French built rolling stock, with the Eurostar services running from London through the Channel Tunnel. It is a tried technology, and France has had a lot of success exporting it round the world, with TGV based rolling stock in use in Spain and Korea, to name but 2.

However, they ARE French.


Next up, Germany.

They kind of got in to the game a bit late, with the first services running in the early 90's. Also, the ICE network is not totally dedicated to ICE services. It is in some cases, mixed. The network enjoys a ridership of just over 77 million, and has seen 10 incidents. None resulting in fatalities, and caused by things on the line. Ranging from cars and trucks, to sheep.

However, Germany did have the Eschede disaster, when an ICE service derailed resulting in significant loss of life, caused by a wheel suffering from fatigue and cracking. All ICE wheels have since been re-designed, and replaced.


So, should we buy German? Why not? It is tried and tested, with only the one incident. The Germans also got on with finding the fault, and re-designing that part that failed. Also, the trains have enjoyed success overseas, in use in Spain, Russia, and China. 


Finally, Japan.

The home of the high speed rail service. The first service running from Tokyo to Osaka way back in the early 1960's. Japan has a network of about 2,400km of track, and just over 353,000,000 people riding the Shinkansen services. As for safety, Japan has the best record. 1 incident which resulted in a derailment, with the Chuetsu earthquake tipping a train off the rails. No fatalities. Otherwise, that's it.


So, what about Japanese? I'd say this has to be the favourite. Best safety record, excellent reliability (puncuality is measured in seconds!), AND most importantly for the NIMBY's in Britain, the Japanese have spent ages researching tunnel design and train design to get their trains as quiet as possible. Something that is as important in Japan as it is in the UK, given that both are island nations with dense populations. Granted, it would mean buying Japanese ducks, rather than the more sleek-looking French and German counterparts, but given that most people will only get a fleeting glimpse as it whistles past, or are sat inside, its not such a big deal!

Monday, July 4, 2011

Are we proud to be British?


Canadians can let their hair down, and go nuts during Canada Day. Their nations birthday. People dress up largely in red, with a bit of white thrown in. something Catherine, the Duchess of Cambridge took to heart and selected a lovely white dress with a red maple leaf inspired hat during her outings during the Canada Day celebrations she and her husband where involved in during their visit to Canada.


America shuts down and dresses up in red white and blue for Americas birthday on the 4th of July. Independence Day. Parades, fireworks, and flag waving galore.


The French also have their Bastille Day, a day to be proud to be French (not that they need an excuse!)

But what about Britain? There is no national day for Britain. It is a very difficult thing to define. For me, as an Englishman, Britishness is hard to define. England is the largest constituent nation in the UK, and has often seen Englishness confused with Britishness. Rightly, this has seen a lot of resentment in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland.

This has seen a rise in the Celtic nations in their search for their own identities. Now, the Welsh get their Leeks and dress up on St Davids Day.


The Irish have St Patricks Day. Though a lot of it has been driven by the fact that the Americans very nearly stole it from the Irish!


And the Scots deep fry the proverbials out of everything on St Andrews Day! OK, a bit of a stereotype! But again, there is active encouragement to push Scottishness.


In England, St Georges Day is popular...


But is NOT actively encouraged. Many councils refuse to fund parades for fear of "extremism." Indeed, the TUC according to someone I heard on the BBC, really dont want any mention of "England" at their main conference.

Gordon Brown, as PM, wanted to have a British Day. And I agree. But can we HAVE a British day?

I think we can, but the problem is, we need to work out what it means to be British. To be British is confused and amorphous. It is my belief that the only way to sort it all out is to sort out the current imbalances that are existent already in the UK.

You have macro imbalances which the Celtic home nations bang on about, with England being the dominant nation. And you have micro imbalances, which piss off the English, with the Barnet Formula granting Scots far more in council funding, and Welsh and Scots being able to impact on English only matters.

How can we sort all this. For one, we need the government to actually allow people in England ENJOY St Georges Day without being made to feel like it is some dirty thing (Jack Straw suggested that there is something inherently dark about "Englishness."). Allowing England to be English in a proud AND positive way would allow people to reclaim it from the nutters. This would make it positive, and begin to ease a little of the resentment.

On a macro level, we need to sort out the imbalances. By REALLY sorting out devolution it allows each home nation the chance to sort out their own topics and work together on UK-wide issues. I have talked about this sort of thing here. Also, the high speed line would allow areas outside London to be able to push for companies to relocate outside London whilst having easy access to the rest of the nation. 

On a micro level, we need devolution across ALL home nations. This would then stop the farcical situation of the vote for tuition fees. This was an issue under Tony Blairs Labour government where it was essentially an English only issue. Labours English MP's mostly voted for it after being whipped (not literally! It means that Labours "heavies" instructed their MP's which way to vote "or else.")

However, the opposition voted against it, many English Labour MP's rebelled and voted against, and in the end, the motion was carried after Labour got its Scottish MP's to vote in favour. This proved hugely controversial because this law was in no way going to impact on their constituents. With education being a devolved topic. 

It is my belief that we need to scrap the current system. Get rid of the vast numbers of MP's and replace it with a 2 tier system. At 1 level we need each nation to have its own parliament. This would allow each nation to control its own specific areas and prevent dominance by one or another of the home nations. 

On top of that, a smaller British parliament This would debate purely British issues. It would also allow you to get rid of the over representation that exists in the current system. As it stands, for the English, 1 English vote counts for far less given that each of the other home nations are over - represented with MP's for their population size. Also, the imbalance exists because a Scot has the right to vote on MSP's who debate on purely Scottish topics, as well as voting for an MP, who can impact (only in a small way, but the fact is they CAN) on English only topics. This means that the English are under represented. I know that if the English MP's band together, the other home nations dont get a look in, but democracy is about the right of the individual to choose, and I have less choice, and less of a voice!

Also, my idea would be for the British parliament would be for the constituencies to ignore national boundaries. This would allow the boundaries to be drawn to be perfectly equal. There is no need for the constituents to worry about whether their MBP (Member of British Parliament) was born in Scotland or England, as they would only be able to work on British matters. The constituents "English" or "Scottish" or "Welsh" concerns would be dealt with by their "English" or "Scottish" MSP/MEP. 

If there was a proper balancing of the parliamentary system and of powers across the UK, with all nations being equal, then it would allow each nations people to settle on their own national identity. It would also help England sort out its own identity. If England was allowed to forge its own identity in the UK, then that would then give the home nations the chance to work together and forge a new idea of what it means to be British.

It works in sports, we have England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland in the rugby, who band together to form the British Lions who tour every 4 years.


Also, in the Commonwealth games we compete as the home nations, which works OK for us.


But at the Olympics, we combine as Team GB. To great success, indeed, in the cycling Britain is one of the top nations, and at the Beijing Olympics, Britain basically kicked everyone else. The team is made up of mostly English riders (there ARE more of us!) but it also includes exceptional talents from Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. Indeed, the number one rider is Sir Chris Hoy, from Scotland, and during the team pursuit, the team was made up of 2 English, 1 Welsh, and 1 Belgian (OK, Bradley Wiggins was born there, but raised in London!).


the problem we have in the UK is that we just dont have a national day to be proud to be British. also, we are a little uncomfortable with it as there is no real description of what it is to be British. This has allowed the extremists a chance to create their own definition of what it is to be British, and the rest of us are not comfortable with it. 

Without a national day, it leaves us with the Olympics, and the occasional big day such as the wedding of Prince William and Catherine Middleton. But these days are sporadic, and not fixtures on the calendar.


If there was true equality between the home nations it would ease a lot of the tensions that exist. If we could be comfortable with what it is to be uniquely Scottish, English, Welsh and Northern Irish (though that could be tricky!), then we would be able to seek out those things that combine us together to make us British.

THEN we could be uniquely proud to be British.


Radiation Update

I have been tracking the radiation in Japan, but for the last month, it has been tracking largely without any major changes. The occasional spike, but nothing dramatic. So, I have decided to stop tracking it like I have. But should it change, then I will continue. If you want to seek the info, then I have been taking the information from the Japan times.

Go and have a look at their stuff. It is good!

Friday, June 3, 2011

Radiation Update - Japan 6/4

Chavtastic Chavdom!

So, the world (well, the UK) is being riven in two by that most heinous of words. A word that is a dark stain on our soul. A word so vile it has been deemed to be worthy of total erasure from the English language. That word is...

CHAV

Yes. A vile word indeed. 

The word itself first really appeared back in 2001 in the media, and by 2004 had entered common everyday use. A word that is linked to the growth of anti-social behaviour. 

Many social (usually left-leaning) commentators link the rise in the use of the word "chav" with a rise in a new "class war" or a kind of neo-snobbery. Almost an attack on the working class. It has been often linked with youths who wear certain fashion styles, and embody a certain type of attitude. The fashion of choice was Burberry. Especially the Burberry cap. Burberry has since scaled back the amount of Burberry check they use on their fashions, and have pulled their signature "chav" item, the cap.
Burberry then...

Burberry now


I cannot be bothered detailing the ins and outs of the social issues, mainly because I am not a social scientist and I dont have the time to wade through all the material. I will leave you to read into it. I am just going to point my view.

In my opinion, "chav" is more a state of mind than a social grouping. Granted the largest group is a sort of young under class who DO engage in socially questionable activities. However, it is not exclusively linked to them. Though Michael Carroll is an excellent example of a chav. After winning the lottery, he blew all his money on pointless bling, parties, and drugs. Had a stretch in jail, got declared bankrupt, and is now back as a binman (nothing wrong with the profession!)

He just makes me cringe!

I cant see the word "chav" as being exclusively working class. To say it is a "working class" word would be to tarnish those who are supposedly "working class" as they work really, really hard. Working to deliver services  to people, living within their means, not running out to buy fashion stuff just because...

Shock! Working class guy actually working! Deserves a medal, for hauling milk through the snow, this guy!

Likewise those in the "upper classes" are not all elegant paragons of society. For example, Paris Hilton. 

I REALLY dont understand why some people say she is stunning! I know plenty of girls here in Japan far prettier than her!

Here is a lady that is not working class, not ever really having had to work a day in her life! However, her attitude is quite selfish, she goes out to party for herself, and to my mind, does not really deliver social benefits to the US. She also spent time in jail for various misdemeanors, been arrested for bad driving,,, AND Her TV shows have been quite vapid and shallow. I would level the charge of "chav" at her!

So, to me, the word "chav" is not an attack on the working class, more an attack on the work-shy socially stunted class!