A Coat of Arms

This is the Coat of Arms of the Amherst family. The first time I saw it, I was really flabbergasted. I originally come from the Netherlands where a big discussion is going on about Zwarte Piet, to be translated as Black Pete. This character is the servant of St.Nicolas who is the bringer of gifts to the children of the Netherlands in December. (Not at Christmas, but on the 5th of December, the eve of the Saints day of St.Nicolas.)

Black Pete fell out of grace by a lot op people, it is considered to be a racist thing. While the white man (St.Nicolas) is a wise man with a lot of knowledge, Black Pete is a dumbo. Because of being stupid he is supposed to be funny. Normally Black Pete is played by white people with black painted faces. A bit like the Black and White Minstrels, a music group from a few decades ago. They were not political correct, so their show on tv was abandoned.

                                         St.John's House, Ryde

So to see this coat of arms in the Pearl Center in Brighstone on the Isle of Wight was a bit of a shock for me considering all this. I planned to write an article about it. I have found the Coat of Arms belonged to the wealthy Amherst family. I know they owned the St.John's House, near Ryde on the Isle of Wight. They probably owned the building where you can find the Pearl Center too. A pity I can't find any proof of this.

                                         Pearl Center, Brighstone

The family Amherst has been a very influential family from the 16th century onwards. I can write a lot about them, but I discovered that an excellent article has been written by Nick Kingsley.
http://landedfamilies.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/121-amherst-of-bayhall-and-montreal.html
No need to repeat what he wrote.

It does leave me with the question: Should this image not be removed from the walls of the Pearl Center? I don't think it's something to be proud of.
===========================================

Teflon Man strikes again

The last weeks have been very interesting for me and that is not an understatement.
Even if I had wanted to I could not have avoided all the turbulence that came with the LEAVE and REMAIN competition around the referendum of 23 June 2016 about the membership of the European Union. Even the fact that I had no right to vote in this referendum did not stop both sides bombarding me with propaganda.

The REMAIN side would hammer on about very gloomy expectations if it would come to a BREXIT; the LEAVE side under leadership of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Ian Duncan Smith of the Conservative party,  and Nigel Farage of UKIP came with very optimistic stories, a bit like that a new Golden Age would come for the UK if there was going to be a BREXIT.

                                          Boris Johnson

Some of the things that were being said by the Leave side were obvious lies and empty promises. Even I as a newcomer to the UK could see that.

Of course a new government was not going to put all the money not spent on the membership into the National Health Service.
Of course the UK would not have the profits of an European Union membership while not paying for it.
Of course there would not be free travelling for Brits in the EU, while people from the EU would need visa for the UK.
Of course the EU would not follow British rules in proceedings and such.
Of course leaving the EU will not stop immigration nor reduce the amount of immigrants.

It is hard to believe for me but a (small) majority of the Brits went for the empty promises and lies. So the United Kingdom is going to leave the European Union. The LEAVE campaigners must have not expected this. There is nothing to organise this. All they say is that there is no hurry.
European leaders are fed up with all the moaning and stalling and ask the British leaders to get on with it.

                                          David Cameron

How did all this became possible?
For fear of losing too many votes to UKIP  David Cameron promised the voters in the last general election that he would create a referendum about the membership of the European Union if he won. So there would be no need to vote for UKIP if you wanted this.

David Cameron won and kept his promise.
He accepted that the members of his government would campaign towards the referendum, so already allowing the country being led only half, The other half of his team was too busy with bickering in the campaign to do anything that would normally be their job.
I have the feeling that for most of these Eton boys this was no more than having a bit of fun. It would never come to a victory for the LEAVE side.   But it did.

In the aftermath a petition has been started by upset people, lots of them voted LEAVE but saw this as a protest against David Cameron who had stated he was in favour of REMAIN. They never thought for a second it would come to all this. The petition is already signed by 4 million people but is swept aside as not relevant by David Cameron.

David Cameron made his decision clear after hearing the results of the referendum. He is stepping down as Prime Minister and leader of the Conservatives at the next convention of his party, in October. It is up to his successor to lead the UK out of the European Union.

From all around David Cameron is being praised. Like he has been the best leader of the Conservatives and the best Prime Minister ever. Firstly I was flabbergasted, but then I remembered my own little piece about his acting as a Prime Minister ( http://dutchbicyclemaninnorwich.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/teflon-man.html) and how he got away with lying three times about money that was stashed away to avoid paying tax. (This getting out through the Panama Papers.)
So Teflon Man did it again: nothing sticks on him.

The events around the referendum make me think of a cook who suggested that he will prepare a nice meal for a family. He creates the most awful meal possible and makes a terrible mess of the kitchen. The family is polite and say that the meal was very good.
The neighbours see the state of the kitchen and tell the cook that they expect him to clean up and replace what is damaged. The cook simply shakes his head: "No, the next person who will cook, will clean up."
And so...everybody cheers how great he is.

In the aftermath of the referendum a fight started about who will succeed Teflon man as leader of the Conservative Party and as Prime Minister. Not very surprisingly Boris Johnson withdrew himself as a candidate, so he is not getting his hands dirty either. It looks like Theresa May has to clean the kitchen. She was not in favour of a Brexit, but she is volunteering to be the next cook.
=========================================

4th of July 2016
Boris Johnson is having a good time, away from the fire that he helped to ignite.

                                          Boris Johnson

But he can't help having an opinion when he sees a journalist; he tells the British politicians to move on as quick as possible. And drives away to more pleasant talks.

That is nice of the former cook, telling others to hurry in cleaning the kitchen. Still not volunteering to help cleaning up the mess he himself created.

In the meantime Nigel Farage stepped down as leader of UKIP. His ultimate goal in life - getting the UK out of the European Union - has been fulfilled. So he retires, for the third time.
A bit like a pop star or a football player. We wait for his next come back.

                                          Nigel Farage

Nigel Farage fits perfectly into the picture I described of the kitchen.
He is like a TV cook you really would not like to see in your kitchen, always swearing, drinking too much and being foul mouthed. Now he shouts out that they have cooked according to his recipe. He is ready to retire and write his memoires: "My Biggest Insults".
==============================================

Shit Talk

The majority of dog owners nowadays take care of the shit of their beloved animals. But still some people don't do this; even the threat of fines is not enough to force them to do it. So I can understand that countries like Malaysia and Singapore have almost Draconian punishments. I do think this goes too far. But a solution for getting every dog owner clearing their own dog turds is difficult to find. It leads to a lot of anger for other people.

I've seen people marking dog turds with flags to show their annoyance.

I have been talking to some dog owners and most of them are outraged about the fact that they pay dog tax and have to clear the dog turds while horse owners don't pay tax for their horses and don't take care of the turds of their animals either. And a horse produces a lot more! It stays on the streets a long time while flattened out by cars. It makes it harder and harder not to step on it or ride through it when it really covers the street or the pavement.

There is a way to prevent horses to litter the streets. Maybe it's not comfortable for a horse; I don't know, there is no way to ask. But I think it would be very reasonable to demand from people who ride horses on the public road to use them.

The Horse Nappie:

I expect that more dog owners will obey the rules regarding dog turds when they are not confronted with piles of horse shit on the streets anymore. So there is a lot to gain with this.
==========================================

Waste and Recycling Collection

Since the start of May 2016 we have a new firm emptying our bins.
Expectations were high: the whole procedure would become more green, there was going to be more recycling and more dividing of the recyclable materials. We were going to get two new bins: one for paper and cardboard and a black bin instead of the black trash bags we were using. These were often ripped open by crows, seagulls and foxes. They were too vulnerable.

Soon it was clear how the changes really were. The paper and cardboard bin was a little insert bin that had to be placed in the recycle bin. The thing was all shiny and new, but delivered a problem. No way it could be fit in our bin. It did not seem to be a big problem; I phoned the county council and the friendly civil servant assured me I would get a new recycle bin before the new service would start.

The next thing that amazed me was the fact that we had to start using the new garbage bin by putting bin bags in the new shiny bin. In these day we try to keep the use of plastic to minimum and here we are packing our garbage double. One thing is certain: no animal will get to the rubbish. Still I can imagine the scene of the dump with thousands and thousands of black bin bags. This is plastic that is not going to dissolve itself.

Today we saw the garbage trucks speeding through our street WITHOUT taking our rubbish. I had been careful: had placed the paper and cardboard out at the last minute, to prevent that it got soaked by the rain that had started earlier that day. I phoned the council to complain about it and after 30 minutes waiting to get connected I was sort of told off by a lady whose voice reminded me strongly of actress Jo Brand. I almost got the feeling this phone call was recorded for a comedy show where stupid people try to phone the authorities. Her story was that the bin man probably were called away.

Stupid me! Of course!

It's now months after my initial phone call to the friendly civil servant: the new recycle bin has not been delivered yet. The man who had to deliver the thing probably was called away too...
=======================================

An Empty Gesture?

This year we decided not to send Christmas cards to anyone.
More and more people send their best wishes for a nice Christmas and an even nicer New Year on social media or mention them in a mail.
So no more need to sit together at the table and write the cards out. "How many left to do now?" Pfff.

Every year we would count the cards and there was always less than what we've sent out. What to do? Check lists? A bit like "Who unfollowed me on Twitter?" We never could be bothered to do that. If I'm honest it was more annoying to see people sending the same cards as they did in previous years, realising they probably bought them in bulk at Aldi's or Primark. Some cards would be too tiny or too ugly to hang them on the string. It always led to the discussion that we maybe should not send these people a card any more. In the end nobody would be erased from the list and on the contrary even more would be added, us being in a shame because we were certain we never had sent these people a card.

This morning a car stopped in front of our house and a woman got out. A man, maybe her partner, waited behind the wheel while she walked up to the front door. We waited for the doorbell; it never rang. The woman had gone back to the car and they had driven off.

The card was addressed to Alice and Ken. We know the names, they are the old couple who lived here till around Christmas last year. They were both in their nineties, she was seriously ill and he was her carer. That became impossible after a light stroke that struck him caused him to lose the feeling in his fingertips. The children of the couple decided they were better off living in a nursing home. The old lady died a few months later.

The sender of the card mentioned on the card was just Violet. It was obvious that this Violet never made the effort to visit the old couple in the last year and never tried to phone them. If she had done so, she would not have delivered the card in person. I think it is a bit strange to just put this card in the letter box; she could have tried to visit, but could not be bothered to do such.

The card was a Christmas card on which was added "a happy new year".
Why oh why did you decide to write and deliver this card Violet?
I'm afraid we'll never know.

One year later

A car stops in front of our house and a lady gets out, holding an envelope in her hands. She walks towards our front door and my wife gets to the door, asks her who she wants to give this envelope.
"To my friends Alice and Ken", she answers, "I live around the corner". She points in the direction.

My wife tells her the couple moved two years ago to Kent and that Alice died half a year later.
The lady thanks my wife and takes the envelope back into the car. It takes a few minutes before she drives away.

Maybe we will not get another Christmas card for Alice and Ken...
========================================================

A letter from Michael Moore

I normally don't reproduce other people's material, but I think this should be read.
And it doesn't need any picture to brighten it up, that would only conceal the message.

Those Who Say "I Support the Troops" Should Just Stop, Out of Respect for the Troops …a letter from Michael Moore

Thursday, January 3rd, 2013

I don't support the troops, America, and neither do you. I am writing this as I have just learned of the suicides of two more of our active duty reservists who live here in the Traverse City, Michigan area. That brings the total number of soldier suicides (that I know of) in the past year, in this rural area, to four.

I am tired of the ruse we are playing on these brave citizens in our armed forces. And guess what -- a lot of these soldiers and sailors and airmen and Marines see right through the bull**** of those words, "I support the troops!," spoken by Americans with such false sincerity -- false because our actions don't match our words. These young men and women sign up to risk their very lives to protect us -- and this is what they get in return:

1. They get sent off to wars that have NOTHING to do with defending America or saving our lives. They are used as pawns so that the military-industrial complex can make billions of dollars and the rich here can expand their empire. By "supporting the troops," that means I'm supposed to shut up, don't ask questions, do nothing to stop the madness, and sit by and watch thousands of them die? Well, I've done an awful lot to try and end this. But the only way you can honestly say you support the troops is to work night and day to get them out of these hell holes they've been sent to. And what have I done this week to bring the troops home? Nothing. So if I say "I support the troops," don't believe me -- I clearly don't support the troops because I've got more important things to do today, like return an iPhone that doesn't work and take my car in for a tune up.

2. While the troops we claim to "support" are serving their country, bankers who say they too "support the troops" foreclose on the actual homes of these soldiers and evict their families while they are overseas! Have I gone and stood in front of the sheriff's deputy as he is throwing a military family out of their home? No. And there's your proof that I don't "support the troops," because if I did, I would organize mass sit-ins to block the doors of these homes. Instead, I'm having Chilean sea bass tonight.

3. How many of you who say you "support the troops" have visited a VA hospital to bring aid and comfort to the sick and wounded? I haven't. How many of you have any clue what it's like to deal with the VA? I don't. Therefore, you would be safe to say that I don't "support the troops," and neither do you.

4. Who amongst you big enthusiastic "supporters of the troops" can tell me the approximate number of service women who have been raped while in the military? Answer:19,000 (mostly) female troops are raped or sexually assaulted every year by fellow American troops. What have you or I done to bring these criminals to justice? What's that you say -- out of sight, out of mind? These women have suffered, and I've done nothing. So don't ever let me get away with telling you I "support the troops" because, sadly, I don't. And neither do you.

5. Help a homeless vet today? How 'bout yesterday? Last week? Last year? Ever? But I thought you "support the troops!"? The number of homeless veterans is staggering -- on any given night, at least 60,000 veterans are sleeping on the streets of the country that proudly "supports the troops." This is disgraceful and shameful, isn't it? And it exposes all those "troop supporters" who always vote against social programs that would help these veterans. Tonight there are at least 12,700 Iraq/Afghanistan veterans homeless and sleeping on the street. I've never lent a helping hand to one of the many vets I've seen sleeping on the street. I can't bear to look, and I walk past them very quickly. That's callednot "supporting the troops," which, I guess, I don't -- and neither do you.

6. And you know, the beautiful thing about all this "support" you and I have been giving the troops -- they feel this love and support so much, a record number of them are killing themselves every single week. In fact, there are now more soldiers killing themselves than soldiers being killed in combat (323 suicides in 2012 through November vs. about 210 combat deaths). Yes, you are more likely to die by your own hand in the United States military than by al Qaeda or the Taliban. And an estimated eighteen veterans kill themselves each day, or one in five of all U.S. suicides -- though no one really knows because we don't bother to keep track. Now, that's what I call support! These troops are really feeling the love, people! Lemme hear you say it again: "I support the troops!" Louder! "I SUPPORT THE TROOPS!!" There, that's better. I'm sure they heard us. Don't forget to fly our flag, wear your flag lapel pin, and never, ever let a service member pass you by without saying, "Thank you for your service!" I'm sure that's all they need to keep from putting a bullet in their heads. Do your best to keep your "support" up for the troops because, God knows, I certainly can't any longer.

I don't "support the troops" or any of those other hollow and hypocritical platitudes uttered by Republicans and frightened Democrats. Here's what I do support: I support them coming home. I support them being treated well. I support peace, and I beg any young person reading this who's thinking of joining the armed forces to please reconsider. Our war department has done little to show you they won't recklessly put your young life in harm's way for a cause that has nothing to do with what you signed up for. They will not help you once they've used you and spit you back into society. If you're a woman, they will not protect you from rapists in their ranks. And because you have a conscience and you know right from wrong, you do not want yourself being used to kill civilians in other countries who never did anything to hurt us. We are currently involved in at least a half-dozen military actions around the world. Don't become the next statistic so that General Electric can post another record profit -- while paying no taxes -- taxes that otherwise would be paying for the artificial leg that they've kept you waiting for months to receive.

I support you, and will try to do more to be there for you. And the best way you can support me -- and the ideals our country says it believes in -- is to get out of the military as soon as you can and never look back.

And please, next time some "supporter of the troops" says to you with that concerned look on their face, "I thank you for your service," you have my permission to punch their lights out (figuratively speaking, of course).

(There is something I've done to support the troops -- other than help lead the effort to stop these senseless wars. At the movie theater I run in Michigan, I became the first person in town to institute an affirmative action plan for hiring returning Iraq/Afghanistan vets. I am working to get more businesses in town to join with me in this effort to find jobs for these returning soldiers. I also let all service members in to the movies for free, every day.)

Yours,
Michael Moore
MMFlint@MichaelMoore.com
@MMFlint
MichaelMoore.com 

Exchanging one risk for another

   My attention was drawn towards this article http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/dec/21/britain-deploy-troops-gulf-cameron.
It all sounds very attractive: troops withdrawn faster from dangerous Afghanistan. The Afghan troops can handle things themselves, they will be able to fight off the Taliban/Al Qaida.
   Being a bit older it has a very familiar ring to it: things went like that in Vietnam too. And half a year later the so called very able troops were smashed by the Vietcong.

   Next interesting thing is the 2.5 Billion deal: selling Typhoon jets and stationing more military in the Gulf, the states of the UAE. It sounds very attractive, too good to be true. A nice flow of income and a nice friendship with the UAE.

   The reality is a bit different. The jets and the troops are meant to give protection against a big neighbour. I don't mean Saudi Arabia but Iran. In the states of the UAE is a lot of unrest you hardly hear about in the UK and other western countries. The states are ruled by wealthy and powerful families, their heads - the emirs - are in fact no more than dictators. And the people want more democracy.

                                          

   The problems are enlarged by the fact that the ruling families are sunnis while an overwhelming majority of the people are shiites. The shiites not only want more democracy - like I mentioned before - but even more freedom for celebrating their own holy days and holding their processions like they have done for centuries. The ruling families fear these celebrations because they often lead to riots and more demands for freedom and democracy.

   Because the ruling families lack enough protecting forces often the Saudi army is called for help and they have employed an official militia with arabs from other countries. The militia is very provocative and has caused riots by itself. It has led to bloodshedding and even imprisonment of doctors and nurses who dared to treat the wounded. The story that has been made up is that the medics were hiding criminal looters and telling lies to the international press about was what going on.

                                               5th fleet

   The interests of the western countries here is a bit different than in the cases of the revolutions in Egypt, Lybia, Tunisia and Syria. Because all eyes are on big bad Iran. Everything is about protecting the region against this country. Because of that there is the American 5th Fleet in Bahrain. So it is important to keep the situation stable (like it is).

  I see a big risk in this. The Americans and soon the British will be considered by the people as an occupying force with all the risks involved. As military who help to keep the ruling families in their power. So the people will go to to the streets to have demonstrations and even riots. Knowing that Al Qaida was born in this region (NOT in Afghanistan and certainly not in Iraq) I'm afraid that this will cause reactions from people who are related to Al Qaida too. We have seen what these reactions can be: bombs in western capitals.

So this nice article about a 2.5 Billion deal makes me worried.