.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Saturday, April 24, 2010


Labels: , ,

Friday, August 01, 2008

Or maybe not? Here's historian Arthur Herman in the current issue of Commentary (NOT my favourite mag. . . ):

What these and other such statements remind us is that, by the time George Bush entered the White House in January 2001, the United States was already at war with Iraq, and in fact had been at war for a decade, ever since the first Gulf war in the early 1990’s. (This was literally the case, the end of hostilities in 1991 being merely a cease-fire and not a formal surrender followed by a peace treaty.)

I point I've been making repeatedly for at least the last six years, though to be more accurate the last twelve is more like it. Here I am, without reservations I would make today, on my blog back in 2004:

In effect this is the moment the war we are still embroiled in has its beginning. This beginning is in both strategic terms and in terms of justification.
Strategically the problem was Saddam's dangerous regional ambitions that could only be stopped by removing him from power. [. . .] In terms of justification this date matters because this is the moment the Gulf/Iraq war was started by an act of aggression by Saddamite Iraq. Hence the coalition was and is justified both morally and legally to bring this conflict to an end we think appropriate.

Also here and here. What I find strange about this is that this is an obvious argument and yet Herman's comment above is the first time I've read/heard anybody else make it. Did I miss it?

Labels: ,

Thursday, April 24, 2008

At Harry’s Place there’s a story about a council which introduced male "Muslim only" swimming sessions or not as the case seems to be. But in the course of trying to ascertain from the staff whether that was indeed the official policy or not, HP’s writer
asked him whether Clissold Leisure Centre would institute Whites Only swimming for racists. His answer was that they would, if there was sufficient demand.

Is he serious? I find this quite intriguing. They really would? Perhaps someone should alert the BNP. That said in a way of course it's the only logical destination multiculturalism* will end up in. If one were a white supremacist who is the government, the public or the law to tell me that "white separatism" is not the authentic expression of my "culture"? And if we're using taxpayers money to foster arbitrary expressions of particularistic sub-sections of society, why not this one too? Well . . . ?
Of course it's bollocks.
And that's exactly the problem with multiculturalism.

* Before anyone has a go at me about opposition to multiculturalism being racism I should point to this standard definition of the term, which says that multiculturalism denotes
[t]he characteristics of a multicultural society; (also) the policy or process whereby the distinctive identities of the cultural groups within such a society are maintained or supported

I only use it in the second meaning. Otherwise the term multiculturality would be correct, which is entirely uncontroversial and in effect only a statement of fact. I'd add to that, that when I use the term multiculturalism I don't mean just support or maintenance of sectional identities, but the pressurising nature usually employed to do so (see the above example), almost invariably coupled with the refusal to support to unifying ones.


Saturday, December 01, 2007

And all sorts of stuff changes.
David Cameron? Back in late September I argued with someone that theoretically the Tories would be making a comeback soon, but that beyond the theory Cameron was just not cutting it. Now he's kicking polling ass.
Mean while the mighty Gordon Brown has descended into a farce and we've gone from weekly crises to daily ones. At the current rate, will he last a year?
Defence and military equipment has become a serious issue in political debate. Mind, the content of said debate may be still a little lacking, but still.
I've also heard that the BBC is becoming right-wing.
Whatever next?! This blog to appear regularly? Don’t bet on it!

Labels: ,

Tuesday, September 11, 2007

General Petraeus yesterday:
There will be no single moment at which we can claim victory; any turning point
will likely only be recognised in retrospect

Though you could have read that thought on my blog three years ago:

So when will it be over? It will be over on the last day coalition forces in Iraq carry out the last combat operations to maintain internal order. Of course we will only be able to determine that date in hindsight.

Finally someone listens to me… ;) Not quite, but the point matters.

Labels: ,

Thursday, August 30, 2007

in a month. That's gotta be some kind of anti-record for the site. So quick time to put this one in. In fairness to myself I have been well busy, as one says. Anyways....
You scored as Classical Liberal, You are a classical liberal. You are sceptical about much of the historicity of the Bible, and the most important thing Jesus has done is to set us a good moral example that we are to follow. Doctrines like the trinity and the incarnation are speculative and not really important, and in the face of science and philosophy the surest way we can be certain about God is by our inner awareness of him. Discipleship is expressed by good moral behaviour, but inward religious feeling is most important.

Evangelical Holiness/Wesleyan


Classical Liberal


Modern Liberal




Roman Catholic


Reformed Evangelical




Neo orthodox




What's your theological worldview?
created with QuizFarm.com

Labels: ,

Wednesday, August 01, 2007

On a confusing issue about privacy, property rights and stuff, this is what we read on the aggregator page:

Medical Correspondent Children born from donated sperm or eggs should have this recorded on their birth certificates, MPs and peers said yesterday

Why are the children of medical correspondents being singled out in this way....

Sunday, July 15, 2007

Since the first in this series he's actually left Downing Street, seemingly into complete nothingness; no press conferences, no grand standing alternative careers (yet) and no more "Blair - the legacy bla bla bla" stories. So, here's my second look-back. One thing Blair loved was changing names, for various nefarious purposes no doubt and not just because he was superficial and ineffectual. My example is this: under Thatcher there was introduced an experiment in regional policy called Enterprise Zones. Ghastly Thatcherite free-marketeering zealotry I think you'll agree, and of course Blair always warned us he was the only thing that stood between Ye Olde Iron Lady returning (or somesuch). So, out with Enterprise Zones, and hello Enterprise Areas (what a difference!).

Labels: ,

Friday, July 13, 2007

So, further to this story about banning racist TinTin books, Tim Worstall has a good example of food that would probably not be marketed like this in the UK . . . .
Which brings me neatly to my own humble contribution: In Germany you can buy an ice cream from supermarkets called Nogger (yes, I had to read it twice too). Chocolate ice cream, as if it needed saying. Looking for some clear images of it, I stumbled upon this somewhat unfortunate historical record. Could be worse, though I'm not sure how? Ok, I guess if he was seen next to it, or eating it, might be worse. Though just to finish this, an animal in Heidelberg Zoo is called Nogger - a monkey, in case your wondering.
Seriously though, I'm not really sure when I look at this and Worstall's example, are we Brits a little too uptight and overly sensitive or is it -in this case- the Germans and Portugese who are a little off?


Thursday, July 12, 2007

I'm sure I'm not the only rubbing his eyes over this story, Giant man-eating badgers stalk Basra:
now a plague of giant man-eating badgers are stalking the streets of Basra at
night according to residents.
The city, already prey to a nasty turf war
between rival militia factions, has now been gripped by a scary rumour that the
giant animals are attacking humans
Of course, out-of-control badgers are not a new topic on this blog.
But to be serious again, what's the real cause here:

Scientists have speculated that the badgers' numbers are on the increase because of efforts to reflood the marshlands north of Basra that Saddam Hussein had drained to quell insurgency among Shia Marsh Arabs.

So, to sum up, Saddam caused the problem, and the Coalitions redemptive measures leave much to be desired. I’ve got a feeling that line has a familiar ring to it . . .
To wrap up, Via NRO, there's this strangeness. Huh?


Saturday, June 30, 2007

I’m told is LOLcats. Dear me. Here’s the first that comes up, including other animals too.

Friday, June 29, 2007

So, via a blog I don't link to as I want to remain family-friendly, I stumble on this from National Review. The piece is written by one Denis Boyles, who has a book entitled: Vile France: Fear, Duplicity, Cowardice and Cheese.
(Ok, maybe only I think that's funny, but it does sound like an episode of 'Allo 'Allo)
But from there we come to this piece in the Guardian by Roy Hattersly. It half makes sense, but for the rest I was in stiches. Here’s my fave bit:
I would run away and take refuge with other survivors of my species. If I were suffering from some virulent transmittable disease, I would spread it about. Being in a state of perturbation, I would not spend much time thinking about the common good.

Of course badgers are generally know for spending much time thinking. About the common good.
Hands up anyone else who thinks that large chunks of it read like Mark Steyn spoofing the root-cause-brigade?

Thursday, June 28, 2007

Have I missed it, or does the current edition of the Spectator not carry one single full article on last weekend’s EU action? I mean, this is The Story. Instead we get some more stuff on Gordon Brown (as if we hadn’t had enough), which all things considered, for now is just trivial flim-flam. Given the debate about what resulted from the EU meeting (possibly the legal creation of a confederation, or maybe not), surely this should have been top priority. Sorry Speccie, not good.

Labels: , ,

Thursday, June 14, 2007

Well done!

Also, read this address by Thatcher and this article from one of the more prominent veterans. And don't forget to visit here:

Labels: , ,

Wednesday, June 06, 2007


I'm not sure, but I seem to remember the troops are Canadian, a country whose contribution to the battle for liberty was (and is!) often overlooked.

Labels: ,

Friday, May 18, 2007

If you want to read 60-page supplements in every newpaper and magazine up and down the land feel free to do so. I’ll be doing the Blair Years review in short chunks instead. Here’s a good little starter which is, all things considered, typical Blair.

Labels: ,

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?