
Not all Germans believe in God but they all believe in the Bundersbank.
I
was listening to the opinions of three witnesses to a House of Lords
Committee about Europe and of course the position of Germany was
crucial. The problems arising from the Eurozone debt is landing on the
desk of Germany's financial system because there is no common budget to
draw down from with a common share of the total debt, shared by all the
national governments.
The idea of a Debt Mutualisation approach,
which would straddle independent national governance, is far from the
current position.
What is missing is a Collective National
Responsibility not only for a country's independent debt but as a
"collective" for the general debt. With the debt goes the reforms that
will make the adjustments required to spending norms, norms which differ
from country to country depending on the cultural priority of the
particular society.
Of course the ECB has powers as a centralised
authority for the Euro but has no collective taxation power and no
overall budgetary control.
The German position is further
constrained by the over-reaching power of the German Constitution. A
constitution which was drawn up to protect future Germans from their
past, particularly the destabilisation that political decision making
can bring. Any changes to National financial arrangements would be
vetoed before they got off the ground and the policy makers would be
rendered powerless.
Of course it highlights the exposure we have
in the UK, where there is no fundamental constitution, instead we place
our faith in the Government we elect, not to go too far from the
"historical" process. Keep your fingers crossed !!

"Those in
peril of the sea", the words of a sombre hymn rise from the congregation
gathered to remember the men who lost their lives in the "Battle of the
Atlantic" during World War Two.
Liverpool Cathedral was the scene
of the memorial where we remembered the heroic service given by the men
of the Merchant Service, an unsung battle fought out in the wild and
turbulent seas of the Atlantic. The terror of being sunk, the struggle
for life in those cold waters, the high chance that your ship would be
hit, didn't deter the crews of these floating targets as they
ponderously made their way through the seas waiting, waiting, waiting
for the sight of the first torpedo heading for the ship.
Why did
these men turn up for the voyage, they weren't signed up for a life in
the Royal Navy, each voyage was a decision to continue to do their bit.
The
men of the Merchant Navy have only recently been awarded a medal for
service, which sadly, few are still alive to receive. The Establishment
had not seen fit to acknowledge their contribution, being seen to be
very much a junior to the senior service, the Royal Navy with its
symbolism and rank.
Without their immense contribution, we as a
nation would have starved and it was only the ships that got through the
U boat packs with their precious cargo that allowed us to fight on.
How
do we weigh the courage of each seamen, just as vital in their
contribution to the war effort as the rousing rhetoric of Winston
Churchill.
Of course Churchill became an icon but what of the efforts of the men who made him one !!

I know many
of you don't have a great feel for football, some actually hate the
game, especially the place football has claimed in the media. Its been
the corner stone of Sky's success, attracting millions of subscribers.
The fans travel the country spending thousands in tickets, travel and of
course booze. They literally put their families on hold owing
allegiance to their team who can do no wrong !!
100.000 Germans
have invaded London to be at Wembly Stadium to watch the final of the
European Cup. Two German teams Bayern Munich v Borussia Dortmond,
playing a brand of German football that was a joy to watch.
I like
many others have praised the silky skills of the Spanish teams,
particularly Barcelona with their slow mesmeric build up play, knocking
it around, hypnotising the opposing team into a stupa and then suddenly,
a flurry of movement and the magic of Messi scores. Whilst one
acknowledges the sparkling brilliance of these Spanish clubs I have
become a little bored with the chess like game they have developed.
This
game was very skill-full but more than anything it was direct, incisive,
it had the tempo of a real contest. It had the David and Goliath aspect
with Bayern a huge,wealthy club set against the smaller kid on the
block, Dortmond. The kid on the block had no sense of respect and came
out of the blocks, pummelling Bayerns defence with through balls, onto
which their forwards could fasten and shoot for goal. At both ends the
goalies were magnificent bringing off great saves. The tempo of the game
was terrific, end to end stuff and a tribute to German football.
I
felt that Bayern were very lucky not to have two of their men sent off.
One for a vicious elbow in the face, the other, a clear second yellow
card, not given, which would forced the ref to show a red. Games are won
and lost on such decisions.
We had a blend of football, a
respectful tension between the teams which was a breath of fresh air
from the spoilt, overpaid UK Premier League with the weekly sight of
snarling prima donnas, rolling about the pitch, feigning injury.
Perhaps the weight of their wallets induces the weakness !!

One is reminded every so often, of the loss of a loved one, how the grief hits like a punch. .
Luckily now-a-days such events are few and far between, a far cry from 70 years ago when Europe was a cauldron of fighting and dissent.
70 years of peace has enabled the people of the continent to live and never know the trauma of war. To never know the traumatic effect of a shortened life expectancy, of men in their hundreds of thousands, away fighting and dying in the cause to preserve democracy and avoid totalitarianism.
The scale of the losses on all fronts, particularly on the Eastern front, where over 20 million died is on a scale unimaginable in today's world.
The conflicting nations of the Europe of 1930/40s are now collaborative in every way and it would seem unimaginable for any one of them to take up arms against another.
How
we, of my generation, owe the men who took up arms to fight the battles
described in the history books by their proximity to a hill or a
village but inadequate in describing the fear and the heroism of the
ordinary solders who actually fought the battle, who died in their
thousands gaining a mile here, a hundred yards there.
In civvy street they were unassuming people, the plumber, the labourer, the
clerk, the delivery man who, in a typical, English class segregated
fashion, were looked down upon by the upper middle class as inferior.
They were the Officers pawns in the game of warfare, they were the means
of gaining success, of collecting the commendation, of adding a another
pip !!
Now we see them only on Armistice Day, an ever decreasing
band of brothers marching stiffly, not as a result of drill but of old
age. We owe them so much that we take for granted.

"Impotence"
is the word that comes to mind as political commentators discus the
reasons why a couple of men kill someone and then deliberately wait around to publicise their reasons.
Any
society has a responsibility to engage all its citizens in the
democratic process by providing a vote for everyone. The problem is that
often the action of voting seems to carry little real weight and ones
real concerns are ignored which leads to massive frustration.
Frustration can potentially lead to instability, making the person open to taking a line of action out of character and usually leading to damage.
As our political representatives seem more and more out of touch, not to say unable themselves to have the
power to make decisions on our behalf. The power of the financial
markets, the directives that come in from Europe which seem to
countermand our own Parliament, the Whitehall Establishment which is regarded as being out of touch with the ordinary voter, the wealthy members of parliament who have no practical understanding of the worries of Joe Public, the university trained professional politician who have little or no experience outside the rarefied atmosphere of the political world.
All contribute to the question of feeling impotent, not being listened to, which drives the individual into an inward sense of anger and sometimes it can boil over.
As all our actions become of interest to myriad authorities who seek to rule our lives. The cameras in the street, the Health and Safety rules that have seeped into every corner of our lives, the interrogation of our key strokes on the internet, not to mention the incision of slanted politically correct rules and regulations that take out the last vestige of free thought.

So what has your correspondent to say regarding the horrific attack on the soldier in Woolwich by the so called Muslim terrorists.
What creates the ideological fervour to follow a course of events which not only create disgust in the general population but also end any sort of life for the participants. Only religious concepts, involving individual sacrifice and a belief that, in a life after death scenario, one can attain a special position in your "makers" eyes, can young men and women commit the horrendous crimes against their fellow man and be prepared to die for there actions.
All religions have a mystical side where the faithful believe a goal is to be attained by acting out their lives in a certain way. On the whole the issue is an individual one and depends wholly on ones own sense of commitment.
The Muslim faith is different. It has a far greater collective brotherhood, a greater commitment to the faith and a "teaching sect" that can infiltrate many messages into the mind of the congregation. The faith has been at the forefront of a religious struggle for centuries.
The faith has two sects the Sunni and the Shi'ites. The Sunni selected Abu Baka as their first Caliph after the death of Muhammed, whilst the Shi'ites selected Ali as their first Caliph.
This mis-match, over many years has led to a tremendous loss of life, without a day going by when followers of each sect being killed in the most in-human, traumatic way by members of the other group.
When Pakistan came into being in 1947 under Ali Jinnah, it was initially created as a secular state and the construct of the state was the recognition of the power of the religious schools, the madrassah which were in effect a state within a state.
In many countries this potential conflict,of a "state within a state" has been recognised and the problem that arises with the powerful inter-relationship of these, madrassah centred religious groups, who know little "State" allegiance when compared with their religious allegiance. It is this immensely powerful force which crosses boarders and seeks to promote the religious above the secular democratic ideal.
A brotherhood which sees its group as totally unified, who can through radical teaching lead its followers to do anything in furtherance of holy attainment.
One of the outcomes at the sight of the Muslim Nigerians, hands covered with blood, the chopper clear for all to see has been a Media storm with interview after interview deriding the action.
One of the leading Muslim clerics, Anjem Choudary who has in the past preached hatred towards the none Muslim
in this country was questioned on TV as to his views. His message was
simple. We in the West were guilty of far greater crimes in Muslim
countries towards Muslims and this latest crime was in small part a response to our own guilt.
There is no doubt that we have blood on our hands. Our history up to the present day has been one of self interest and we have used what ever force was necessary to obtain our own murky ends.
Why should we be surprised that the religious relatives of those very people we oppressed would want to strike back.
How incoherent we are when we ignore these facts, how hypocritical when we profess our horror and ignore the dirt of our own foreign policy which results in death and destruction in far away countries.
Of
course in our attempt to create a multi cultural society after
encouraging many millions, particularly from Pakistan in the late
40/50s, to come here to fill the need for cheap labour, we are left with a polyglot of interests.
There is no united "national" interest, the landscape has changed massively since the 40s and we are confused and horrified when the different views surface.

Our Parliament has been putting its-self through the wringer, not on things that matter like the economy but on whether Gays and Lesbians should be allowed to marry in a church and obtain the same matrimonial rights as straight people.
The Gay & Lesbians have long campaigned for equality, particularly in their rights as a couple to have the same legal rights. The recognition of the cohabiting, same sex, couple to be legally married came
about with the creation of the Civil Partnership in which same sex
people were recognised as being married. The Civil Partnership did not
have the legal baggage of defining the rights of the people being
married and was much looser in defining the legal statute of each
person.
In its search for equality, defining its-self as same but different, the powerful lobby representing the Gay and Lesbian community, Stonewall, under its indefatigable leader Peter Tatchel have insisted that human beings should not be treated differently from anyone else.
The problem lay in "their" need required other people and other established group's to change !
Religious biblical texts set the guidelines for what is viewed as deviant behaviour. Sodomy is clearly defined as being outside the scope of normal human behaviour and was punishable by death but slowly the secular world has changed its stance. In this country, the Wholfenden Report stated that it was not a crime between consenting adults and so we have the time old conflict of Secular opinion versus Religious dogma based on teachings that purport to be from the word of God.
How do you square the circle ? Well you can't and yesterday one saw the torment in people who spoke with all the conviction in their very being, opposed on matters of principle, opposed until hell freezeth over.
One
thing that comes from all this discussion is the number of Gay &
Lesbian people there are in certain specific segments of our society. As
a proportion they are quite high. The Arts, actors, ballet dancers,
artists and writers were where one would find, even expect to find
Homosexuality. Was it the mixing of the male testosterone with the
defusing sensibility of the female that enhanced their creativity ?
Now we see men and women "coming out" from all walks of life, from Business & Commerce to such a hard province as Rugby.
There
were many Parliamentarians who stood to speak who were gay and who
rigorously pursue the Gay & Lesbian agenda wherever they can. The
lobby is powerful, not in sheer numbers but in the position of the
membership. Like other minority causes, they have the fervour of feeling
slighted.
Of even more interest is why do people feel this attraction for members of their own sex.
We
take for granted what we would call the laws of nature, the drive to
procreate and keep our species alive through offspring. There must be an
evolutionary, biological set of, predetermined, interactional drives
that cause the young male to be attracted to the young female, from it
flows survival.
The
homosexual has none of these biological pre-determinates, other than
sex for sexes sake, since there can be no benefit to the species in any
act they perform.
So is it the case, as with so much in our life, it
is purely self-gratification. If this is the case then the homosexual
should not be given any special status.