It has come to my attention that today is the feast day of St. Andrew, patron saint of Scotland. This will probably be marked in northern parts by much revelry and nationalist braying from chaps in plaid skirting, ungrateful for the endless subsidies from the civilised south.
Let's be quite clear about this. Braveheart was a travesty, not a documentary. Scotland is not a country in its own right, but is merely a province which we regard with the same affectionate tolerance one affords a wayward toddler. Before it was taken under our wing, it spent centuries achieving nothing of note, sitting back in jealous awe as the English conquered the world.
So, Hamish McHaggis, hush your bleating. Scotland is not a real country and hasn't been a nation state for more than 350 years. Get over it.
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Monday, 30 November 2009
Friday, 27 November 2009
Politics
As I sat bemused by Question Time on BBC1 last night, a weekly routine, the performance - and that's certainly the mot juste - of Lord Falconer prompted the mental re-working of a one-liner that was doing the rounds about 25 years ago. Then, it referred to the limited understanding of computers among those charged with selling them. Anyway...
Q: What's the difference between a member of the British Cabinet and a used car salesman?
A: A used car salesman knows when he's telling lies.
Meanwhile, the Chilcot enquiry rumbles along. We're supposed to be impressed by the staged leaking, a drip at a time, of snippets of 'new' information. This is, one assumes, intended to engender public belief in the fairness of the proceedings. We all know, of course, that Tony Bliar (sic) and his cronies will not be held to account.
Don't misunderstand me. I was in favour of taking out Hussein, although it should have been done the first time we bloodied his nose. I simply resent being patronised with obvious lies about our reasons for setting the tanks to roll. Some of us knew that this was a war intended to secure a significant contribution to the West's oil supplies and had no problem with that from the outset. I write, of course, as a former soldier who served in that region.
The lack of any coherent exit strategy concerns me, as it continues to concern me about Viet Nam. Sorry, I meant Afghanistan, but it's a forgiveable confusion. As ever, Question Time was followed by This Week, during which Michael Portillo cut to the very nub by saying that our position can be summarised in two short sentences: "We won't win. We can't leave."
And so to work.
Q: What's the difference between a member of the British Cabinet and a used car salesman?
A: A used car salesman knows when he's telling lies.
Meanwhile, the Chilcot enquiry rumbles along. We're supposed to be impressed by the staged leaking, a drip at a time, of snippets of 'new' information. This is, one assumes, intended to engender public belief in the fairness of the proceedings. We all know, of course, that Tony Bliar (sic) and his cronies will not be held to account.
Don't misunderstand me. I was in favour of taking out Hussein, although it should have been done the first time we bloodied his nose. I simply resent being patronised with obvious lies about our reasons for setting the tanks to roll. Some of us knew that this was a war intended to secure a significant contribution to the West's oil supplies and had no problem with that from the outset. I write, of course, as a former soldier who served in that region.
The lack of any coherent exit strategy concerns me, as it continues to concern me about Viet Nam. Sorry, I meant Afghanistan, but it's a forgiveable confusion. As ever, Question Time was followed by This Week, during which Michael Portillo cut to the very nub by saying that our position can be summarised in two short sentences: "We won't win. We can't leave."
And so to work.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
