Thursday, December 31, 2009

THE FUTURE ...?


Is this the Britain of the future ?

Happy New Year



To all my readers, followers, friends, contacts and acquaintances, HAPPY NEW YEAR !

I hope it's a gud 'un. Meanhile I post below a video from Hairy Chestnuts with his New Year message.

I raise my glass of home brewed mulled wine to each and every one of today's social freedom fighters who work for fairness and equality in society.

Here's to you in 2010. At least we'll get our vote in the election. That, I think, is all we can look forward to. Whoever wins won't matter. We are not self ruled anymore anyway. Westminster is now about as powerful as my local parish council.

... AND NOW FOR SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT



My son found this rather amusing blog.


NICOTINE VEGETABLES



I thought I'd use this information sent to my inbox today in a new post as the others invaded by Baz are getting a bit cumbersome, and , indeed, not entirelty related to any particualr post but debated generally.

Mandy V sent this through and it makes interesting reading.

She writes :

The vegan analogy is interesting, as far as I am aware, no-one is banned from opening a vegan restaurant are they?
I am over 50 and never been in hospital, (apart from having babies).
It is years since I stepped inside the doctors surgery also.
I work with some elderly people who by some miracle are still alive and kicking and smoking.
Shoving the elderly outside (old peoples homes) to smoke is the most evil thing out of this ban.

It is bad enough pubs and clubs and others who were happy to cater for smokers and non-smokers are closing down because this was forced upon them.
If, nicotine is so addictive, why are drug commpanies allowed to sell products that give false information, ie the percentage of people giving up with them?
Intolerance sure as hell is not healthy either -http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2007/250407antismoking.htm

I am also a smoker and feel like a criminal/leper or whatever the new fad name is for smokers nowadays, for enjoying something that is not illegal.
I hate the thought of going to parties and pubs/clubs anymore.

Just out of interest, are Vegans addicted to vegetables from the same plant family as tobacco?
The Nicotine Content of Common Vegetables

Vegetable Nicotine in ng/g g per 1µg nicotine
Cauliflower 16.8 59.5
Eggplant (Aubergine) 100.0 10
Potatoes 7.1 140
Green tomatoes 42.8 23.4
Ripe tomatoes 4.3 233.0
Pureed tomatoes 52.0 19.2
Rose


"The term "niacin" used interchangeably with vitamin B3 is actually a non-technical term that refers to several different chemical forms of the vitamin. These forms include nicotinic acid and nicotinamide. (Nicotinamide is also sometimes called niacinamide.) The names "niacin," "nicotinic acid," and "nicotinamide" are all derived from research studies on tobacco in the early 1930's. At that time, the first laboratory isolation of vitamin B3 occurred following work on the chemical nicotine that had been obtained from tobacco leaves."

Don't call time on historic pubs

Writing in the Guardian, Simon Davies says that the government should be doing much more to preserve the interiors of pubs. While there is a good case for listing the interiors of pubs that appear on CAMRA’s National Inventory, whether as whole interiors or as part survivals, beyond that the survival of pubs must be a matter of commercial viability. I like pubs with a sense of tradition and history, but I recognize that pubs can’t be preserved in aspic if they can’t attract customers. And, as many commenters point out, the government itself is the chief villain in making profitable pubs unviable at the stroke of a pen. Davies says:

It is time for political parties to take action to preserve what is left of the pub heritage. To hell with the idea that we shouldn't stand in the way of progress. I want future generations to stand in a grotty pool room and sniff the air that Johnny Rotten smelled when he changed history.
Oh the irony!

Home drinkers can’t count

The latest piece of festive joy from the Righteous is a warning that people drinking at home are pouring themselves measures much larger than the official “units” and thus underestimating their alcohol consumption.

Most people who drink spirits at home pour well over what they would get in a pub when trying to give a single measure, figures suggest.

The government's Know Your Limits Campaign found that among 600 people tested, the average amount poured was 38ml, compared with a standard 25ml.

Those aged 31 to 50 - the most generous pourers - gave an average of 57ml.

For a person thinking they were drinking 7.5 units a week, the extra measures would equate to 17 units...

…When asked to pour the equivalent of one unit into a large (250ml) wine glass, the average amount poured was 157ml - almost exactly twice the correct amount of 76.25ml.

In a smaller wine glass (175ml), it was 131ml, which is still 55ml more than the correct standard measure.

Surely the real reason for this is not ignorance but the fact that people couldn’t give a toss about the made-up official guidelines and their teeny units. And does anyone really think that 25 ml of spirits or 76ml of wine represents an acceptable or satisfying drink?

Tuesday, December 29, 2009

The drinkers of Britain have murmured

Back in September, Emily Ryans of CAMRA created a very laudable petition on the Number 10 website saying:

We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to reject proposals from the British Medical Association to vastly increase taxes on alcohol and restrict pub opening hours; and to protect the interests of the responsible, sensible majority of moderate drinkers.
What drinker or pubgoer could object to that? Yet it only achieved 2,824 signatures. When we consider that CAMRA has over 100,000 members, at least half of whom must be Internet-literate, that is frankly pathetic. It was given a certain amount of publicity in What’s Brewing, but it never appeared on the front page with a direct link to the web page.

The proposition in the petition was entirely reasonable and moderate and did not challenge any of CAMRA’s shibboleths. But it’s hard to escape the conclusion that far too many members are still preoccupied by tilting against the windmills of Lager, The Supermarkets, The Tie, The Pub Companies and The Keg Menace and completely fail to appreciate the existential threat to every single thing they hold dear.

Monday, December 28, 2009

Any bets on a pub revival?

There have been various comments in the beer blogosphere suggesting that we are likely to see a revival in the pub trade in 2010. This one by Paul Garrard is one example – I’m sure I’ve seen a similar one by Tandleman, but I can’t locate it at present. Locally we have seen high-profile reopenings of the Magnet in Stockport and the Black Lion in Salford. However, I have to say I think this is all dust in the wind – we may see a few more optimistic reopenings in 2010, but on balance we will continue to see closures vastly outnumbering openings. But you can give your opinion in the poll.

More or less going to the pub

I recently concluded a poll asking the question: “Do you visit pubs more or less often since 1 July 2007?” There were 73 responses, broken down as follows:

I didn’t go to pubs before but have now started: 1 (1%)
Much more often: 10 (14%)
A little more often: 10 (14%)
About the same: 11 (15%)
A little less often: 2 (3%)
Much less often: 29 (39%)
I have completely stopped going to pubs: 8 (11%)
I never went to pubs before or after: 2 (3%)

Quite a wide divergence of opinion there, whereas I suspect a real-world poll of a representative selection of drinkers would cluster much more strongly around the options of “about the same” and “a little less often”. As we know, the smoking ban is an issue that arouses strong feelings and many responses on both sides may have had something of an axe to grind. But it is notable that by far the largest single group was those who said “much less often”, and combined with those who said “I have completely stopped going to pubs” they account for over 50% of the total of respondents. So it’s hardly surprising that so many pubs have closed, and so many of those that remain are visibly struggling. For what it’s worth, I was one of only two who said “a little less often”.

CHRISTMAS WITH A BANG



I thought I'd got it sussed this year. All summer and autumn, my other half and I worked tirelessly picking fruit, making jam, and fermenting wine. Nice, stylish proper kitchen jars and bottles were bought from a classy shop, hampers were made, packed, and stored between August and November and very smart they looked too. There was plum jam, mint jelly, damson jam, and lilac, plum, pear, and damson wine.

Then I spotted this status on daughter No 2's Facebook profile : "I'm still reeling from the assasination attempt!!! Bottle of home brewed wine has exploded in me kitchen!! glass and bloody cork everywhere .... Any confessions to make ...????"

I have said before that the older kids get the more they break your heart but I obviously wouldn't have intended any harm and I'm actually quite mortified to think what might have happened if daughter No 2's family, including my one year old Grandaughter No 2, had been in the kitchen at the time of the explosion. Thank God they were not.

The incident frightened her so much, however, that she threw away a damn fine bottle of lilac. The jam and jelly seem to have hit the spot in a more pleasant way.

Daughter No 3 said the bottle of fizzy plum she also received in her hamper simply popped the cork from the bottle and nothing worse than flat wine resulted from that. Happily, there have been no other encounters with exploding wine and the hampers were well received. The lesson next year is not to use champagne yeast, we think, but as novices in all this, perhaps we should just send them out with a health warning.

The rest of our Christmas was lovely. My friend Lou came over on the day and joined me and my other half in eating, drinking and smoking, while Son No 1, stayed in his room and plugged into his computer.

Boxing Day was just as pleasant with a visit from my sister and her family, Daughter No1 and her fiancee, Daughter No 3 and Grandaughter No1 . Mulled wine all round the adults, and some nice munchies for the kids from a buffet made in Iceland and a lasagna made by eldest daughter who also contributed a very nice trifle.

Yesterday was peaceful heaven of eating, drinking, smoking, pampering, and then leaving for an evening get together at my mate Juliette's house to finish off Christmas leftovers. As soon as my other half struck up the engine of his car, something snapped, it whirred to a whisper and then it died. Begrudingly, he got into my car which was about as lively as a rabbit without duracell before the engine refused to turn over at all. There wasn't much that could be done last night but today all is well. My other half is simply a God. He can't save his car but he has sussed out what is wrong with mine and he has fixed it.


Sunday, December 27, 2009

Enter your high score here

I had to raise a smile at the latest example of the unintended consequences of Righteous initiatives. The NHS have launched an iPhone “app” which lets users enter details of the alcoholic drinks they have consumed and then warns them if they are exceeding “safe” levels. However,

within days of the tracker being released it was being described on the internet as an “awesome game” and users were boasting about trying to beat their “top score”.
Now who could have ever guessed that would happen?

It’s on a par with those roadside signs that light up saying “Your speed is 36 mph” which inevitably acted as an invitation to the local yoofs to see who could record the highest speed.

ST GILLIAN DOESN'T DESERVE OUR VOTE




St Gillian of Merron, my local MP, and the state health persecutor, has talked here of the new anti-smoking kit which aims to morally blackmail smokers into quitting by using children as human shields again. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8428998.stm

I might take this sort of propaganda a bit more kindly if I didn't know that sanctimonious Merron only represents smokers who have quit or want to quit.

She made it quite clear that she does not care nor represent smokers that don't want to quit in a parliamentary answer to the question of whether she would support an amendment to the cruel, unusual and blanket discriminatory smoking ban.

Her response was that she had a duty to help only those people who want to quit.

Lincolnians - Merron doesn't care about you if you smoke, if you're fat, if you drink more than 3 units of alcohol a day. Do not vote for her. She doesn't deserve your support until she starts listening to what you have to say and starts to treat you as fellow human beings and not outcasts.

I am trying to organise a protest in St Gillian's constituency. Anyone want to join me? Email for more information if you do.

Thursday, December 24, 2009

MERRY CHRISTMAS


I had hoped to blog more today, given a lack of posts recently, but Christmas has rather got in the way.

We've done all the shopping, and now we have to go out and deliver pressies to relatives and friends which will take us ages which means I won't get back to my computer today.

My mate Lou's coming over for the day tomorrow, and daughter number 3 and grandaughter number 1 at some point, daughter number 1 will be here on Boxing Day and my sister and her family. Daughter number 2 and grand daughter number 2 will, hopefully, make it over for New Year. My other half is over the moon that I'm cooking proper food and not burning what has gone into the oven from the freezer which is my usual culinary skill.

I guess I won't be back blogging until sometime between now and New Year as I will no doubt be tied to my cooker.

I hope all my readers, followers, contacts, friends and family have a peaceful Christmas and a succesful and properous new year.




Wednesday, December 23, 2009

Bah Humbug!


Good to see the spirit of joy and goodwill to all men is alive and well this Christmas:

Snow-trapped cars abandoned at pub are wheel-clamped

Festive wine list branded as irresponsible

A Merry Christmas to all blog readers, and make sure you don’t exceed four units of alcohol even on Christmas Day, as you know how harmful it can be.

Tuesday, December 22, 2009

Minimum effectiveness

From the school of I could have told you so, a report by Wilson Drinks Research says that a minimum price of 50p per unit of alcohol would be unlikely to affect overall consumption. Only one in five adult drinkers in the UK said they would buy less alcohol and spend the same amount they do now, while more than half of those responding to the survey said they would either spend more on the same amount of drink or look for cheaper drink alternatives.

Interestingly, given that such a measure has been most strongly advocated in the country, “Scottish drinkers were the most likely (35 per cent) to take the hit on pricing and continue to drink the same amount should minimum pricing be introduced.”

Of course, if you jacked the minimum price up high enough, it would start to affect overall consumption, but I suspect we would be looking at the £20 bottle of whisky and £1.50 can of cooking lager before that started to happen to any significant degree. Well before then, ordinary middle-of-the-road drinkers would have started to realise that a measure claimed to be targeting cash-strapped problem drinkers was actually hitting them hard in the pocket. And of course there would be all the inevitable unintended consequences such as a rise in smuggling and the growth of illicit distilling and home brewing for resale.

Thursday, December 17, 2009

Starting them early


Chief Medical Officer Sir Liam Donaldson has announced that he is going to step down in the middle of next year. For many, of course, that couldn’t come a day too soon. Today he’s come out with another load of prohibitionist nonsense suggesting that parents giving their children alcohol is likely to encourage binge drinking in later life. Once again, as I pointed out back in January, he completely fails to make the distinction between irresponsible parents who couldn’t care less about what their children are doing, and responsible parents who introduce their children to alcohol in a controlled and supervised manner.

I am not David Cameron’s greatest fan, but surely he was right with this last year:
The Tory leader said his friends with the biggest alcohol problems were those who were ‘never allowed to drink anything at home’.

Those who had been allowed small amounts to drink at mealtimes were now the most responsible drinkers, he said.

Even Sir Ian Gilmore, who normally sings in harmony with Fat Liam, conceded that:
We know that adults who drink sensibly tend to pass these habits on and that some families choose to introduce alcohol to their children younger than 15 in a supportive environment.
The worry, of course, is that what is “guidance” today gets the force of law tomorrow, with children being put into care and their parents arrested for daring to give them a small glass of shandy with their Sunday lunch.

Raedwald very effectively dismisses Donaldson as someone suffering from a crazed compulsion about stopping other people drinking alcohol:
The one consolation with cranks like Donaldson is that they can quickly take up novel obsessions; perhaps convincing the French that eating cheese is bad, or advocating the health benefits of the German habit of walking about naked once you reach forty years of age. Perhaps all of these together; a shrill, naked little man prancing about opposite Parliament waving a 'No cheese, No wine' placard. That will get you taken seriously, Liam.
Edit: I’ve just spotted another good article on the same theme in today’s Telegraph by Cassandra Jardine: Why I will let my children drink alcohol. This reinforces the point made above:
My children all say that the thirteen- and fourteen-year-olds most likely to be found heading to the park with alcopops concealed in plastic bags, are those who come from homes where there is total prohibition.

Tuesday, December 15, 2009

Gone but not forgotten


Earlier this year I made a post noting the sad loss of most of the pubs on the main road between Ashton-under-Lyne and Oldham, which provoked an oddly poetic comment about the decline of the Ashton pub scene.

This is now starkly underlined by Steve Gwilt in the latest issue of Opening Times, in an article entitled Gone but not forgotten... Ashton-under-Lyne, a study in misery for the drinker. (Warning, it’s a big .pdf, and you’ll need to scroll down to Page 16).

More than one in three pubs in existence in the town fifteen years ago have now closed, he says, and the situation is much the same in many of the Manchester satellite towns, although Stockport has not suffered quite so badly. He writes:
Out west, the credit crunch, the smoking ban, town centre redevelopment and the changing demographics have done for several pubs.
And his conclusion is a reproach to anyone who still goes on about the reason pubs are closing is that they’re crap:
And yet I’ve always admired those down to earth staunchly working class locals and Ashton had many. Places doing what they’ve done for a century or more – being the heart of a local community and helping dull the pain of the day to day miseries we all face. Of course these pubs are much the better if they have some architectural merit; and much more palatable if they sell real ale. But even a cold leaking shack dispensing chemical lager to a band of dedicated locals should have its place in our communities. No food, and no frills and no beer mats laying down the law and selling healthy lifestyles either. But these pubs are slipping away and part of our history is going with them.

More than one in every three pubs we had in Ashton 15 years ago is gone, and many of those that remain are up for sale or to let. Now you might disagree with me that these pubs are worth saving. But too often in Opening Times I see remarks such as “good riddance” when a non-real ale pub closes for the last time. Yet it is these ordinary pubs that form an established network of community locals – with their darts teams and pool tables, their dominoes, cards and quizzes and yes, their keg beers too. They are the fabric of our communities and we should do all in our power to support them – real ale or not.

A “bad” pub can always be turned into a “good” pub. A demolished or de-licensed pub is lost forever – like the nearly 40 pubs of Ashton you won’t find today.

The same issue of Opening Times also contains the write-up (on Page 9) of the pub crawl of Stockport Market Place that I referred to here – so those who don’t know can find out my real name.

Taking the rough with the smooth


There was a lot of discussion in the beer blogosphere the other week about innovation in the beer market. Surely one of the biggest innovations of recent years, albeit one not to the taste of cask ale fans, is the establishment of smooth beers as a distinct market category in their own right.

If we go back twenty years to 1990, the draught beer market was (very crudely) divided into “bitter” and “lager” (OK, with a few pockets of mild too). All the lager was keg, whereas the bitter was divided between real and keg. The real ale drinker knew the difference, but most of the bitter drinkers neither knew nor cared. In any case, a lot of real ale, especially in the North-West and the Midlands, was still served by electric pumps so it wasn’t obvious at the point of sale whether or not it was real.

But then Bass in Ireland dreamed up Caffrey’s, a sweet, copper-coloured ale dispensed by the same nitrogen system used for Guinness, which produced a much smoother (some would say almost soapy) and less fizzy beer than traditional kegs. For a brief period, this took the beer market by storm, and other brewers inevitably followed suit with their own version of what were then called “smoothflow” beers. A new market category had been created, which some people started deliberately looking for when they went in pubs.

You hardly see Caffrey’s any more, and the lasting winner has proved to be John Smith’s Extra Smooth, which surely now must be the biggest selling ale brand in the on-trade by some margin. Earlier this year I saw it on the bar of a tied house in Sussex alongside one of the finest “ordinary” bitters in the country, Harvey’s Sussex Best. Despite this, it was still attracting a number of customers.

One of my worst predictions was suggesting that I didn’t think our local independent family brewers would have any truck with smooth, whereas of course it wasn’t too long before they all did. You will now see fonts for both pale and dark versions prominently positioned on the bars of many Holts, Hydes and Robinsons pubs. In hindsight, that particular column was spectacularly wrong in every way.

In 1990, you wouldn’t really get anyone who would describe themselves as “a keg drinker”, but nowadays there are plenty of people who would say their beer of choice was “smooth”. In a sense this change gives cask a clearer profile, with more people choosing it specifically because it is cask rather than just generic “bitter”, but on the other hand it has led to it losing market share and disappearing from a lot of pubs.

Monday, December 14, 2009

LIGHT BLOGGING


Apologies for the light blogging of late but I've got myself a sort of proper job which has kept me in the wilds of the Lincolnshire wolds.

I've been working at the Market Rasen Mail and I must say it's been quite a pleasant experience. I might even get front page this week with this story http://www.marketrasenmail.co.uk/news/Shop-owner-threatens-to-quite.5910019.jp .

Make the most of being able to view it online for free. Johnston Press is the first regional group to announce it will charge to read online news. Some in the group have begun to charge. Others, like the Rasen Mail, will follow and so will a host of other regionals and nationals.

I'm commissioned to work at the Rasen Mail until mid January but blogging is likely to stay at updates once a week until I get through my MA course.

FAILED SMOKING BAN BAD FOR HEALTH


Ah ha. Of course. A ban on smoking in public leads to more smoking at home, therefore more children at risk from leprosy. There lies the real reason why the Govt and the timid opposition are happy to see smoking banned at home and in cars.
However, if they bothered to look at the true scientific and social evidence, instead of being coerced by the powerful and well funded anti-smoking industry, they would see that second hand smoke is not fatal for children or anyone else.
At worst it's an irritant that can be adressed without the exclusion of a minority group from public and without the Govt getting into our homes and our private lives.

Patrick Basham, co-author of the report Are Smoking Bans Necessary? said there are viable alternatives to blanket public bans that address not only the health but also the irritant and annoyance concerns of those who don't like smoke.
"None of the reasons offered in defence of the smoking ban stands up to careful scrutiny," he said.
"The bans have not reduced smoking in the UK and they have had perverse public health consequences.
"The Govt maintains that the public smoking ban has forced record numbers of smokers to quit but such claims are not supported by the Health Survey for England, produced by the National Centre for Social Research and the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health at University College London. According to the Health Survey, not only did the smoking ban fail to reduce smoking, it's first year saw an increase in cigarette consumption among males aged 18 - 34 and an increase in smoking among poorer classes."

Basham has examined the methodolgy used to scientifically assess the dangers of second hand smoke and found that various Govt and public health reports suggest that second hand smoke does NOT pose a serious health risk to non-smokers. They do, however, make smokers feel isolated and force them to stay at home more.
"Governments should remember that they can never predict the consequences of this unprecedented governmental intervention in our lives," Basham said.

* The report is launched at The Democracy Institute, Waterways Room, One Queen Anne's Gate, Westminster, London, SW1H, on Wednesday, December 16 at 11am.

WHO SPEAKS UP FOR SMOKERS


According to this article
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/6803981/Parents-face-ban-on-smoking-in-front-of-children.html there is no-one in Cabinet to speak up for smokers now we are to be aggressively persecuted with yet another anti-smoking campaign aimed at stopping us smoking at home and in cars - using chiiildren as the excuse, of course.
The writer didn't say that there are, in fact, lots of people and organsations who do fight the smoker's corner and I salute them all and every single one of you who writes, blogs, debates on forums, or just stands outside in the cold and spreads the word.
I'd particularly like to mention F2C, Forces, Forest, and The Democracy Institute, Rich White and Chris Snowdon, and many individual fighters of liberty who work every single day in their own time, using their own money, and their own expertise to bring common sense, truth, and justice to the debate. The only thing they lack is a listening ear.
Neither the govt nor the shadow cabinet wants to hear of the smokers' plight because they are cowards and sanctimonious snobs. It seems the media is not listening either. Why didn't the writer of this piece even bother to get a balancing quote?
According to Dick Puddlecote , http://dickpuddlecote.blogspot.com/ they are using "charity" money to pitch our kids against us and scare them to death, no doubt, with a campaign aimed at getting them to bully us to quit.
Their vile hatred and muck spreading is separating families. It's time for the Govt to butt out of our lives and to take it's vicious propaganda with it.

Sunday, December 13, 2009

A crisp deal


As the tide of bansturbation spreads across our once pleasant land, it opens up surprising opportunities for keen-sighted entrepreneurs. Create a shortage, create a demand. 12-year-old Joel Bradley was caught allegedly selling a packet of Discos in a Liverpool secondary school at a marked-up price of 50p. No doubt he has a bright future ahead of him in business.

It is a sad commentary on the state of our nation that the humble crisp should be banned in the first place.

Have you been drinking, Sir?

And, if you feel reasonably confident of passing a breath test, the answer tends to be “just the one”.

I recently concluded a poll asking the question “How many times have you been breath tested in your driving career?” There were 60 responses, and the results were:

Never: 23 (38%)
Once: 18 (30%)
Twice: 7 (12%)
3-5 times: 3 (5%)
6-10 times: 1 (2%)
More than 10 times: 1 (2%)
I have never held a driving licence: 7 (11%)

I was really asking this out of interest rather than trying to make any particular point. Obviously the likelihood of anyone being breath tested depends both on how long they have been driving and the pattern of journeys they make. I would imagine anyone routinely driving in suburban and urban fringe areas late on Friday and Saturday nights would have experienced more than one test.

While I am certainly not an advocate of large-scale random breath testing, there is no doubt that having been tested, or knowing a friend who has been, is an effective deterrent to drink-drive offending, and the widespread replacement of traffic police with speed cameras may in a sense have given a green light to offenders. But, given that most drivers rarely or never experience a test, it calls into question what safety benefit a lower limit would bring. If you just blend into the general flow of traffic, your chances of being pulled up are miniscule. Of course, though, the situation in which you are most likely to be tested is having just driven out of a pub car park.

For what it’s worth, I have held a driving licence since November 1976. Since then, I have driven more than 350,000 miles, and have been breath tested just once, almost exactly twenty years ago, in precisely the circumstances described above, having just pulled out of a pub car park in an urban fringe area at about 8.30 pm. I had had a drink, but an amount that I believed would leave me well below the legal limit, which the test confirmed.

Saturday, December 12, 2009

Elliot Paul



Elliot Harold Paul, was an American journalist and author.

Born in Linden, a part of Malden, Massachusetts, Elliot Paul graduated from Malden High School then worked in the U.S. West on the government Reclamation projects for several years until 1914 when he returned home and took a job as a reporter covering legislative events at the State House in Boston. In 1917, he joined the U.S. Army to fight in World War I. Paul served in France where he fought in the Battle of Saint-Mihiel and in the Meuse-Argonne offensive. Following the war's end, he returned home and to a job as a journalist. At this time, he began writing books, inspired in part by his military experiences.

By 1925 Elliot Paul had already seen three of his novels published when he left America to join many of his literary compatriots in the Montparnasse Quarter of Paris, France. There, he worked for a time at the International Herald Tribune before joining Eugene and Maria Jolas as co-editor of the literary journal, transition. A friend of James Joyce and Gertrude Stein, Paul defied Ernest Hemingway's maxim that "if you mentioned Joyce twice to Stein, you were dead." Paul was a great enthusiast of Stein's work, equating its "feeling for a continuous present" with jazz.

Paul left the fledgling journal after little more than a year to return to the newspaper business and to write more novels in his spare time. He had completed three more books when he suffered from a nervous breakdown and abruptly left Paris to recuperate in the Spanish village of Santa Eulalia on the island of Ibiza. With virtually no one in the literary community knowing where he was, in her 1933 The Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas, Stein muses over his "disappearance."

Caught in the middle of the Spanish Civil War, he was inspired to write the well received The Life and Death of a Spanish Town. Forced to flee Spain, he returned to Paris produced detective fiction featuring the amateur sleuth Homer Evans, as well as crafting what is considered as one of his best works, The Last Time I Saw Paris.

Back in the United States following the outbreak of World War II, Elliot Paul turned to screenwriting where in Hollywood, between 1941 and 1953, he participated in the writing of ten screenplays, the most remembered of which is the 1945 production, Rhapsody in Blue; he also wrote the screenplay for the Poverty Row production of New Orleans, a fictional history of Storyville jazz featuring Billie Holiday in her only acting role. He also contributed to London Town (1946), one of the most infamous flops in British cinema history.

Contemptuous of the censorship imposed on the studios by the Hays Code, Paul mocked Hollywood's hypocritical puritanism in his satiric book from 1942, With a Hays Nonny Nonny , where he reworked Bible stories so that they complied with the Code. The Book of Esther , for example, becomes a vehicle for Don Ameche, with Groucho Marx as Mordecai.

A talented pianist, he frequently supplemented his income by playing at local clubs in the Los Angeles area.

Married and divorced five times, Paul had one son. He died in 1958 at the Veterans' Hospital in Providence, Rhode Island.



Friday, December 11, 2009

Hugh Scott, Jr.



Hugh Doggett Scott, Jr. was a politician from Pennsylvania who served in both the United States House of Representatives and the United States Senate, and who also served as Chairman of the Republican National Committee.

He was born in Fredericksburg, Virginia, on November 11, 1900 and attended public and private schools. He graduated from Randolph-Macon College, Ashland, Virginia, in 1919 and the law department of the University of Virginia at Charlottesville in 1922. He was admitted to the bar in 1922 and commenced practice in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. He was a brother of the Alpha Chi Rho fraternity.

During World War I he enrolled in the Student Reserve Officers Training Corps and the Students’ Army Training Corps.

Scott served as assistant district attorney of Philadelphia, Pa. from 1926 to 1941 and was a member of the Governor’s Commission on Reform of the Magistrates System (1938–1940). During the Second World War he was on active duty for two years with the United States Navy, rising to the rank of commander.

An author, Scott was also vice president of the United States Delegation to the Interparlimentary Union. He was elected as a Republican to the 77th United States Congress and reelected to the 78th United States Congress (January 3, 1941–January 3, 1945). He failed to be reelected in 1944 to the 79th United States Congress and resumed the practice of law, serving as Chairman of the Republican National Committee from 1948 to 1949. He then returned to Congress (the 80th) and was reelected to the five succeeding Congresses (January 3, 1947–January 3, 1959), leaving his seat to run for the Senate.
In 1958 Scott was elected to the United States Senate and was twice reelected, in 1964 and again in 1970, and served from January 3, 1959, to January 3, 1977. He was Republican whip in 1969 and minority leader from 1969 to 1977, serving as Chairman of the Select Committee on Secret and Confidential Documents (92nd Congress).

A memorable quote from Hugh Scott came during the U-2 Incident in 1960, when Senator Scott said that "We have violated the eleventh Commandment — Thou Shall Not Get Caught."
He did not run for reelection in 1976. The same year, he chaired the Pennsylvania delegation to the Republican National Convention.

Scott was a resident of Washington, D.C., and later, Falls Church, Virginia, until his death there on July 21, 1994. He is buried at Arlington National Cemetery.













Thursday, December 10, 2009

Edward Atkinson



Edward Leicester Atkinson was a Royal naval surgeon and Antarctic explorer who was a member of the scientific staff of Captain Scott's Terra Nova Expedition, 1910-13. He was in command of the expedition's base at Cape Evans for much of 1912, and led the party that found the tent containing the bodies of Scott, "Birdie" Bowers and Edward Wilson. Atkinson was subsequently associated with two controversies: that relating to Scott's orders concerning the use of dogs, and that relating to the possible incidence of scurvy in the polar party. He is commemorated by the Atkinson Cliffs on the northern coast of Victoria Land, Antarctica.

Atkinson was born on 23 November 1881 in the Windward Isles, where he spent much of his childhood. He was educated at the Forest School, Snaresbrook, and received his medical training at St Thomas's Hospital, London, where he became the hospital's light heavyweight boxing champion. He qualified in 1906 and two years later joined the Royal Navy as a medical officer, based at the Royal Naval Hospital, Haslar, in Gosport, Hampshire. He was primarily a researcher, and had published a paper on gonorrhoeal rheumatism when he was appointed physician and parasitologist to the Terra Nova expedition.

In 1928 his wife died and he suffered a nervous breakdown. He recovered, however, and within a few months had married again and been promoted Surgeon-Captain. On board ship in the Mediterranean on 20 February 1929, on his way back to England, Atkinson died suddenly, at the age of 47, and was buried at sea.

Joseph Spence



Joseph Spence was on born in August of1910 in Andros, Bahamas; and was a Bahamian guitarist and singer. 


He is well known for his vocalizations and humming while performing on guitar. Spence played a steel-string acoustic guitar, and nearly all of his recorded songs employ guitar accompaniment in a Drop D tuning, so that the guitar sounds, from sixth to first D A D G B E. The power of his playing derives from moving bass lines and interior voices and a driving beat that he emphasized with foot tapping. To this mix he adds blues coloration and calypso rhythms to achieve a unique and easily identifiable sound.

Spence died on March 18, 1984 in Nassau, Bahamas.

Wednesday, December 9, 2009

Who are you working for?

On the day when Alastair Darling, not surprisingly, confirmed that he was not going to cut beer duty when VAT went back up to 17½%, thus effectively imposing a stealth increase of 8%, it’s a sobering thought that the beer and pub industry makes five times more money for the government than it does for brewers and pub companies.

Oxford Economics conducted a study for the British Beer & Pub Association (BBPA) that compared the Government’s tax take on beer with the profits made by brewing and pub sector sales.

The study showed that the total taxes, including excise, VAT employment and corporation taxes, raised by the Government from beer sales totals £7.2bn. The profits made by brewing and the pub sector amounted to just £1.4bn.

The total UK beer market generates £19bn. The Government takes 84% of the £8.6bn total tax and profit generated by beer sales.

That makes all the hard work by licensees seem really worthwhile.

Edit: I see that Irish finance minister Brian Lenihan has actually cut alcohol duties in an otherwise hard-hitting austerity budget.

Tuesday, December 8, 2009

Don’t call me stupid


“What’s the matter, lagerboy?” goes the Hobgoblin advert, “Afraid you might taste something?” Well, actually he probably is, possibly something along the lines of vinegar or yeast.

It has long been an article of faith amongst many in CAMRA that people only drink keg beers and lagers because they have been taken in by advertising and promotion into believing that these products are desirable, and they need to be educated into seeing the light and switching to the proper stuff. But surely that view is very disrespectful of the judgment of most beer drinkers, and if you’re trying to change someone’s mind you’re off to a bad start if you call them stupid.

Most people who drink beer are not really particularly interested in the subject, and tend to drink the same brew or a limited range rather than constantly experimenting. To them, it makes sense to choose something familiar and consistent from what they perceive as a reputable source. They want it to be refreshing, to lubricate their socialising with friends and to have something of an alcoholic effect on them, and if it meets those needs reliably then they’re happy to buy it. They may well see it as desirable to avoid extremes of flavour that would have the beer buffs’ tastebuds tingling.

It has been said that all the advertising in the world will only sell a bad product once, and if people are repeat purchasers of kegs and lagers then obviously they must satisfy their requirements – which will not be the same as the requirements of a beer enthusiast.

For example, I have no interest whatsoever in breakfast cereals. There are hundreds of different varieties on the market, but I eat the same one pretty much every day of the year. With the same type of milk and the same type of sugar on it. But I don’t think that makes me a fool.

There are some people who give the impression of trying to live their entire lives on the bleeding edge of experiment and unconventionality. And they are often some of the most crashing, self-obsessed bores you can hope to meet. Life really is too short for that kind of approach – you have to decide what matters to you and take the rest as it comes.

It also cannot be denied that there is a strong and genuine demand for beers served colder than the natural cellar temperature that is appropriate for cask. If people really didn’t want cold beer, they wouldn’t buy it. They only didn’t buy it in the past because the refrigeration facilities weren’t available. And of course far too much cask beer still ends up being served well above cellar coolness anyway.

I have written before about the “quality lottery” involved in drinking cask beer. For some people, the peaks are well worth enduring the occasional troughs, and they take the view they end up better off all round. But for others, indeed the majority, keeping their stake in their hand and keeping out of the troughs seems a better bet.

It is maybe less true now, but in the past many car enthusiasts would praise the driving qualities of Alfa Romeos. The only problem was, they were likely to leave you stranded by the roadside rather too often, so it wasn’t surprising people chose to buy Toyotas instead which at least could be relied upon to get them from A to B, even if in a somewhat dull and predictable manner.

For most drinkers, beer is just a commodity, and within their terms of reference they are making a rational and sensible choice by picking well-known keg and lager brands. In no way are they deluded dupes. That is what suits them according to their criteria.

Surely in this era of pub closures and anti-drink hysteria it’s a good thing that people are drinking beer at all. And if you want to encourage them to take more of an interest in the subject rather than just accepting the default choice, the way to do it is to communicate your own enthusiasm rather than telling them they’re stupid.

Sunday, December 6, 2009

What’s a nice girl like you doing in a dump like this?

Given that this is a blog whose main themes are pubs and beer, a recent poll showed a surprisingly high proportion of people who had not been to a pub at all in the past month. So, as a commenter suggested, I thought I would ask people what was the main interest that led them to read this blog.

With some polls you have a good idea of what the answer will be, with others you may be looking for a particular response, but with this one I genuinely had no idea of what the outcome would be.

There were 65 responses, and the results were:

Beer: 16 (25%)
The pub trade: 12 (18%)
The smoking ban: 27 (42%)
General lifestyle freedom issues: 10 (15%)

So make of that what you will...

As I’ve said before, this isn’t wholly or even mainly a blog about the smoking ban. But I think being the only “beer blogger” to take a strong anti-ban stance does give the blog a unique selling proposition which is probably what accounts for that result.

Saturday, December 5, 2009

UKIP LEADER SPEAKS OUT




Following my post further down on WTF? - a piece showing my disappointment at UKIP's offer to "disband" if Cameron's Tories held a referendum on membership of the EU - I am pleased to say that it was all a bit of fluff and nothing.

UKIP's new leader, Malcolm Pearson, has addressed members concerns and I share his message with readers of this blog. I am still convinced that UKIP is the only hope left for oppressed British subjects who want to see a return to independence for Britain and individual freedom for it's citizens.

The only thing left to say is vote UKIP next year - you know it makes sense!

"Many of you have concerns about recent media coverage, and I want to answer some of them now. We did anticipate that sections of the Conservative Press would attack UKIP in general and the new leader in particular. We were proved right and I must admit to a certain satisfaction at having drawn fire so quickly. Naturally some media stories will be written to deliberately upset members and lose us future supporters. They will sometimes be false and frequently twisted, or 'spun' and there will be more of them. They are now out to get us, and we should be flattered by this overt recognition of the threat we pose. My appeal to each of you is to keep your nerve and treat the media with the caution it richly deserves. Now for a few facts. The word "disband" has been taken out of context. In a long interview for the Times profile last Saturday, I was looking forward to the great day when we are out of the EU, after winning an 'in or out' referendum (a referendum delivered by Cameron after we had stood aside and helped him into 'Government'). On that day there would have been a complete realignment of British politics, led by a triumphant UKIP, with the political class rebuffed. It is in thinking about this happy prospect that I may have used the 'disband' word, and if I did it was a mistake and I shouldn't have done so. The party will never be mine to disband. That is a matter for the members alone. As for the proposed deal with the Conservatives to stand aside at the 2010 election only, we knew that David Cameron was most unlikely to accept, because he is fully committed to membership of the EU. That's why he does not want an In or Out referendum. But - and this is important- we had to ask. By rejecting the deal he has proved that he would rather risk losing the next general election (because of UKIP's participation) than consult the people of Britain on EU membership. Next time a Tory cries: "Vote UKIP and you'll let in Labour," you can reply: "We gave them the chance and the Conservatives refused it. Roll on the election." I feel this has turned out to be quite a coup for us, and we should be shouting it from the rooftops. We put our country before our party and they did the opposite. I must also settle any worries that UKIP is merely the eurosceptic wing of the Conservative Party. This is not true. Under my leadership, UKIP will continue to target seats right across the political spectrum. The Labour vote will collapse at the next general election, and we must go all out for it as well as for that of the Lib Dems, many of whose members do not realise how Eurofanatic their party is. I am proud to be the leader of such a marvellous Party. Yours sincerely," Malcolm Pearson Lord Pearson of Rannoch UKIP Leader

READ AND SIGN IF TRUE SCIENCE MATTERS


Leading scientists from across the globe are supporting the launch of The
Brussels Declaration on Scientific Integrity, strongly upholding
professional and scientific ethics above financial and political gain or
personal ideology.

The Declaration is a Statement of Principles calling for the return to the
Scientific Method as the guiding qualifier for the definition of a study
as scientific. It centres around epidemiology and toxicology and covers
topics such as alcohol, obesity and passive smoking.

John Gray of The International Coalition Against Prohibition
states, “The Brussels Declaration was initiated during the successful
TICAP Conference of January 20093. It will pave the way for the return to
the robustness and reliability of scientific integrity that is essential
for the credibility of scientific institutions and general advancement of
humanity.”

Endorsement is now being sought from international politicians, community
leaders, academics, writers, journalists and non-governmental
organisations.

This comprehensive document demands the setting of exacting standards for
gathering data in epidemiological studies, the mandatory specification of
margins of error, and the rejection of expert opinions based on studies
that do not fulfil these criteria.

It demands the restoration of the concept of risk threshold, and calls for
the rejection by governments and regulatory bodies of any scientific work
that does not meet those standards.

It condemns the use of unqualified studies as the basis for public policy
and prohibition and calls for the dismantling of policies and regulations
that are based on such studies.

In addition to the conclusions of scientific studies, it also calls upon
official institutions and the media to accurately report the limitations
and uncertainties of those conclusions in respect of the public's right to
complete, accurate information that does not lead to unnecessary
apprehension or panic.

“As the effects of the Manhattan Declaration begin to be felt at both the
political and public opinion levels,” continues John Gray, “so will that
of the Brussels Declaration when it comes to scientific integrity in the
area of lifestyle prohibitions.”




Friday, December 4, 2009

Smoking policy poll

Well, the great smoking policy poll has come to an end. The question was: “What should be the official policy on smoking in pubs and bars?” There were 134 responses (which I suspect will prove an all-time record for this blog) and the results were as follows:

Licensees should be able to decide their own policy: 83 (62%)
Smoking should be allowed in separate rooms: 20 (15%)
Private smoking clubs should be permitted: 8 (6%)
Smoking should be banned in all indoor public areas: 15 (11%)
Smoking should be banned in outside areas of pubs too: 8 (6%)

So 83% of respondents favoured some relaxation of the status quo. I hope the 8 who voted for the final option aren’t the same antismokers who are constantly telling us that it’s no problem for smokers visiting pubs to go outside.

I wonder whether, if I’d included a further option “Smokers should be ritually disembowelled and hung from lampposts”, it would have received any votes.

The preponderance of opinion demonstrated in this poll shows clearly that the smoking ban issue is not going to “go away” and those who oppose the ban (many of whom are non-smokers) are not going to “move on” anywhere.

Rise of the anti-pub

This provocative article on Sp!ked by Nathalie Rothschild is bound to ruffle a few feathers: A place where nobody knows your name - as Britain’s dark, smoky, friendly pubs close down, the anti-pub - the JD Wetherspoon - is taking their place.

That the chain is marching on in these credit-crunched times signals not a healthy growth of public houses, but the relentless rise of the anti-pub, which is a suck-up to, and a beneficiary of, our unhealthily killjoy times.

The rise of JD Wetherspoon parallels the slow but steady decline of authentic, grimy, smoky, welcoming, rowdy and unruly real pubs. There’s nothing wrong with family-friendly cheap eateries, but publicans and their customers should be allowed to relax, to sing and talk loudly to friends and strangers, play games, misbehave and drink if they want to.

And, as I posted here, I broadly agree. Wetherspoon’s are soulless, corporate eating and drinking barns – they are not real pubs.

Thursday, December 3, 2009

Pubs face renewed drink-drive threat


It’s reported today that Transport Secretary Lord Adonis has asked legal expert Sir Peter North to draw up plans (yet again) to cut the drink-drive limit. This news is exceptionally galling for pubs and pubgoers as only last year it seemed that any such plans had been rejected for the time being.

During their term of office, New Labour have toyed with this idea on several occasions without ever putting it into effect. Indeed, after the 1997 general election, it seemed for a while that it was inevitable, but those plans were eventually quietly dropped. It is my suspicion that it is the privately-expressed scepticism of senior police officers that has kept the plan from being implemented. However, given that it has been made abundantly clear over the past twelve years that New Labour hate pubs, hate motorists and hate the countryside, what’s not to like with a policy that kills three birds with one stone?

Of course these plans will run into the sand with the General Election being imminent, and there is no guarantee that a new government will implement them, but this is a clear indication that the threat to pubs from a lower limit has not gone away.

Another interesting aspect of the report I link to is how the amount of alcohol represented by the current limit seems to have been deflated over time. I have in my possession an CAMRA publication from about 1980 called 100 Classic Pubs in the Heart of England that explicitly states “the limit equals three pints”. Now, that might be taking a rather optimistic view, but it has always been my understanding since I passed my driving test over thirty years ago that if a man of average build consumed two pints of sub-4% beer he would stay comfortably within the limit – something that is borne out by this TRRL publication from 1986.

However, the report states that “the current 80mg limit equates to one-and-a-half small glasses of wine or one-and-a-half pints of normal strength beer,” which is not the case. In reality, it equates to roughly 5-6 units for a man, and 4-5 units for a woman. A 50 mg limit would still allow someone to legally consume one pint of ordinary-strength beer, or glass of wine, although whether they would think that was worthwhile is of course a moot point.

And, as often stated before, wouldn’t it make more sense to enforce the current limit more effectively rather than impose a lower limit which in practice people will all too often be able to flout with impunity?

Heads in the sand

There’s a quite astonishing piece of smoking ban denial on the Number Ten website in the response to a petition calling for pubs to be allowed to have indoor smoking rooms.

Survey data, anecdotal evidence and reports in the media seem to indicate that the impact on the hospitality trade as a whole has been at worst neutral and in many cases positive.
Have these people been living in a cave for two and a half years? There is a vast amount of anecdotal evidence reported on this blog and other websites that the ban has been extremely damaging to the pub trade, and the rate of pub closures has dramatically increased.



There have been numerous reports that the smoking ban has proved a significant factor in deterring working-class people from voting Labour:
Brian Iddon, MP for Bolton South East, said: “I’m getting complaints from our core Labour vote that they feel the Labour Government is just hitting them left, right and centre. They are heavily bruised at the moment.”

Dr Iddon cited the ban on smoking in public places and rising alcohol and food prices as other causes of anger.

This response shows a complete unwillingness to listen to any evidence that contradicts the official message. Now, where else have we seen recently that evidence must be discarded if it doesn’t fit the theory?

And the school exam results go up and up every year despite the fact that major employers bemoan the growing illiteracy and innumeracy of school-leavers. Meanwhile, tractor production continues to set new records!

Wednesday, December 2, 2009

Owen Barfield



Owen Barfield was a British philosopher, author, poet, and critic.

Barfield was born in London. He was educated at Highgate School and Wadham College, Oxford and during 1920 received a 1st class degree in English language and literature. After finishing his B. Litt., which became the book Poetic Diction, he worked as a solicitor. Because of his career as a solicitor, Barfield contributed to philosophy as a non-academic, publishing numerous essays, books, and articles. His primary focus was on what he called the "evolution of consciousness," which is an idea which occurs frequently in his writings.

He is most famous today as a friend of C. S. Lewis and as the author of Saving the Appearances: A Study in Idolatry. He died in Forest Row in Sussex.

The Reverend Martin Niemöller


Friedrich Gustav Emil Martin Niemöller was a prominent German anti-Nazi theologian and Lutheran pastor. He is best known as the author of the poem First they came....

Although he was a national conservative and initially a supporter of Adolf Hitler, he became one of the founders of the Confessing Church, which opposed the nazification of German Protestant churches. He vehemently opposed the Nazis' Aryan Paragraph, but made remarks about Jews that some scholars have called antisemitic. For his opposition to the Nazis' state control of the churches, Niemöller was imprisoned in Sachsenhausen and Dachau concentration camps from 1937 to 1945. He narrowly escaped execution and survived imprisonment. After his imprisonment, he expressed his deep regret about not having done enough to help the victims of the Nazis. He turned away from his earlier nationalistic beliefs and was one of the initiators of the Stuttgart Declaration of Guilt. From the 1950s on, he was a vocal pacifist and anti-war activist, and vice-chair of War Resisters' International from 1966 to 1972. He met with Ho Chi Minh during the Vietnam War and was a committed campaigner for nuclear disarmament.

Martin Niemöller was born in Lippstadt on 14 January 1892 to the Lutheran pastor Heinrich Niemöller and his wife Paula née Müller, and grew up in a very conservative home. In 1900 the family moved to Elberfeld where he finished school, taking his abitur exam in 1910.

He began a career as an officer of the Imperial Navy of the German Empire, and in 1915 was assigned to U-boats. His first submarine was the "Thüringen", and in October of that year he joined the submarine mother ship "Vulkan", followed by training on the submarine U-3. In February 1916 he became second officer on U-73 which was assigned to the Mediterranean Sea in April 1916. There the submarine fought on the Saloniki front, patrolled in the Strait of Otranto and from December 1916 onward planted mines in front of Port Said and was involved in commerce raiding. Flying a French flag as a ruse of war, the U-73 sailed past British warships, and torpedoed two Allied troopships and a British man-of-war.

In January 1917 Niemöller was coxswain of U-39. Later he returned to Kiel, and in August 1917 he became first officer in U-151, which attacked numerous ships at Gibraltar, in the Bay of Biscay, and other places. During this time the U-151 crew set a record by sinking 55,000 tons of Allied ships in 115 days at sea. In May 1918 he became commander of the UC-67. Under his command, UC-67 achieved a temporary closing of the French port of Marseilles by sinking ships in the area, by torpedoes, and by the laying of mines.

For his achievements, Niemöller was awarded the Iron Cross First Class. When the war drew to a close, he decided to become a preacher, a story he later recounted in his book Vom U-Boot zur Kanzel (From U-boat to Pulpit). At war's end, Niemöller resigned his commission, as he rejected the new democratic government of the German Empire that formed after the resignation of the German Emperor William II.

On July 20, 1919 he married Else née Bremer (born July 20, 1890 - died August 7, 1961). The same year he began working at a farm in Wersen near Osnabrück but gave up becoming a farmer as he couldn't afford the money for his own farm. He subsequently pursued his earlier idea of becoming a Lutheran pastor, and studied Protestant theology at the Westphalian William's-University in Münster from 1919 to 1923. His motivation was his ambition to give a disordered society meaning and order through the Gospel and church bodies.

During the Ruhraufstand in 1920 he was battalion commander of the "III. Bataillon der Akademischen Wehr Münster" belonging to the paramilitary Freikorps.

Niemöller was ordained on June 29, 1924, and the united Evangelical Church of the old-Prussian Union appointed him curate of Münster's Church of the Redeemer. After serving as the superintendent of the Inner Mission in the old-Prussian ecclesiastical province of Westphalia, Niemöller in 1931 became pastor of the Jesus Christus Kirche (comprising a congregation together with St. Anne's Church) in Dahlem, an affluent suburb of Berlin.

Like most Protestant pastors, Niemöller openly supported the right-wing opponents of the Weimar Republic. He even welcomed Hitler's accession to power in 1933, believing it would bring a national revival. However, he decidedly opposed the Nazis' Aryan Paragraph. In 1936, he signed the petition of a group of Protestant churchmen which sharply criticized Nazi policies and declared the Aryan Paragraph incompatible with the Christian virtue of charity. Adopting the Nazi racist attitudes betrayed the Christian sacrament of baptism, according to which this act makes a person a Christian, superseding any other faith, which oneself may have been observing before and knowing nothing about any racial affinity as a prerequisite of being a Christian, let alone one's grandparents' religious affiliation being an obstacle to being Christian.

The Nazi regime reacted with mass arrests and charges against almost 800 pastors and ecclesiastical lawyers. In 1933, Niemöller founded the Pfarrernotbund, an organization of pastors to "combat rising discrimination against Christians of Jewish background." By the autumn of 1934, Niemöller joined other Lutheran and Protestant churchmen such as Karl Barth and Dietrich Bonhoeffer in founding the Confessing Church, a Protestant group that opposed the Nazification of the German Protestant churches. The author and Nobel Prize laureate Thomas Mann published Niemöller's sermons in the United States and praised his bravery.

However, Niemöller only gradually abandoned his sympathies with National Socialism and even made pejorative remarks about Jews of faith while protecting - in his own church - baptized Christians, persecuted as Jews by the Nazis, due to their or their forefathers' Jewish descent. In one sermon in 1935, he remarked: "What is the reason for [their] obvious punishment, which has lasted for thousands of years? Dear brethren, the reason is easily given: the Jews brought the Christ of God to the cross!"

This has led to controversy about his attitude toward the Jews and to accusations of anti-Judaism. Holocaust scholar Robert Michael notes that Niemöller's statements were a result of traditional antisemitism and that Niemöller agreed with the Nazis' position on the "Jewish question" at that time.[4][13] Werner Cohn, an American sociologist, who lived as a Jew in Nazi Germany, also reports on antisemitic statements by Niemöller.

Thus, Niemöller's ambivalent and often contradictory behavior during the Nazi period makes him one of the most controversial enemies of the Nazis. Even his motives are disputed. The historian Raimund Lammersdorf considers Niemöller "an opportunist who had no quarrel with Hitler politically and only began to oppose the Nazis when Hitler threatened to attack the churches." Others have disputed this view and emphasize the risks that Niemöller took while opposing the Nazis. However, Niemöller's behaviour contrasts sharply with the much more broad-minded attitudes of other Confessing Church activists such as Hermann Maas. The pastor and liberal politician Maas — unlike Niemöller — belonged to those who unequivocally opposed every form of antisemitism and was later accorded the title Righteous Among the Nations by Yad Vashem.

Arrested on 1 July 1937, Niemöller was brought to a "Special Court" on 2 March 1938 to be tried for activities against the State. He was fined 2,000 Reichmarks and received a prison term of seven months. As his detention period exceeded the jail term, he was released by the Court after the trial. However, immediately after leaving the Court, he was rearrested by Himmler's Gestapo--presumably because Rudolf Hess found the sentence too lenient and decided to take "merciless action" against him. He was interned in Sachsenhausen and Dachau concentration camps from 1938 to 1945. In late April 1945 he was transferred to Tyrol together with about 140 other prominent inmates, where the SS left the prisoners behind. He was liberated by the Fifth U.S. Army on May 5, 1945.

After his former cell mate, Leo Stein was released from Sachsenhausen to go to America, he wrote an article about Niemöller for The National Jewish Monthly. Stein reports that having asked Niemöller why he ever supported the Nazi Party, Niemöller replied:

"I find myself wondering about that too. I wonder about it as much as I regret it. Still, it is true that Hitler betrayed me. I had an audience with him, as a representative of the Protestant Church, shortly before he became Chancellor, in 1932. Hitler promised me on his word of honor, to protect the Church, and not to issue any anti-Church laws. He also agreed not to allow pogroms against the Jews, assuring me as follows: 'There will be restrictions against the Jews, but there will be no ghettos, no pogroms, in Germany.'"

"I really believed," Niemoeller continued, "given the widespread anti-Semitism in Germany, at that time—that Jews should avoid aspiring to Government positions or seats in the Reichstag. There were many Jews, especially among the Zionists, who took a similar stand. Hitler's assurance satisfied me at the time. On the other hand, I hated the growing atheistic movement, which was fostered and promoted by the Social Democrats and the Communists. Their hostility toward the Church made me pin my hopes on Hitler for a while.

"I am paying for that mistake now; and not me alone, but thousands of other persons like me."

In April 1945 Niemöller was, together with other prominent prisoners, transferred to Tyrol, where he was liberated by the Allies on May 5, 1945. According to Lammersdorf, there had been some attempts to whitewash his past which were, however, soon followed by harsh criticism because of his role as a NSDAP supporter and his attitude toward the Jews. Niemöller himself never denied his own guilt in the time of the Nazi regime. In 1959, he was asked about his former attitude toward the Jews by Alfred Wiener, a Jewish researcher into racism and war crimes committed by the Nazi regime. In a letter to Wiener, Niemöller stated that his eight-year imprisonment by the Nazis became the turning point in his life, after which he viewed things differently.

Niemöller was president of the Protestant Church in Hesse and Nassau from 1947 to 1961. He was one of the initiators of the Stuttgart Declaration of Guilt, signed by leading figures in the German Protestant churches. The document acknowledged that the churches had not done enough to resist the Nazis.

Under the impact of a meeting with Otto Hahn (who has been called the "father of nuclear chemistry") in July 1954, Niemöller became an ardent pacifist and campaigner for nuclear disarmament. He was soon a leading figure in the post-war German peace movement and was even brought to court in 1959 because he had spoken about the military in a very unflattering way. His visit to North Vietnam's communist ruler Ho Chi Minh at the height of the Vietnam War caused an uproar. Niemöller also took active part in protests against the Vietnam War and the NATO Double-Track Decision.

In 1961, he became president of the World Council of Churches. He earned the Lenin Peace Prize in 1966.

He died at Wiesbaden in 1984.

Tuesday, December 1, 2009

X-certificate drinking

An annoying feature you come across on an increasing number of beer and brewery websites is a requirement to either enter your age or confirm that you are of legal drinking age in your country of residence. I assume this originally began in the US, but it has now spread to this country, for example on the website of Wells & Youngs.

Obviously these controls are easily circumvented by anyone with half a brain, and so are no more than a futile sop to political correctness, but even so there is an underlying assumption that it is undesirable for anyone under the legal drinking age to find out anything about alcoholic drinks, because if they did they would immediately head out for a mammoth binge. Presumably we’re not meant to see any schoolchildren researching projects on the brewing industry, although that in itself would probably lead to howls of outrage from the Righteous.

In most countries the legal age to drive a motor vehicle is at least 16, yet I don’t see any of these age controls on automotive websites, and indeed they are probably an endless source of fascination to pre-pubescent boys. Nobody suggests that being able to view the Ford website is going to encourage a 14-year-old to go out on a joyriding spree. So why do we have to have these double standards when it comes to drink?

Isn’t it time that, at least on this side of the Atlantic, those running beer-related websites stopped treating all their readers like naughty children?

TICAP SPEAKERS ANNOUNCED



Speakers at The second International Conference Against Prohibition have been announced and it looks like it is going to be another enlightening event which will discuss the dire state of the hospitality industry in the race to eradicate smoking.

Held in memory of pro-choice campaigner Gian Turci, the conference takes forward his work towards social justice and equality by examing the effects of smoking bans on the hospitality industry and whether guests are still welcome or not.

Speakers include former Winston Cigarettes ad man Dave Goerlitz, who later worked for the tobacco control industry, former MSP Brian Montieth, author of the Bully State, and Dr Kamal Chaouachi, tobacco researcher and consultant.

The conference takes place on March 15 at the Hague, Nederlands.

TO PURSUE OR NOT PURSUE ....?


Click on image to enlarge

Birmingham East and North PCT has today confirmed that it is to take down the Youtube video that shows a smoker getting beaten to death.

The NHS PCT still does not accept the video could incite violence because the assailant is invisible and it takes little responsibility for the video's distribution.

What the officialese second action point means in plain English is anyone's guess. My interpretation is that the Trust will think before making suich an obscene film in future but perhaps I'm being an optimist.

The pessimist in me feels that there is no point in going to the next stage of the complaint - the Parliamentary and Health Ombudsman - because if it is Govt sponsored it will repeat the same old line that smokers need saving from themselves.

However, I also feel that it is important that there is official and government acknowledgement that such violence can never be justified - especially against a minority that is never heard. It is also important that in powerful, govt run organsations that there is some recognition, and basic knowledge of the difference between health information- which is to be welcomed - and health propaganda - which incites hatred and self-loathing.



DON'T SMOKE OR YOU WILL BE MURDERED - COP


I couldn't believe this from the Oakland Tribune :

REDWOOD CITY — A South San Francisco man faces attempted murder charges for stabbing his roommate in the face and neck after a disagreement about smoking on a balcony turned violent, officials said.

Bernie Castro, 58, started arguing with his 48-year-old roommate after the man left the balcony door open in the first block of Gardiner Avenue while he had a cigarette on Nov. 11, said South San Francisco Sgt. Joni Lee. The roommate, who has shared a house with Castro for three years, came back in after the cigarette and opened some windows.

The arguing escalated to violence when Castro allegedly punched the victim in the mouth. Lee said the fight stopped there and the victim went into his room for about 30 minutes.

But after he went out to smoke another cigarette, the arguing started up again. This time, however, Castro pulled out a folding knife and began attacking his roommate, Lee said. He was stabbed about eight times in the head, neck and face but is expected to recover, she added.

"It's just another good reason not to smoke," Lee said.

Castro is due back in court Dec. 9 and faces up to nine years in prison if convicted, said San Mateo County Assistant District Attorney Karen Guidotti. He is in custody in lieu of $500,000 bail.

Death by smoking ban and attacks on smokers encouraged through health propaganda is not new to those of us who have been warning for some time that balance in the health debate is important for just this reason. But by judging from the comments by police officer Lee, then it's OK to murder a smoker because the smoker should know better than to smoke.

Excuse me while I reach for the vomit bag!

http://www.insidebayarea.com/sanmateocountytimes/localnews/ci_13869376