Search

Paul's Blog

  • Home
    Home This is where you can find all the blog posts throughout the site.

Uncategorized

Posted by on in Uncategorized

I think it was the American wit and comedian Groucho Marx who said he was disinclined to join any club that would have him as a member. I think I would be equally disinclined to join any club that did not want me as a member. What is the point of demanding entrance to somewhere you are not welcome on grounds of creed, colour or background? Why would anyone want to mingle with narrow minded blinkered bigots? Someone also said something about not agreeing with what someone said, but being prepared fight for their right to say it. So, I have to respect the Muirfield Golf Club's decision not to admit women members. I feel sorry for the people who voted against women members. But it is a private club with the right to write its own rules. What got my goat was the BBC quoting a number of people condemning the golf club's decision and none speaking in favour; though it might be hard to find anyone who would defend such stupidity. I felt the BBC should have added a rider that it endorses sexual discrimination. What else can "The Conversation", which bills itself as produced for women by women about women, be but sexual discrimination? Perhaps its producer could have gone on air to defend the Muirfield Golf Club's decision. Or, come to think of it, if the BBC had any real journalists left, they could have interviewed a spokeswoman for one of the women-only golf clubs in Scotland. I understand there are more women-only clubs in Britain than men-only. 

Continue reading
Hits: 143
0

Posted by on in Uncategorized

Here's something that has long puzzled me: When I was in Afghanistan, long long ago. a high ranking Canadian general came to visit. No, that's not it. His machine-gun toting bodyguards stood out like sore thumbs in their baseball caps, designer khakis and wrap-around sunglasses amongst the gaggle of uniformed aides surrounding him. Now, I'm no expert in bodyguarding but I would thought a protection squad would not want to draw attention to itself - or the guy it is supposedly protecting. I thought they might be better advised to blend in with the crowd and wear uniforms that day. I had a nagging feeling that they wanted to advertise how "special" they were. I remember when the then Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher came to visit the Gateshead Garden Festival that there were several Special Branch officers and other cops whom I recognized, mingling with the crowd in casual street clothing. But all were also wearing same apparently innocuous and non-descript item. I guess that was so that if something happened and guns had to be drawn that Thatcher's London Boys wouldn't shoot them dead in the confusion. I can't help feeling that the British approach was better.

 

Continue reading
Hits: 128
0

Posted by on in Uncategorized

A study of hospital admission figures by Glasgow University researchers raises some interesting questions about combat related mental health problems. A lot of modern journalists seem to believe that the higher than normal admission rates for soldiers and veterans can be firmly attributed to combat stress. These keen young scribblers strongly believe killing bad guys must inevitably result in stress conditions such as PTSD. The Glasgow study shows that soldiers who quit the army before completing their training are most likely to suffer mental health problems. After four years of service soldiers and ex-soldiers are no more likely to have problems that civvies. Long service members of the military, possibly the most likely to have been through multiple combat deployments, are half as likely to have mental health problems than those on civvie street. The question is why those who do not complete their training are so much more likely to suffer from depression, stress disorders or psychotic illness. Could this be because they enter the military with existing mental health problems or vulnerabilities? Or perhaps there is something about the military life that makes people crack. Sadly, bullying and ritualistic humiliation have not yet been entirely erased from our military bases. Either way, the military, and the Army in particular, have questions to answer. Is the selection process selective enough? Money spent training someone who drops out is money wasted. Or should the officer corps and the senior N.C.O.s be doing more to clamp down on those sad-sods who get their kicks from bullying and humiliating new recruits?  

Continue reading
Hits: 151
0

Posted by on in Uncategorized

More than 10% of soldiers in nominally Scottish regiments are not even British, according to recent media reports. Overseas recruits are becoming are bigger factor every year. Some continue to blame the amalgamation of the "traditional" Scottish regiments in the multi-battalion Royal Regiment of Scotland a decade ago. The critics argue that the loss of such names as the Royal Scots and King's Own Scottish Borderers has eroded the local links and backing that the old regiments enjoyed and a price is being paid in poor recruitment. But the truth is that several of the regiments folded into the Royal Regiment of Scotland never did draw a sizeable number of recruits from their supposed home territories. There were few real Argyll lads in the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders and the majority of the Queen's Own Highlanders were not from north of the Highland Line. Scotland has seldom provided enough men to fill all the supposedly Scottish regiments of the British Army. For most of their histories the Scottish regiments always had a substantial number of non-Scots. Even the Highland regiments, which tended to attract more Scots than their Lowland cousins, often had large numbers of Irish and English men serving in their ranks. At the end of the Crimean War there were 734 non-Scots serving alongside 6,164 Scots in the Highland regiments. Nowadays in the Royal Regiment of Scotland the 10% shortfall is filled by Fijians, men from the Caribbean, and South Africa.  The Scots Guards has always had a large contingent of Englishmen in its ranks. But back to my main point; even the decision to cut the number of regular battalions in the RRoS from five to four, basically a 20% reduction, has failed to bring the quota of Scots serving in the ranks of the remaining nominally Scottish units up to even the old, surprisingly low, levels they once enjoyed.  The creation of the RRoS only acknowledged that the "traditional" Scottish regiments could, at most, only add a tinge of regional identity to units which were actually composed mainly of men from the post-industrial West of Scotland and often officered by Englishmen. But even that recruiting ground is slipping away. Perhaps the time has come to look at why the British Army is not an attractive career proposition for young Scots. Scotland has changed.  Maybe the Army should change a little to reflect modern Scottish values and aspirations. Otherwise it is probably doomed to be continually scouring faraway islands to fill its ranks with "Jocks" brought up to prefer kava to whisky: good soldiers though most of them are.  The real question is why equally promising young Scotsmen people don't want to take the Queen's Shilling these days. 

Continue reading
Hits: 170
0

Posted by on in Uncategorized

I was listening to a BBC World Service programme called Outside Source recently. It had an item about, Aleksei Navalny, an opponent of Russian President Vladimir Putin, being accused in a television documentary of conspiring with the CIA and MI6. But Outside Source said the poor English in the documentation which supposedly supported the allegation suggested it was a clumsy forgery. This seemed a little ironic as Outside Source itself usually includes several red flags which suggest it is produced by people with little knowledge of Britain or of the correct use of English. Do Britons really "arrive to" destinations these days? Would someone from the British Isles really refer to the last letter of the alphabet as "Zee"? When someone broadcasting from London refers to the "East Coast" would they really mean the Atlantic seaboard of the United States and not Ipswich? By Outside Source's own journalistic criteria it would be easy for a listener to believe it is produced by some latter-day version of Radio Moscow and not the BBC at all. Alternatively, as the same sort of people who work at MI6 also work on Outside Source, the catalogue of errors in that spy allegation documentation perhaps prove nothing.

Continue reading
Hits: 179
0
Go to top