October's obvious outcome...

Or maybe not...have they peaked too early...AGAIN! I had them as a dead cert to walk it...the 2007 Rugby World Cup in France that is.

"Australia finished full of running as New Zealand lost their way when tight-head prop Carl Hayman was sin-binned in the 60th minute for repeated infringements, leaving his team a man down.

In the time Hayman was off the field the Wallabies scored both of their converted tries..."

October's obvious outcome...

Or maybe not...have they peaked too early...AGAIN! I had them as a dead cert to walk it...the 2007 Rugby World Cup in France that is.

"Australia finished full of running as New Zealand lost their way when tight-head prop Carl Hayman was sin-binned in the 60th minute for repeated infringements, leaving his team a man down.

In the time Hayman was off the field the Wallabies scored both of their converted tries..."

Object of obeisance...

obeisance n. - bow or curtsey; paying of homage. obeisant, ad
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry, I don't usually 'advertise' and this will be an exception. The release today of Apple's new 'iconic' iphone will be sure to make it a yearned-after acquisition for many millions; it is indeed a masterpiece...and I want one :-) I may be a few weeks late posting about this but I know I've mentioned it elsewhere (I just can't remember where/on who's blog it was!)

Interestingly John Gruber sums up what has been an almost unique marketing/advertising campaign; he observed

"that no other cell phone is advertised by showing off the user interface. Thinking about it some more, I can’t recall the last time I’ve seen any tech product advertised simply by demonstrating how it works"...

...in fact the only bad thing is that it costs around $500 and buyers must commit to a two-year contract with AT&T (apparently that will cost them a minimum of $60 odd per month). I agree with John other aspects as well, the ads themselves, firstly they're fantastic, truly, and mark the first step in a new wave of technology - there are 5 or 6 ads and you will need the quick time player to see them - and like John my favourite is the 'Calamari'

P.S. Has anyone seen the new tabletop computers...literally the table top where you can drag around images - as if they were barmats - tap on them and they open up to a new miniscreen etc (that's about 0.000001% of what you can do!)...Microsoft Surface...go and see what can be done...The future is now! :-)

Object of obeisance...

obeisance n. - bow or curtsey; paying of homage. obeisant, ad
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry, I don't usually 'advertise' and this will be an exception. The release today of Apple's new 'iconic' iphone will be sure to make it a yearned-after acquisition for many millions; it is indeed a masterpiece...and I want one :-) I may be a few weeks late posting about this but I know I've mentioned it elsewhere (I just can't remember where/on who's blog it was!)

Interestingly John Gruber sums up what has been an almost unique marketing/advertising campaign; he observed

"that no other cell phone is advertised by showing off the user interface. Thinking about it some more, I can’t recall the last time I’ve seen any tech product advertised simply by demonstrating how it works"...

...in fact the only bad thing is that it costs around $500 and buyers must commit to a two-year contract with AT&T (apparently that will cost them a minimum of $60 odd per month). I agree with John other aspects as well, the ads themselves, firstly they're fantastic, truly, and mark the first step in a new wave of technology - there are 5 or 6 ads and you will need the quick time player to see them - and like John my favourite is the 'Calamari'

P.S. Has anyone seen the new tabletop computers...literally the table top where you can drag around images - as if they were barmats - tap on them and they open up to a new miniscreen etc (that's about 0.000001% of what you can do!)...Microsoft Surface...go and see what can be done...The future is now! :-)

Orson's outstanding opus...

The American Film Institute has released this year's list of the Top 100 films of all time. The following are the Top 10:

1 CITIZEN KANE
2 THE GODFATHER
3 CASABLANCA
4 RAGING BULL
5 SINGIN' IN THE RAIN
6 GONE WITH THE WIND
7 LAWRENCE OF ARABIA
8 SCHINDLER'S LIST
9 VERTIGO
10 THE WIZARD OF OZ

Citizen Kane, written, produced and directed by Orson Welles who was also Kane, the lead actor (he dies in the opening scene but the film is all flashbacks)...an opus indeed.

The top ten above are all fantastic films (IMHO) and the only one I would question is The Wizard of Oz but of course the special effects for the time (1939) were impressive...btw, despite my thoughts that they are all great films they are not my top ten. Any films you'd definitely add if it were your top ten?

Orson's outstanding opus...

The American Film Institute has released this year's list of the Top 100 films of all time. The following are the Top 10:

1 CITIZEN KANE
2 THE GODFATHER
3 CASABLANCA
4 RAGING BULL
5 SINGIN' IN THE RAIN
6 GONE WITH THE WIND
7 LAWRENCE OF ARABIA
8 SCHINDLER'S LIST
9 VERTIGO
10 THE WIZARD OF OZ

Citizen Kane, written, produced and directed by Orson Welles who was also Kane, the lead actor (he dies in the opening scene but the film is all flashbacks)...an opus indeed.

The top ten above are all fantastic films (IMHO) and the only one I would question is The Wizard of Oz but of course the special effects for the time (1939) were impressive...btw, despite my thoughts that they are all great films they are not my top ten. Any films you'd definitely add if it were your top ten?

Ouvres...

You may think I'm becoming art-obsessed as only last month I posted re Cezanne; but now, is this Midsummer Monet Masterpiece Madness? IMHO no, not madness at all: this is what I call art.

This is the 1904 painting part of 'the classic' Water Lily series, "It is unsurprising that this piece by Monet sold at such a high price. It is an exceptional example of his water lily series which is one of the most iconic images of impressionism."

Another Monet sold in the last couple of days: Waterloo Bridge, Temps Couvert [Cloudy Day] is "one of a series of views of the bridge and river that Monet painted from his room at the Savoy Hotel around the start of the 20th Century." These two are now the 2nd and 3rd highest prices paid for a Monet. As usual pictures link to news articles.

Back to Madness...well, THIS I wouldn't pay anything for (Sorry Lucien, I just don't like it)

...thanks Gavin! :-)

Ouvres...

You may think I'm becoming art-obsessed as only last month I posted re Cezanne; but now, is this Midsummer Monet Masterpiece Madness? IMHO no, not madness at all: this is what I call art.

This is the 1904 painting part of 'the classic' Water Lily series, "It is unsurprising that this piece by Monet sold at such a high price. It is an exceptional example of his water lily series which is one of the most iconic images of impressionism."

Another Monet sold in the last couple of days: Waterloo Bridge, Temps Couvert [Cloudy Day] is "one of a series of views of the bridge and river that Monet painted from his room at the Savoy Hotel around the start of the 20th Century." These two are now the 2nd and 3rd highest prices paid for a Monet. As usual pictures link to news articles.

Back to Madness...well, THIS I wouldn't pay anything for (Sorry Lucien, I just don't like it)

...thanks Gavin! :-)

Ominous omission of one's oath...

Unbelievably, the case for "No-mandate Brown" just gets worse and worse: it seems Gordon Brown's sworn oath has been hidden from view of the public. Copied in full from yesterday's revelation the CEP News Blog:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NEWS RELEASE: Wednesday 20th June 2007 - For immediate release

Gordon Brown must drop his Claim

“How can Gordon Brown, who took this oath, become Prime Minister of the United Kingdom?”

When Gordon Brown was an ordinary Scottish MP he signed the declaration of the “Scottish Claim of Right”. This document was a public oath committing those who took it to put the interests of the people of Scotland before all other considerations.

Now Gordon Brown is to become Prime Minister for the whole of the United Kingdom, the Campaign for an English Parliament is calling on Gordon Brown to publicly declare that he will not put the interests of any one part of the United Kingdom above any other part of the United Kingdom.

The Claim of Right, signed by Gordon Brown in 1988, read:

We, gathered as the Scottish Constitutional Convention, do hereby acknowledge the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine the form of Government best suited to their needs, and do hereby declare and pledge that in all our actions and deliberations their interests shall be paramount.

CEP Chairman, Scilla Cullen, said, "There is another nation within the UK- that of England. Will Gordon Brown extend to its people the right of self-determination that he espoused for his own nation when he signed the Scottish Claim of Right?"

CEP Vice Chairman, Tom Waterhouse, said, "The Claim of Right was a public oath, and those who took it pledged to put the interests of the Scottish people before all others. How can Gordon Brown, who took this oath, become Prime Minister of the United Kingdom? He must declare that he will put the interests of the whole of the UK before those of Scotland".

National Council, Campaign for an English Parliament.

Contact: cep-mediaunit@thecep.org.uk

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Clearly being at heart both a conservative and a Conservative I was never in favour of the Scottish Parliament or the Welsh Assembly; having said that I am honest enough to admit that if I had been born either Scottish or Welsh I would probably have been strongly in favour of either/both; that said now that they are actually in existence some sort of balance is essential: how is it right or even logical that some have the 'natural born right' of self-determination but others do not, especially those 'others' that form 85/90% of what was the United Kingdom. Even worse, the soon-to-be supreme leader of said United Kingdom has pledged on oath to favour another 'nation'...his own nation.

Ominous omission of one's oath...

Unbelievably, the case for "No-mandate Brown" just gets worse and worse: it seems Gordon Brown's sworn oath has been hidden from view of the public. Copied in full from yesterday's revelation the CEP News Blog:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NEWS RELEASE: Wednesday 20th June 2007 - For immediate release

Gordon Brown must drop his Claim

“How can Gordon Brown, who took this oath, become Prime Minister of the United Kingdom?”

When Gordon Brown was an ordinary Scottish MP he signed the declaration of the “Scottish Claim of Right”. This document was a public oath committing those who took it to put the interests of the people of Scotland before all other considerations.

Now Gordon Brown is to become Prime Minister for the whole of the United Kingdom, the Campaign for an English Parliament is calling on Gordon Brown to publicly declare that he will not put the interests of any one part of the United Kingdom above any other part of the United Kingdom.

The Claim of Right, signed by Gordon Brown in 1988, read:

We, gathered as the Scottish Constitutional Convention, do hereby acknowledge the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine the form of Government best suited to their needs, and do hereby declare and pledge that in all our actions and deliberations their interests shall be paramount.

CEP Chairman, Scilla Cullen, said, "There is another nation within the UK- that of England. Will Gordon Brown extend to its people the right of self-determination that he espoused for his own nation when he signed the Scottish Claim of Right?"

CEP Vice Chairman, Tom Waterhouse, said, "The Claim of Right was a public oath, and those who took it pledged to put the interests of the Scottish people before all others. How can Gordon Brown, who took this oath, become Prime Minister of the United Kingdom? He must declare that he will put the interests of the whole of the UK before those of Scotland".

National Council, Campaign for an English Parliament.

Contact: cep-mediaunit@thecep.org.uk

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Clearly being at heart both a conservative and a Conservative I was never in favour of the Scottish Parliament or the Welsh Assembly; having said that I am honest enough to admit that if I had been born either Scottish or Welsh I would probably have been strongly in favour of either/both; that said now that they are actually in existence some sort of balance is essential: how is it right or even logical that some have the 'natural born right' of self-determination but others do not, especially those 'others' that form 85/90% of what was the United Kingdom. Even worse, the soon-to-be supreme leader of said United Kingdom has pledged on oath to favour another 'nation'...his own nation.

Oriental output overtaking others...

No great surprise here but noteworthy all the same. "China has overtaken the United States as the world's biggest producer of carbon dioxide, the chief greenhouse gas, figures released today show." says the article in the Guardian [Link] . Only two years ago China's emissions were 2% below those of the USA and of course per capita China's pollution remains quite low but of course that isn't the point. Also these figures only include CO2 emissions from fossil fuels and cement production; this last point seems strange but China now produces 44% of global cement production...and they don't export much!!

The figures also do not include sources of other greenhouse gases (methane from agriculture/ nitrous oxide from industrial processes...) they also do not include other sources of carbon dioxide (aviation/shipping/ deforestation...) Dr Olivier, a senior scientist at the Netherlands government Environmental Assessment Agency that compiled the figures, said that even including all other CO2/greenhouse emissions China would still have the highest output.

"Since China passed the US by 8% [in 2006] it will be pretty hard to compensate for that with other sources of emissions."

...and an interesting final comment from the Guardian writers John Vidal and David Adam:

Chinese industries have been hesitant to embrace unproven clean coal and carbon capture technologies that are still in their infancy in developed countries.

All this comes as a complete non-surprise but I doubt this will stop the Bush/US bashers and their 'he/they didn't sign the Kyoto agreement' rants: before you shout at me I do realise that just not being the worst doesn't make the USA saints in this respect but it just irritates me greatly that the likes of China, along with Russia (another great polluter) are effectively let off the hook and many countries that did sign barely pay lip service to genuine reduction in emissions - and at the same time don't fail to wallow in their own feel-good platitudes whilst firing sanctimonious broadsides at the USA and in particular the Bush administration.

Oriental output overtaking others...

No great surprise here but noteworthy all the same. "China has overtaken the United States as the world's biggest producer of carbon dioxide, the chief greenhouse gas, figures released today show." says the article in the Guardian [Link] . Only two years ago China's emissions were 2% below those of the USA and of course per capita China's pollution remains quite low but of course that isn't the point. Also these figures only include CO2 emissions from fossil fuels and cement production; this last point seems strange but China now produces 44% of global cement production...and they don't export much!!

The figures also do not include sources of other greenhouse gases (methane from agriculture/ nitrous oxide from industrial processes...) they also do not include other sources of carbon dioxide (aviation/shipping/ deforestation...) Dr Olivier, a senior scientist at the Netherlands government Environmental Assessment Agency that compiled the figures, said that even including all other CO2/greenhouse emissions China would still have the highest output.

"Since China passed the US by 8% [in 2006] it will be pretty hard to compensate for that with other sources of emissions."

...and an interesting final comment from the Guardian writers John Vidal and David Adam:

Chinese industries have been hesitant to embrace unproven clean coal and carbon capture technologies that are still in their infancy in developed countries.

All this comes as a complete non-surprise but I doubt this will stop the Bush/US bashers and their 'he/they didn't sign the Kyoto agreement' rants: before you shout at me I do realise that just not being the worst doesn't make the USA saints in this respect but it just irritates me greatly that the likes of China, along with Russia (another great polluter) are effectively let off the hook and many countries that did sign barely pay lip service to genuine reduction in emissions - and at the same time don't fail to wallow in their own feel-good platitudes whilst firing sanctimonious broadsides at the USA and in particular the Bush administration.

Oscillating ornament optimising organs...

After the upsetting news for Indian men at the end of last year that most condoms were too big for them, it seems the market has been created for alternative protection: there is a newish controversial condom causing outrage because a government-owned company is involved in marketing it but critics say it is in fact a vibrator, and should therefore be banned (sex toys etc are banned). Click on image for the corresponding BBC news article.

Oscillating ornament optimising organs...

After the upsetting news for Indian men at the end of last year that most condoms were too big for them, it seems the market has been created for alternative protection: there is a newish controversial condom causing outrage because a government-owned company is involved in marketing it but critics say it is in fact a vibrator, and should therefore be banned (sex toys etc are banned). Click on image for the corresponding BBC news article.

Ozzy's onstage obduracy...

In fairness to Ozzy the only reason there is reference to his onstage antics i.e. biting off a bat's head, was that it was 25 years ago...and USA Today is 25 years old this year so they're doing a series of 25 year 'lists' and today's list (as I breakfast in my Minneapolis Hotel Room...home of Prince...9th on the list with his Purple Rain phenomenom) is "25 Years of Memorable Music Moments"...In 1982, ABBA disbanded, Public Enemy formed and Ozzy Osbourne bit off a bat's head. They tell us that "In the 25 years since, music has undergone cataclysmic changes."

Back to Ozzy for a moment: he has commented on the bat's head incident and 10 years ago in May 1997 (before his TV stardom) said in Rolling Stone Online:"

It took a lot of water to down just that fucking bat's head, let me tell you. It's still stuck in my fucking throat, after all these years. People all over the world say, 'You're the guy who kills creatures? You still do it? You do it every night?' It happened fucking once, for Christ's sake."

Nicely put Ozzy; even now we remember it. How fucking tame we all are! ;-)
Now, the list, take a look and see what you think: to me it seems a bit mixed up: there are some things that are to do with industry changes (advent of CD's, Napster et al, iPods) which we know are memorable moments but not music, also they include some very strange things like "Parental Advisory stickers (1985)" WTF!...can they really call this a memorable music moment?!!

"After finding her daughter listening to Prince’s naughty Darling Nikki, Tipper Gore led the drive to slap warning labels on CDs. The industry’s voluntary effort both hampered and fueled sales."

Also on the list is George Harrison's death in 2001, which on my list wouldn't get near the top 100 but it did encourage (another) Beatle's revival. Clearly, and to be expected I suppose, the list is US orientated but with one honourable exception (if we ignore Live Aid which was international - but oh so British really) Radiohead (1997)

"The most significant and influential British group of the era risked “commercial suicide,” according to its label, with the release of 1997’s OK Computer, an experimental pastiche of ambient electronica, art-rock and post-punk that by 2005 was declared the No. 1 album of the past 20 years in Spin."

We'll leave it there. I think I'll devote a few hours to my own list of my memorable music moments; 'music' being the key word but of course it would have to be 35 years (if you believe that 9/10 year olds - Span, 35 years ago - can have a reasonable taste in music...influenced by their brothers of course; funnily enough Ozzy would be on that list (as would Prince) ...click on image to see what Black Sabbath album influenced young Ows (admittedly their least 'heavy' album to that date [1973]...)

Ozzy's onstage obduracy...

In fairness to Ozzy the only reason there is reference to his onstage antics i.e. biting off a bat's head, was that it was 25 years ago...and USA Today is 25 years old this year so they're doing a series of 25 year 'lists' and today's list (as I breakfast in my Minneapolis Hotel Room...home of Prince...9th on the list with his Purple Rain phenomenom) is "25 Years of Memorable Music Moments"...In 1982, ABBA disbanded, Public Enemy formed and Ozzy Osbourne bit off a bat's head. They tell us that "In the 25 years since, music has undergone cataclysmic changes."

Back to Ozzy for a moment: he has commented on the bat's head incident and 10 years ago in May 1997 (before his TV stardom) said in Rolling Stone Online:"

It took a lot of water to down just that fucking bat's head, let me tell you. It's still stuck in my fucking throat, after all these years. People all over the world say, 'You're the guy who kills creatures? You still do it? You do it every night?' It happened fucking once, for Christ's sake."

Nicely put Ozzy; even now we remember it. How fucking tame we all are! ;-)
Now, the list, take a look and see what you think: to me it seems a bit mixed up: there are some things that are to do with industry changes (advent of CD's, Napster et al, iPods) which we know are memorable moments but not music, also they include some very strange things like "Parental Advisory stickers (1985)" WTF!...can they really call this a memorable music moment?!!

"After finding her daughter listening to Prince’s naughty Darling Nikki, Tipper Gore led the drive to slap warning labels on CDs. The industry’s voluntary effort both hampered and fueled sales."

Also on the list is George Harrison's death in 2001, which on my list wouldn't get near the top 100 but it did encourage (another) Beatle's revival. Clearly, and to be expected I suppose, the list is US orientated but with one honourable exception (if we ignore Live Aid which was international - but oh so British really) Radiohead (1997)

"The most significant and influential British group of the era risked “commercial suicide,” according to its label, with the release of 1997’s OK Computer, an experimental pastiche of ambient electronica, art-rock and post-punk that by 2005 was declared the No. 1 album of the past 20 years in Spin."

We'll leave it there. I think I'll devote a few hours to my own list of my memorable music moments; 'music' being the key word but of course it would have to be 35 years (if you believe that 9/10 year olds - Span, 35 years ago - can have a reasonable taste in music...influenced by their brothers of course; funnily enough Ozzy would be on that list (as would Prince) ...click on image to see what Black Sabbath album influenced young Ows (admittedly their least 'heavy' album to that date [1973]...)

Outstanding ospreys...

England's Lake District Osprey Project has enabled over a quarter of a million people to view the ospreys and is estimated to bring over £1 million into the local economy every year

Click on image to read the good news. Recent changes to the law have introduced custodial sentences for crimes against wildlife; egg-theft has been substantially reduced; I say DEATH to egg thieves!

The Lake District Osprey Project is a partnership of Forestry Commission England and the RSPB, and is supported by the Lake District National Park Authority.

Outstanding ospreys...

England's Lake District Osprey Project has enabled over a quarter of a million people to view the ospreys and is estimated to bring over £1 million into the local economy every year

Click on image to read the good news. Recent changes to the law have introduced custodial sentences for crimes against wildlife; egg-theft has been substantially reduced; I say DEATH to egg thieves!

The Lake District Osprey Project is a partnership of Forestry Commission England and the RSPB, and is supported by the Lake District National Park Authority.

Oink Oink offal (II)...

I know it's true but despite that it never ceases to amaze me how many people have no idea where their food comes from. The beeb reports that a survey by LEAF (Linking Environment And Farming) "suggests many of us are unaware that much of our food is actually from farms."

"22% of 1,073 adults questioned did not know bacon and sausages originate from farms."

"But is the great British public really that ignorant about what life is like down on the farm?"...in a word, yes! A lot of it is pig ignorance - to coin a phrase - but it seems the ignorance isn't confined to chidren and it reminds me of what Homer Simpson said when Lisa was turning vegetarian:

Homer: Are you saying you’re never going to eat any animal again? What about bacon?
Lisa: No.
Homer: Ham?
Lisa: No.
Homer: Pork chops?
Lisa: Dad, those all come from the same animal.
Homer (with sarcasm) : Heh heh heh. Ooh, yeah, right, Lisa. A wonderful, magical animal.

Hehehe...Well I suppose that at least even Homer knew they all came from an animal.

From the LEAF survey: 29% of the adults questioned, including 42% of 16 to 24-year-olds and 33% of those with children, had never visited a farm. Of those, 44% of Scots, 36% of Londoners and 32% of people from Manchester had never set foot in a farmyard. Rural living helps it seems as in the South West 85% of people and 81% of East Anglians had at least visited a farm. There's no excuse really as there are plenty of ways to get 'in the know'; Farms for Schools is a good enough start and there is enough info to keep children safe but of course they get no media help, only the bad news gets big press and many things, i.e. the HSE, ("farmyards are not playgrounds") put teachers off!

Oink Oink offal (II)...

I know it's true but despite that it never ceases to amaze me how many people have no idea where their food comes from. The beeb reports that a survey by LEAF (Linking Environment And Farming) "suggests many of us are unaware that much of our food is actually from farms."

"22% of 1,073 adults questioned did not know bacon and sausages originate from farms."

"But is the great British public really that ignorant about what life is like down on the farm?"...in a word, yes! A lot of it is pig ignorance - to coin a phrase - but it seems the ignorance isn't confined to chidren and it reminds me of what Homer Simpson said when Lisa was turning vegetarian:

Homer: Are you saying you’re never going to eat any animal again? What about bacon?
Lisa: No.
Homer: Ham?
Lisa: No.
Homer: Pork chops?
Lisa: Dad, those all come from the same animal.
Homer (with sarcasm) : Heh heh heh. Ooh, yeah, right, Lisa. A wonderful, magical animal.

Hehehe...Well I suppose that at least even Homer knew they all came from an animal.

From the LEAF survey: 29% of the adults questioned, including 42% of 16 to 24-year-olds and 33% of those with children, had never visited a farm. Of those, 44% of Scots, 36% of Londoners and 32% of people from Manchester had never set foot in a farmyard. Rural living helps it seems as in the South West 85% of people and 81% of East Anglians had at least visited a farm. There's no excuse really as there are plenty of ways to get 'in the know'; Farms for Schools is a good enough start and there is enough info to keep children safe but of course they get no media help, only the bad news gets big press and many things, i.e. the HSE, ("farmyards are not playgrounds") put teachers off!

Operation Overlord...

On this day. Operation Neptune was the codename given to the initial assault phase of largest seaborne invasion in history: Operation Overlord; its mission, to gain a foothold on the continent, started on June 6, 1944 (most commonly known by the name D-Day) and ended on June 30, 1944.

"In the East, the vastness of space will... permit a loss of territory... without suffering a mortal blow to Germany’s chance for survival. Not so in the West! If the enemy here succeeds… consequences of staggering proportions will follow within a short time." Adolf Hitler.

'The Normandy landings were the first successful opposed landings across the English Channel for nine centuries. They were costly in terms of men, but the defeat inflicted on the Germans was one of the largest of the war. Strategically, the campaign led to the loss of the German position in most of France and the secure establishment of a major new front.' Lest we forget.

Operation Overlord...

On this day. Operation Neptune was the codename given to the initial assault phase of largest seaborne invasion in history: Operation Overlord; its mission, to gain a foothold on the continent, started on June 6, 1944 (most commonly known by the name D-Day) and ended on June 30, 1944.

"In the East, the vastness of space will... permit a loss of territory... without suffering a mortal blow to Germany’s chance for survival. Not so in the West! If the enemy here succeeds… consequences of staggering proportions will follow within a short time." Adolf Hitler.

'The Normandy landings were the first successful opposed landings across the English Channel for nine centuries. They were costly in terms of men, but the defeat inflicted on the Germans was one of the largest of the war. Strategically, the campaign led to the loss of the German position in most of France and the secure establishment of a major new front.' Lest we forget.

Olympian obscenity...

Laughable London Logo Low...

Truly, mind-bogglingly, disasterous and above all embarrassing; complete and utter crap...really; I honestly hope it's another hoax. You'll note from this link that I'm not alone: HERE 80%+ of people voted to give the London Olympic logo, revealled (reviled?) today, the wooden spoon - out of a choice of gold, silver, bronze or wooden spoon. Apparently it cost upwards of 400,000 pounds!!! I truly believe that a primary school child paid 40 quid could have done better!

"The jagged emblem, based on the date 2012, comes in a series of shades of pink, blue, green and orange and will evolve in the run-up to the Games."

Evolve into what, something tasteful and appropriate or just another pile of poo? "When people see the new brand, we want them to be inspired to make a positive change in their life" said Tony Blair, I bet he's glad he's leaving now! A positive change in their life or or maybe just a change in the logo!! There are half a dozen quotes from various politicians and bigwigs all of which are sanctiminous crap verging on the ridiculous - and ridicule is what this logo deserves.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Update 7:30pm BST. There's a petiton going for anyone who wishes to get the logo changed: it already has nearly 8500 signatures so if you want to sign 'Online petition - Change The London 2012 Logo' click HERE. (edit: ended up with 48 thousand signatures) Thanks to fellow BBC Radio 5 Live Message Board poster Yellowhammer for that link and also for this description of how they designed it.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Update 9:20a.m. BST. Following up on yesterday: several readers have already sent in better alternatives (took them all of a couple of hours and zero expense) BBC Link

Olympian obscenity...

Laughable London Logo Low...

Truly, mind-bogglingly, disasterous and above all embarrassing; complete and utter crap...really; I honestly hope it's another hoax. You'll note from this link that I'm not alone: HERE 80%+ of people voted to give the London Olympic logo, revealled (reviled?) today, the wooden spoon - out of a choice of gold, silver, bronze or wooden spoon. Apparently it cost upwards of 400,000 pounds!!! I truly believe that a primary school child paid 40 quid could have done better!

"The jagged emblem, based on the date 2012, comes in a series of shades of pink, blue, green and orange and will evolve in the run-up to the Games."

Evolve into what, something tasteful and appropriate or just another pile of poo? "When people see the new brand, we want them to be inspired to make a positive change in their life" said Tony Blair, I bet he's glad he's leaving now! A positive change in their life or or maybe just a change in the logo!! There are half a dozen quotes from various politicians and bigwigs all of which are sanctiminous crap verging on the ridiculous - and ridicule is what this logo deserves.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Update 7:30pm BST. There's a petiton going for anyone who wishes to get the logo changed: it already has nearly 8500 signatures so if you want to sign 'Online petition - Change The London 2012 Logo' click HERE. Thanks to fellow BBC Radio 5 Live Message Board poster Yellowhammer for that link and also for this description of how they designed it.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Update 9:20a.m. BST. Following up on yesterday: several readers have already sent in better alternatives (took them all of a couple of hours and zero expense) BBC Link

Opposite of orthopraxy...

Note: orthopraxy n. - correct action
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"For the good of the Game"..."For the Game; For the World"...two new slogans from FIFA , having just entered a 'new era', seems OK.

"FIFA will enter a new era on 1 June, one in which football's social responsibility and community will take centre stage. The slogan summarises FIFA's mission to develop the game, touch the world and build a better future"

FIFA President Joseph S. Blatter (just re-elected, now FIFA top-dog until 2011) emphasised that "football's social responsibility and the resources available now and in the future will enable FIFA to take a giant step forward and make a major contribution to social development through football." Great, unless you live at high altitude where FIFA, just last week, banned international games, naturally this has caused furore throughout Latin America, principally the 'high' Andean countries. Some feedback HERE on the BBC. Apparently Blatter and the committee took this decision after advice from their medical Committee, I would like to see any reasoning and evidence they presented and hope the Andean Football Associations demand it too (the limit has been set at 2500m)

"The executive committee have listened to a proposal from the medical committee and have decided to act because to play at above that altitude is not healthy or fair,"

...not healthy? OK, prove it; how many players have suffered adversely from playing at high altitudes?...anyway my point is....to say "not fair", NOT FAIR?!! What about playing in freezing Scandinavian countries? Boiling hot African countries? Countries with massive populations?(Brazil, Russia etc...) not fair either as they have more players to select from...countries with several established leagues, not fair, they have a better chance of playing more higher-standard games thereby increasing the percentage of experienced players. What about where wages are higher so that players don't need 'day jobs'? Where the coaches and physios are presumably better so naturally, one assumes, it would follow that the players are at an advantage; a few examples but you know what I mean. One comment from the points of view posted on the BBC: Mike Durrance in Bogota:

Colombia cannot now play international soccer games in its capital city, Bogota, a city of around 8 million inhabitants. How stupid! Who decided on the figure of 2,500m Why not lower it a bit so that Mexico City is affected as well? Who does Fifa represent? All, or simply the powerful soccer nations?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Update 16/06/07: It seems that FIFA have seen sense and have already changed their minds: they have raised the limit to 3000m; I think they should forget silly decisions and let football be played where it's always been played...everywhere.

Opposite of orthopraxy...

Note: orthopraxy n. - correct action
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"For the good of the Game"..."For the Game; For the World"...two new slogans from FIFA , having just entered a 'new era', seems OK.

"FIFA will enter a new era on 1 June, one in which football's social responsibility and community will take centre stage. The slogan summarises FIFA's mission to develop the game, touch the world and build a better future"

FIFA President Joseph S. Blatter (just re-elected, now FIFA top-dog until 2011) emphasised that "football's social responsibility and the resources available now and in the future will enable FIFA to take a giant step forward and make a major contribution to social development through football." Great, unless you live at high altitude where FIFA, just last week, banned international games, naturally this has caused furore throughout Latin America, principally the 'high' Andean countries. Some feedback HERE on the BBC. Apparently Blatter and the committee took this decision after advice from their medical Committee, I would like to see any reasoning and evidence they presented and hope the Andean Football Associations demand it too (the limit has been set at 2500m)

"The executive committee have listened to a proposal from the medical committee and have decided to act because to play at above that altitude is not healthy or fair,"

...not healthy? OK, prove it; how many players have suffered adversely from playing at high altitudes?...anyway my point is....to say "not fair", NOT FAIR?!! What about playing in freezing Scandinavian countries? Boiling hot African countries? Countries with massive populations?(Brazil, Russia etc...) not fair either as they have more players to select from...countries with several established leagues, not fair, they have a better chance of playing more higher-standard games thereby increasing the percentage of experienced players. What about where wages are higher so that players don't need 'day jobs'? Where the coaches and physios are presumably better so naturally, one assumes, it would follow that the players are at an advantage; a few examples but you know what I mean. One comment from the points of view posted on the BBC: Mike Durrance in Bogota:

Colombia cannot now play international soccer games in its capital city, Bogota, a city of around 8 million inhabitants. How stupid! Who decided on the figure of 2,500m Why not lower it a bit so that Mexico City is affected as well? Who does Fifa represent? All, or simply the powerful soccer nations?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Update 16/06/07: It seems that FIFA have seen sense and have already changed their minds: they have raised the limit to 3000m; I think they should forget silly decisions and let football be played where it's always been played...everywhere.

One on one observations...

"When he is making the rounds of a crowded room, his smile, towards the end, is a rictus, and his eyes are as hard as jewels."...no, I'm not talking about Hirst's skull; in fact it's a comment on Tony Blair's 'last smile', made by Martin Amis in today's Guardian: "The Long Kiss Goodbye".

"Power has been described as a drug, an aphrodisiac, a "filthy venom" (in the words of Maxim Gorky); it is also, for much of the time, carcinogenically boring. Like all politicians, Tony has seven or eight kinds of smile. Smiles two and three would do for the bishops. When he is making the rounds of a crowded room, his smile, towards the end, is a rictus, and his eyes are as hard as jewels."

Only last week I posted Objurgatory opinion...a damning confirmation of Tony Blair's real legacy as seen in the results of various polls about his tenure in Number 10 and how Foreign policy has dominated throughout, clearly with events forcing his hand and his popularity (see graph below - links to BBC in depth report).

Amis's article, despite some time in London and No 10, highlights the foreign policy aspect as he accompanied Blair on his 'farewell tour' (Northern Ireland, Iraq, USA...) I know many don't like blogs that just regurgitate news but I enjoyed the article and thought I'd pass it on.

"Something happened to Blair in Basra… …He was quite unable to find weight of voice, to find decorum, the appropriate words for the appropriate mood. 'So we kill more of them than they kill us ... You're getting back out there and after them. It's brilliant, actually ...' The PM, it has to be said, appeared to be the least articulate man in the room."

A humbling experience no doubt, being in the presence of those inexorably and seemingly inextricably involved in the business end of 'Foreign Policy'.

One on one observations...

"When he is making the rounds of a crowded room, his smile, towards the end, is a rictus, and his eyes are as hard as jewels."...no, I'm not talking about Hirst's skull; in fact it's a comment on Tony Blair's 'last smile', made by Martin Amis in today's Guardian: "The Long Kiss Goodbye".

"Power has been described as a drug, an aphrodisiac, a "filthy venom" (in the words of Maxim Gorky); it is also, for much of the time, carcinogenically boring. Like all politicians, Tony has seven or eight kinds of smile. Smiles two and three would do for the bishops. When he is making the rounds of a crowded room, his smile, towards the end, is a rictus, and his eyes are as hard as jewels."

Only last week I posted Objurgatory opinion...a damning confirmation of Tony Blair's real legacy as seen in the results of various polls about his tenure in Number 10 and how Foreign policy has dominated throughout, clearly with events forcing his hand and his popularity (see graph below - links to BBC in depth report).

Amis's article, despite some time in London and No 10, highlights the foreign policy aspect as he accompanied Blair on his 'farewell tour' (Northern Ireland, Iraq, USA...) I know many don't like blogs that just regurgitate news but I enjoyed the article and thought I'd pass it on.

"Something happened to Blair in Basra… …He was quite unable to find weight of voice, to find decorum, the appropriate words for the appropriate mood. 'So we kill more of them than they kill us ... You're getting back out there and after them. It's brilliant, actually ...' The PM, it has to be said, appeared to be the least articulate man in the room."

A humbling experience no doubt, being in the presence of those inexorably and seemingly inextricably involved in the business end of 'Foreign Policy'.

Ostentatious (osseous?) opulence...

Damien Hirst's new work: a life-sized platinum skull, studded with 8,601 stones (weighing more than 1,106 carats; all ethnically sourced...of course)....so in fact it's not osseous at all! It's called "For the Love of God,'' presumably after what his mother used to say about his artistic exploits; that said this is my favourite of all that I've seen of his work; the skull is valued at about 50 million quid (or more than 70 million Euros /about 100 million US Dollars - I'll take two!!) Asked what his next work would be, he joked: "Two diamond skeletons shagging." hehehe. On show at The White Cube , the skull not the skeletons shagging! Entry by ticket only; tickets free.

Ostentatious (osseous?) opulence...

Damien Hirst's new work: a life-sized platinum skull, studded with 8,601 stones (weighing more than 1,106 carats; all ethnically sourced...of course)....so in fact it's not osseous at all! It's called "For the Love of God,'' presumably after what his mother used to say about his artistic exploits; that said this is my favourite of all that I've seen of his work; the skull is valued at about 50 million quid (or more than 70 million Euros /about 100 million US Dollars - I'll take two!!) Asked what his next work would be, he joked: "Two diamond skeletons shagging." hehehe. On show at The White Cube , the skull not the skeletons shagging! Entry by ticket only; tickets free.