Egypt: the status quo ante?

Cairo looks like a mob scene from the French Revolution judging by the takes from BBC World Service and the unshakeable Lyse Doucet. She never flinches when in hearing range of gunfire but rather allows her take to roll off her lips as if she were in a bullet proof cocoon. Plus, she puts together a good narrative. Mind you, she gets a lot of help from the Brotherhood given their inconsolable disposition over the sequestering of Mr. Morsi by none other than the stalwart Egyptian Army.

 

The lads from Texas are breathing a uniform sigh of relief now that the Army is in control. We have no qualms about whether they took over through a coup, force, deception, conspiracy or just common sense. Meanwhile, our friends in the media are calling foul in what they label a violation of democratic principles. They could care less that Morsi abused his mandate, opened the Islamist floodgates, had no clue as to what to do economically, and rendered voiceless everyone in the country who was not a conservative Muslim.

 

Sadly, there is little hope for a viable solution unless common ground for serious economic and political reform can be found. I expect the Army will have some additional duties for a long time to come. These duties may be in the form of ruling the country or worse, subduing the Brotherhood.

 

A civilian leader that the Army might propose on an interim basis and acceptable to all major factions does not exist. The Brotherhood has adamantly refused to accept any solution other than the release and reinstatement of Mohamed Morsi. And they claim that democracy is on their side.

 

My call is to remove the term democracy from the equation all together. Egypt has had dictators in the past that have served the country extremely well. I foresee another one being installed by the Military for a interim period that will morph into several years and possibly more. Only then can Egypt again try to regain control of its population and initiate the economic reforms that are so desperately needed throughout the country.

 

What with Saudi Arabia just having committed three billion dollars to Egypt and with some few billion more coming from other oil rich countries in the Middle East, a good measure of economic fluidity will ensue. In the meantime, the USA and the West can continue their debate over what is and what is not democratic in the land of the Pharos.

 

I dare say it won't take the USA too long to figure out what is needed. Given a little prompting from Israel, we will climb on board, continue to throw money at the Egyptian military and reluctantly return to the status quo ante.

 

If Egypt is to climb out of a thought process dominated by ethics that prevailed during the Middle Ages, then its youthful population needs to be given remunerative jobs. I don't see an Arab Reformation on the horizon, but with an open educational system and expanded work opportunities, the country can stabilize itself through focusing upon material objectives and through participation in the development of housing, infrastructure, agriculture and the utilization of available resources including technology.

 

Perhaps I am wishing for too much. Then again, perhaps it will rain again one day in Texas.

Don'tworry about old age...........

it won’t last long!

 

‘It is not the young man who should be considered fortunate but the old man who has lived well, because the young man in his prime wanders much by chance, vacillating in his beliefs, while the old man has docked in the harbour, having safeguarded his true happiness’…. Epicurus.

 

‘Travels with Epicurus’ by Daniel Klein should be a set-book for all over 60.

 

A septuagenarian, he takes a wry, whimsical, amusing and intelligent view of old age from the small Greek Island of Hydra, with reference to philosophers from Epicurus to Sartre. Epicurus taught that the highest good is personal happiness. I have no quarrel with that.

 

First-up is to accept it; after all there is little palatable alternative.

 

When I see sweaty-faced old fools jogging, or cycling in lycra and crash-helmets, I think to myself ‘There goes another admission to the cardiac ward’. The error is to believe that ‘fit’ means the same as ‘healthy’.

 

People seek to avert the onset of old age with exercise routines that will give them the best-toned body in the mortuary, botox that makes them look like waxworks, dental implants at £2000  per tooth, pilates (whatever that might be), liposuction, and all the other expensive cosmetic interventions. Scarcely a day goes by without a snake-oil salesmen advertising on the internet his remedy for ED, Alzheimer’s, or whatever.

 

They miss the point.

 

The key to a successful and fulfilled old age is intellectual, not physical. The little grey cells must be kept exercised. The enemy of old age is boredom. Prime examples of those who got it right are the retired Judge who went to Oxford University at the age of 73 to get another degree and the 93-year old lady who took up painting and got an exhibition at the Royal Academy.

 

High Court Judges have a lifestyle that involves much sitting and port wine, but they seem to live to a ripe old age. It’s the intellectual stimulus.

 

Epicurus believed that it was essential to have the company of friends. His table was famous not for the quality of the food (contrary to popular belief he was quite happy with a plate of lentils) but of the company.

 

He had no ’side’. Professors and prostitutes were welcome at his table; in truth, it became even more popular when word got around that ‘red hat and no knickers’ was commonplace.

 

We have a group of 5 or 6 oldies who spend every Friday afternoon in the local pub. It’s like an Irish Parliament there; everyone talking and nobody listening. There is both a high decimal count and matching profanity, especially on the subject of Stan’s shorts.

 

After retirement, time takes on a different dimension. Managing it is an art in itself. Epicurus said ‘Work is easy but true idleness takes courage and fortitude’. Attitudes change radically. Klein describes the old boys at his tavern admiring a beautiful young girl aesthetically rather than as a sex object, although one of them hopefully keeps a supply if Cialis and wears a testosterone pouch!

 

Klein has no time for the medical profession that seeks to keep oldies alive long past their ‘die-by date’. He observes that no longer could Dylan Thomas beseech his father to ‘rage, rage against the dying of the light’ because the old man would have been pumped full of chemicals. Nor for ‘care homes’. On his island there is a former mansion that has been converted into one such. The Greek government had not appreciated that it would be unthinkable for families there to abandon their aged parents, so there was only one inmate – 92 years old, incontinent, helpless, unable to feed himself, and with a zero quality of life.

 

And the desire for possessions diminishes with age, which in itself reduces stress and worry. I could easily afford a new Jaguar but I am quite happy with my 13-year old Focus.

 

One of Klein’s oldies is sitting with his friends at the taverna, drinking ouzo, and watching the sun go down. He had been approached by a developer who said that the old boy’s land was worth a fortune which would enable him to do what he pleased.

 

‘Like sitting with my friends at the taverna, drinking ouzo and watching the sun go down’ was his response.

 

 

 

 

Things fall apart.......especially for Obama

O appears befuddled by the entire international and national scene. His statements address his feelings of the moment without regard to multiple contradictions relating to his earlier policies and pronouncements. The consensus here is that O is alarmingly weak and the stronger of our foreign heads of state are taking advantage of it.

 

Europe has every reason to be annoyed now that Edward Snowden has revealed that we have bugged almost every communications link on the Continent and in the UK. Such bugging and hacking was permissible as long as it was not made public. Europe has no other choice than to be irate.

 

It will pass, but I do recall having said in one of my earlier notes that the US Government is the biggest hacker in the world. I did not realize how true that statement was.

 

I rather hoped that Snowden would have remained in Russia. He could have cooled off a bit and then lived a life of leisure without, of course, humor, central heating, privacy, friends and all the comforts of his former home. When I learned he may have been accepted by Bolivia I wanted him to be on the airplane. The whole episode began with an offhand remark by President Evo Morales who comes across a equally wet behind the ears as O himself

 

Why France, Spain and Portugal scrambled so fast to deny Morales' airplane flyover rights is beyond me, if indeed they did deny such rights. I assumed the these European countries were sufficiently pissed off with America that they would gladly aid in Snowden's escape to Bolivia.

 

There is a lot of anger among American conservatives about the manner in which O is exercising his presidential role. The remainder of O's term will be fraught with mounting and more acerbic criticism from the right.

 

The right smells blood and the pressure to bring O to his knees is mounting. The recent scandals and a very poor performance internationally are prime target areas. I also suspect that a lot more misguided efforts on the part of O and his administration will surface.

 

The nature of these will be tactics to discredit and disrupt conservative political and business leaders and institutions.

 

 

 

A land of grasses...........

When I was at school, the worst thing was to be labelled a ‘snitch’, the creep who told tales about his school-mates to the prefects and teachers. The snitch was ostracised, bullied, taunted and generally detested.

 

Until recent years, informers had been despised since Judas Iscariot. There is a whole lexicon of derogatory terms – coppers nark, squealer, ratfink – but the most common now is ‘grass’. And it is now becoming not only more common for people to grass-up others but, worse, socially acceptable, even a hobby.

 

I know three people who have been breathalysed recently. One was stopped within 300 yards of the pub that he had just left. Another found the police waiting at his home, only minutes away from the pub. The third was stopped on a quiet road on a Sunday morning and told that he had cut-up another car when turning out of a side-street. The only other car at the time was an A1 taxi.

 

All three must have been grassed-up, the first two by other customers, the third by the taxi-driver.

 

A neighbour has been stopped twice for driving too slowly. On the first occasion, the police were waiting at her home. They demanded that she get out of the  car. She said they would have to help her as she was paralysed down one side, hence the ‘disabled’ badge on her windscreen. They made their excuses and  left. She had obviously been reported by van-man who had tailgated her for miles.

 

The second time, she was again stopped for going too slowly and driving erratically, with the same outcome. The driver of the following car must have had the police phone number stored on his mobile for precisely this purpose (whilst committing an offence for using it whilst driving!).

 

And anyone wishing to be super-grass can now fit a miniature video-camera to the car windscreen, which will provide endless opportunities for amusement by getting others into trouble.

 

‘Grassing’ has not only become commonplace; it has become institutionalised.

 

The police reward successful snitchers.

 

There is an outfit called ‘Crimestoppers’ that encourages people to spy on their neighbours in case they are benefit cheats or smoking a spliff (they will give you a scratch-card smelling of – yes – ‘grass’).

 

No doubt their efforts are very successful.

 

As the KGB and Stasi knew well.

Obama has lost it!

I find, these days, that events are transpiring so rapidly and with so many of them that I cannot keep up with the day to day changes, alerts, breaking news, speculation and the like.

 

One stable factor is that O is decidedly losing it. Perhaps he cannot keep up either.

 

His silly trip to Africa brings little to the table other than rampant  criticism that he and his family and his entourage are undoubtedly the most traveled lot in American history. Of course, the associated costs are astronomic; a fact to which he seems to be totally oblivious.

 

The major news carriers are going bonkers playing the game 'Where in the World is Edward Snowden'. They are pretty sure he has departed Hong Kong. Opinion clusters around the speculation that both HK and their Mainland Chinese mentors were delighted to see the back of him and thereby minimize what could have been a monumental diplomatic rift.

 

The Russians claim Snowden is in travelers limbo being neither in nor out of Russia but somewhere in between. I dare say the speculators are correct that he is at the airport in some Kafkaesque hotel being squeezed by the succors to the KGB until he regurgitates all he knows.

 

Putin disagrees saying the man is outside of their control and therefor untouchable since Russia has no jurisdiction over him. What a load of bollocks that is. If Putin can reach all the way to London to off one of his own, he certainly can walk over to the airport and knock on Snowden's door.

 

One thing is very clear. The USA looks a complete ninny in its lame efforts to get a bead on Snowden's whereabouts. We look and indeed are weak and everyone knows it. It is time to put O's policy of engagement aside and look for a big stick. Frankly, nobody thinks O has got the balls.

 

His efforts to divert attention by suddenly coming up with a major speech on the environment, global warming and the need to curtail coal fueled industries caught everyone off guard. We expected something about the IRS capers, the NSA hacking, Snowden's legal status, or phone tapping our journalists. Instead, we get a speech on global warming.

 

Typical of a second, lame duck, presidential term, the incumbent's political chickens are coming home to roost.

 

And roosting they are, big time.

 

Public and media attention has already begun to morph into items on possible candidates for the next presidential election. Hillary is high on the democratic list as is, can you believe it, Joe Biden.

 

 

Realpolitik in Syria?

‘So they go on in strange paradox, decided only to be undecided, resolved to be irresolute, adamant for drift, solid for fluidity, all-powerful to be impotent’.

 

Churchill’s words sum up perfectly the West’s attitude to the shambles in Syria.

 Obama is set upon masterly inactivity; no boots on the ground, no ‘no fly zone’; no military assistance to the rebels apart from ‘soft aid’ such as flak jackets and bandages in case the flak jackets don’t work.

 Cameron comes all gung-ho about supplying arms, knowing full well  that he has zero chance of getting this past the Commons.

 The EU muddles and mutters; no change there, then.

 Or is there a more Machiavellian plan?

 In this conflict there are no goodies and baddies; only baddies and baddies. If Assad comes out on top, there will be massive reprisals and repression, and probably an on-going insurgency.

 

 If the rebels win, about the last thing we are likely to see is a peaceful, democratic  regime. There will be struggles amongst the various groups for dominance; Sunni against Shia, tribe against tribe, territory carved up between competing warlords.

 

 The only advantage will fall to Al Qaeda, which will be able to conceal itself amongst the chaos in a rich recruiting ground.

 And so it may suit the West to have neither winner or loser, but to let the conflict drag on until it burns itself out.

 Hezbollah has sent sizeable forces into Syria. It is pretty certain that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard is there in force. There are reports that Iran is planning to send in 4000 more troops.

 There are very clear advantages for the West. Hezbollah forces tied down in Syria lessens the direct threat to Israel as long as they are preoccupied with endless fighting  a guerrilla war. Iran bogged down in neighbouring territory might limit its freedom to meddle elsewhere and distract it from making mischief in the Middle East.

 It is now fairly common knowledge that the rebels are being supplied with plane-loads of serious hardware from the Ukraine, but no heavy weapons; enough to keep the pot boiling but not enough to have a decisive effect. This is surely under the sponsorship of the CIA, whatever Obama might say about not arming to the rebels.

 It is not beyond the bounds of possibility that, far from vacillation and inaction, the West is reverting to realpolitik.

 

 

 

A real Liberal Party?

What we need is a new Liberal Party.

 

I don’t mean the rabble of middle-class lefties who call themselves the Lib Dems (or Dums, as some would more accurately put it), the party of tofu, muesli, sandals and no principles, distinguished only by their taste for bizarre sexual practices and alcohol.

 

I mean the Liberal Party of the 19^th Century, the party of William Gladstone and John Bright whose philosophy was driven by Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill, Jeremy Bentham and others of the times.

 

It was first and foremost the party of free trade. With globalization its hour has come. FTAs are springing up all over. The US/EU talks are beginning, and there seems to be a strong consensus in Europe to get an agreement quickly despite French attempts to bugger it up right at the beginning – how typical!

 

It is globalization, not foreign aid, that has lifted more than 200 million out of poverty and is creating a whole new consumer-class. We need to be out front.

 

It was the party of both social and economic liberalism.

 

It was the party of small government; what JS Mill called ‘the night-watchman state’. Bizarrely, in America ‘liberalism’ is synonymous with ‘big government’ when in fact it is the opposite.

 

It believed in letting business get on with business without over-regulation that is a curse and fetter on today’s economy, especially when emanating from Brussels. What is it about Eurocrats that makes them micro-meddle, as with the short lived proposal to ban olive oil bottled on restaurant tables?

 

Do you wonder why Switzerland is prosperous, peaceful and hugely wealthy? It is not because of government. It is because of the lack of it. Central government is miniscule compared with the bloated states of the EU27. Governance is mostly in the hands of subordinate bodies, and decisions are taken at the lowest appropriate level, always a good management principle.

 

All this would fit nicely with the attitudes of the younger generation, according to a recent survey that has had a lot of traction in the  serious press.

 

It tells us that the young are socially liberal when it comes to sexual attitudes (no surprise there, then) and race, and rather wish that politicians wouldn’t keep banging on about immigration. They don’t think much of the Welfare State, and have little sympathy with benefits scroungers and those who won’t stand on their own two feet. The subject of homosexual marriage only induces yawns.

 

The Labour Party represents the opposite of all these attitudes. The Tory Party is too busy trying to emulate UKIP to notice the trend.

 

A Real Liberal Party could be the future.

 

As for a leader, who ticks all the boxes?

 

Step forward Boffo Johnson!

Big snit..........

We Americans are in a big snit just now.

 

 Wherever we turn, we witness deception, trickery, corruption, poor judgement, irresponsibility and cowardice among our politicians and leading civil servants. It is a sad time for America when we are embroiled in the filth of politics and seemingly without recourse to justice through lethargy, lack of a voice or perhaps just ignorance. We are being robbed blind by the powers that be, or at least enough of them, to warrant large-scale contempt for those who pretend to carry our cause and lead us forward.

 

The glowing aura of Obama that prevailed during much of his first term has faded into a sea of doubt over his true intentions. His disregard for the suffering of the people, especially the middle class, will be his undoing. At the same time, he has done precious little for his and other minorities and is losing followers at an accelerating rate.

 

Some argue that O is oblivious to the havoc he has created in almost all aspects of political, economic and social life. Others claim he, like an ill-bred upstart, is trying to extract as much from the system and for himself as he possibly can before retiring from office.

 

In either case, the verdict is negative on his performance and on the prospects for a favorable legacy.

 

 

Leveson, the NHS, and the BBC...........

Being a retired rustic expat, I sometimes have difficulty in what is happening in the Great Wen across the Irish Sea.

 

At this time there is a clutch of ex-editors, hacks, coppers, civil servants and whatnot facing trial and the prospect of a diet of porridge as the haul from the Leveson Inquiry.

 

The alleged offences revolve around the giving or receiving of money or favours in return for revealing information about the goings-on amongst the great and good (or not, as the case may be).

 

At the same time we are getting almost daily revelations of money being paid to public servants for concealing information that might otherwise be in the public interest. The NHS is a serial offender (and also has an appalling record of sacking whistle-blowers).

 

Now it seems that the BBC is up to its neck in the same scam.

 

Now, here is what I can’t quite understand.

 

If it is a crime to pay or receive money to reveal information, is it not also a crime to pay or receive far greater sums to conceal it?

 

I think we should be told.

'Bitches in britches'!

What fun! Two great catfights have broken out in the sisterhood.

 

One is over the public assertion by a woman that female doctors are a source of ‘unintended consequences in the NHS’. A junior Health Minister, Anne Soubry, said, quite reasonably, that there should be more GPs to take account of the fact that female doctors take timeout and reduce their hours to take care of their families.

 

Sep forward Dr Sharon Bennett. Whizzing off a letter to the Telegraph, she said that she was ‘shocked’ by Ms Soubry’s sexism and that she was promoting ‘outdated sexist attitudes’.

 

Dr Bennett is married to Andrew ‘Plebgate’ Mitchell MP.

 

Dr Hannah Mitchell joined the fray, saying that it was a display of sexism.

 

Dr Mitchell is Andrew Mitchell’s daughter.

 

Unsurprisingly, they didn’t counter the argument that, with 70% of medical students being female, it followed logically that more GPs would be needed to take account of the female’s shorter working life.

 

But this is not unique to medicine. We frequently read feminist hacks going on about the ’glass ceiling’, the low proportion of woman as directors of FTSE 100 companies, about women’s earnings being lower than men’s, as if there was a widespread male-chauvinist conspiracy to keep women down. But it’s just not true, and it’s absurd to suggest that employers twin-track their staff remuneration to discriminate against women; jobs are usually advertised with a salary range that is part of the deal.

 

The main reason why women’s lifetime earnings are lower is that they have a shorter working life; they withdraw from work to create a family; they retire earlier; they often take part-time employment so that they can juggle the demands of work and home. They are wise enough o understand that you can’t ‘have it all’, whatever the female columnists might tell them.

 

For similar reasons, they tend to be absent from the workplace between the ages of 30 and 40, which is the make-or-break part of a career.

 

The other ruckus is over the feminist magazine ‘Spare Rib’.

 

The founder, Rosie Boycott who is now travel editor of the Oldie magazine after a stellar career in journalism, is opposed to the new publication taking the name. M’ learned friends are hovering.

 

The feisty Julie Burchill helpfully suggests that it should be called ‘Bitches in Britches’.

 

 

 

What fun! Two great catfights have broken out in the sisterhood.

 

One is over the public assertion by a woman that female doctors are a source of ‘unintended consequences in the NHS’. A junior Health Minister, Anne Soubry, said, quite reasonably, that there should be more GPs to take account of the fact that female doctors take timeout and reduce their hours to take care of their families.

 

Sep forward Dr Sharon Bennett. Whizzing off a letter to the Telegraph, she said that she was ‘shocked’ by Ms Soubry’s sexism and that she was promoting ‘outdated sexist attitudes’.

 

Dr Bennett is married to Andrew ‘Plebgate’ Mitchell MP.

 

Dr Hannah Mitchell joined the fray, saying that it was a display of sexism.

 

Dr Mitchell is Andrew Mitchell’s daughter.

 

Unsurprisingly, they didn’t counter the argument that, with 70% of medical students being female, it followed logically that more GPs would be needed to take account of the female’s shorter working life.

 

But this is not unique to medicine. We frequently read feminist hacks going on about the ’glass ceiling’, the low proportion of woman as directors of FTSE 100 companies, about women’s earnings being lower than men’s, as if there was a widespread male-chauvinist conspiracy to keep women down. But it’s just not true, and it’s absurd to suggest that employers twin-track their staff remuneration to discriminate against women; jobs are usually advertised with a salary range that is part of the deal.

 

The main reason why women’s lifetime earnings are lower is that they have a shorter working life; they withdraw from work to create a family; they retire earlier; they often take part-time employment so that they can juggle the demands of work and home. They are wise enough o understand that you can’t ‘have it all’, whatever the female columnists might tell them.

 

For similar reasons, they tend to be absent from the workplace between the ages of 30 and 40, which is the make-or-break part of a career.

 

The other ruckus is over the feminist magazine ‘Spare Rib’.

 

The founder, Rosie Boycott who is now travel editor of the Oldie magazine after a stellar career in journalism, is opposed to the new publication taking the name. M’ learned friends are hovering.

 

The feisty Julie Burchill helpfully suggests that it should be called ‘Bitches in Britches’.