Bardiness

"..a bardy view!"

Chewing the Cud over GMT and BST…..

CowVery soon I will give the hour back which I received 5 months ago. In seven months time I shall reclaim it.

I don’t know who is the beneficiary of my sixty minutes, nor do I know who returns it.

I do know that every year since the day I was born I have, with great philanthropy, parted with an essential essence of my life – my time – but comforted in the knowledge that I only permitted it’s borrowing on a short term loan.

I gave it free, without interest, yet if time was indeed money, I could have become very wealthy over the years had I charged for it.

After all, if I asked my bank manager for a loan he wouldn’t give it to me for free just because I promised to return it promptly after seven months. The difference of course is that my time is priceless, and although it is unique it has no monetary value.

I can invest it, I can spend it, I can save it and I can waste it. I cannot hold it. I cannot keep it. I cannot preserve it. It is gone in a moment – and lost in a memory.

I can think of nothing more valuable, more essential than time, yet it is not oil, not gold, not silver, not platinum. My time is more precious than metals and minerals, but it is all mine – every single second of it. It’s value is incalculable.

At 02.00 on the last Sunday of  March (as is always the case) I will say hello to British Summer Time, or on the last Sunday of October, return to the dark days of Greenwich Mean Time.

It’s an economic decision that I have no choice over. A few years ago the UK government considered the Daylight Savings Private Members Bill to abolish GMT and align the British Isles with CET (Central European Time), which would have meant more light at night and less light at morning. Longer summer evenings, and maybe an hour more light in winter resulting in longer darker mornings. It would have suited the more southern English, but not the northern Brits. In any event, the bill was rejected, and it’s not likely to reappear again for some time.

Any change in daylight saving policy won’t change the orbit of the earth, no more than it will stop the sun from rising and setting at inconvenient times for commerce and industry.

The cows in the fields will chew the cud regardless. The sheep will be fairly laid back and the pigs are unlikely to grunt in dissent. The cocks will continue to crow at dawn, and the chickens will lay their eggs without cracking up at the stupidity of it all.

The EU will be happy because everything will be standardised. But they tried that with the Euro and look what happened.

They can mess around with money. Surely we can’t allow them to mess around with the clocks as well?

I just don’t have the time for it.

March 26, 2016 Posted by | Culture, Current Affairs, Education, General, History, Humour, London, Politics, United Kingdom | , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

In God We Trust

usdollarAll American Presidents and candidates believe that God is on their side. The latest being Rand Paul, who says “with God’s help” he will win. That’s in sharp contrast with the UK candidates for Prime Minister. The Labour leader Ed Milliband has gone on record as being an atheist, although he does have faith (whatever that means).

The Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg is also an atheist (but raises his son in his wife’s Catholic faith).

The Conservative leader David Cameron admits that he is a lapsed Christian, as indeed is the UKIP leader Nigel Farage (yet both proclaim that they have not lost their faith – deep down they have Christian values etc. blah blah).

This is a quandary.

I’m a Christian in so far that I believe in Jesus Christ. Any man who suffered as much as He, through persecution, betrayal and crucifixion, yet still decided to return within 48 hours to save those who treated Him so badly surely gets my vote. That’s dedication! Jews of course don’t believe that Jesus was the Messiah – he didn’t meet the conditions laid down in the Messianic Hebrew Chronicles – but they accept he may have been a prophet. The Messiah has yet to come – apparently.

Still, we have reached a tolerable medium, and Judeo-Christianity are the scales which balance precariously on the fulcrum of faith.

So how does that leave us in this secular western world? Well, the United Kingdom is a Christian country. Not my words – but the Queen’s. She is officially “Defender of the Faith and Supreme Governor of the Church of England”. She appoints Archbishops and bishops on the advice of the Prime Minister – the “Head of Her Majesty’s Government”.

This puts me, and Her Majesty in a pickle, although it’s more of a pickle for her (I’m just pickled). It beggars the question – how can an atheist Prime Minister advise “The Supreme Governor of the Church of England” on who should be appointed as the Archbishop of Canterbury – the symbolic head of the worldwide Anglican Communion? How can a Prime Minister of a Christian country in which the laws since Magna Carta were founded on Christian theology, if not exegesis, espouse from his or her political pulpit the importance of Christian values and Christian morals? How can a Prime Minister be a PM without practising what he preaches?

Love it or loath it, the United Kingdom is predominantly a Christian country. Other religions and faiths function very well within it. They are welcome.  Britain is traditionally the home for all – and it’s a worthy commendation. Yet, with a constitutional monarchy, with a Queen as the Head of State, not only in the UK but in other Commonwealth countries around the world, one would expect her Prime Minister to have a Christian faith. It is the bedrock of over 1500 years of British history, and one way or another it has stood the test of time, at home or abroad.

In the USA candidates who declare themselves as atheists wouldn’t stand a chance. “In God we Trust” is written on every dollar bill, and if God was never mentioned in the Constitution He was certainly present between the lines.

So here is my problem. Who do I vote for? An atheist or a Christian? Should it matter? After all, the future of the nation isn’t at stake, what’s at stake is our humanity to our fellow man and how we care for each other.

What’s God got to do with that? I think you know my answer!

April 7, 2015 Posted by | Culture, Current Affairs, Education, History, Politics, Religion, United Kingdom, USA | , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Prince Philip in hot water over the Philippines

 

Prince Philip meets Filipina nurse

"Just put it there pal!"

Prince Philip has hit the headlines again in his own
inimitable style, with what some consider another of his famous gaffes.

 

Renowned
for his jokey persona he tends to dispel the restrictions of diplomatic speak
and just pops up with the first thing which enters his head.

And why not? He's 91 years old with a great sense of humour.

Some perceive his words as racist or insulting (not normally by those on the receiving end) and it's the media who run with them trying to make
a story out of nothing.

Philip is reported as saying to a Filipina nurse that he
thinks her country must be half empty as most are over here in the UK running the NHS (note he said "running"). I suspect he meant it as a compliment – after all, he spent a lot
of time in hospital since the Queen's Jubilee Pageant on the Thames where he
was getting soaked to the skin and having his royal bollocks frozen off, so he
probably saw first-hand the various nationalities employed as health care
staff, and clearly they made an impression on him.

Continue reading

February 20, 2013 Posted by | Culture, Current Affairs, Education, Europe, London, Politics, The Philippines, United Kingdom | , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

Never in the Field of Human Conflict………

ChurchillIt was Great Britain which provided the inspiration to the founders of the Modern Olympics.

That legacy in this 30th Olympiad has come home. Whilst the official language is French, it is the dominance of the English language which turns the world on its axis.

In this world where China is flexing her muscles, where Russia plays dangerous games, it is the free democratic nations of the world which provide the light. Would you want to live in a world dominated by China or Russia – in sport or elsewhere?

If the European Union competed as one entity it would rule the world. UK, Germany, France, Italy, Holland, Spain, Denmark, Sweden, Ireland, Norway – have a combined gold medal total far greater than that of the China.

Yet their combined population is considerably less than China's 1.5Billion – indeed the population of the EU is similar to the USA.

Of course the EU consist of separate countries, with different languages, but they are free democratic ones also.

Continue reading

August 12, 2012 Posted by | Culture, Current Affairs, Education, Europe, Events, History, Olympic Games, Politics, Sport, United Kingdom, USA | , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Another Argy Bargy…..?

 

Hms duantless

The Argentine President Cristina Fernandez has recently described Britain as a "crass colonial power in decline" because they are refusing to hold talks over the future of the Falkland Islands.

This appears to have rattled a sabre with the UK's Ministry of Defence, and they have decided to send HMS Dauntless down into the South Atlantic in what seems to be a statement of intent – that intent being that the Falklands are not open to negotiation, that they have been a British protectorate since 1833, and that is how they will remain.

Putting aside the economic reasons for holding onto the islands – British oil companies are drilling for oil in the region, for example – the small population of the Falklands are British and wish to remain so.


Continue reading

January 31, 2012 Posted by | Culture, Current Affairs, Education, Events, History, London, Politics, United Kingdom | , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Water water everywhere, and not a drop to drink…..

WaterAid_logoI've just received my half-yearly water bill of £200 from Thames Water, which works out at £1.00 per day.

I don't know if I live in an average household (I suspect not) but the shower is used at least three times a day, the dishes washed twice, the washing machine used once, the bog flushed at least ten times, and the kettle filled at least twice, and maybe some veggies boiled once.

Strangely enough, the amount of direct tap water drunk is minuscule in comparison. I haven't included watering the plants or the garden, because that's not everyday, nor even the number of times a day the molars get brushed and gargled. 

As for dripping taps (faucets) there may be a wasted pint here or there, but that's nothing that a good rubber-washer couldn't stop. I certainly don't waste water washing the car because that's what car washes are for, and besides, you get a polish and buff thrown in. And who uses water for washing windows nowadays? That's what Mr Muscle is for. In fact, I doubt I have seen a window cleaner cycling around with a ladder, bucket and shammy for over twenty years. 

Continue reading

October 17, 2011 Posted by | Conservation, Culture, Current Affairs, Education, Science, The Philippines, United Kingdom | , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Pacific

 Not being a subscriber to Sky Television I had to wait until The Pacific became available on BT Vision. Whether it will ever reach bog-standard Freeview I know not.  

 Digital Freeview – the great excuse for dumbed down television – can only be  justified for access to  BBC4 and Yesterday. The rest is……but I digress, and my thoughts on that can wait for another day.

This post is about The Pacific – a television mini-series.  Based on the reluctant memoirs of Eugine Sledge and Robert Leckie – whom the latter, after seeing the musical "South Pacific" in a cinema during the 1950's, walked out half-way through in disgust, remarking that " the Pacific War was not a musical – and the truth should be told". 

It also acknowledged  John Basilone – a man not renown to the British – but to the Yanks is a great hero – a soldier who received the Medal of Honor and has had roads, buildings and warships named in his honour – unlike John Wayne, who didn't fight in the Pacific, but got an airport named after him because he was a great American hero too.

But that's where the fiction ends and reality takes over. John Wayne was an actor on celluloid – The Pacific is about real people in the very real theatre of war, and the Duke had no role in it.

Being a Brit I have always followed the supercilious and humorous mantra that the Yanks always arrive late to a fight. They popped in during 1917 some three years after WWI began, and they popped late in 1941 after the bombing of Pearl Harbour – two years after the outset of WWII, and they didn't get active in the Pacific until well into 1942 – so their war was a short one, ending with the atom bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It may have been short, but it was brutal.

Leaving aside the horrors that the British Army suffered at the hands of the Japanese and their experiences in Burma and Singapore – and not to diminish them by any degree – I was grossly negligent in my knowledge of the American experience.

 

Such was my ignorance I had a revelation watching "The Pacific", and subsequently read Sledge's book – a book he chose to write in 1981 to banish the demons which invaded his dreams every night for nearly 40 years.

 

Such was the impact of his book, the US Marine veterans who had survived raised their heads and thanked him for it – they too were suffering, and nobody had ever really told their stories because they themselves could not. (I urge readers to see Sledge speak in the video below). 

It's been a bane for many that VE Day severely overshadowed VJ Day. The war against Japan lingered on after victory in Europe, and those that returned home found that their experiences were quickly forgotten.

 

The Nazis were defeated, and those who fought or were imprisoned  further afield ( the British, the Anzacs and Americans) found upon returning home that people wanted to forget the war. By the time they returned, the celebrations were over – they had arrived too late for the party. An irony indeed.

 

Well – The Pacific has put the record straight – rather late – but better late than never. It's about US Marines who fought a war of sheer hell, in the mud and guts of those islands, where the golden sands were covered in blood on the shores of Guadalcanal, Iwo Jima, and several other forgotten  islands and archipelagos which barely get a mention in the history books.

 

War propaganda movies of the 1940's were exactly that – propaganda. They displayed – in Britain's case – the stiff upper lip – and every one on screen was either a public school educated officer or a simple working class tommy.

This portrayal pervaded well into the 1960's and 70's. Our television is laced with movies like the Battle of Britain (spiffing pilots where the ground crews are mere extras), The Longest Day (all officers doing the decent thing and the actual soldiers mere cannon fodder), Von Ryan's Express (a travesty of reality to serve Frank Sinatra's ego), Bridge on the River Kwai -  starch-stuffed-shirt officers discussing their situation as if they were at the Queen's Garden Party; Where Eagles Dare, where not only do the bit-part NCO's get killed, but are even exposed as traitors while the hero officers (Burton and Eastwood) save the day -  and so on etc etc – the list is endless.

The British continued to make films where the main characters spoke RP – Received Pronunciation, and were the epitome of the stiff upper lip. The only expletives which passed such a lip was "I say, what damned bad luck Sir!" as if Bertie Wooster was in charge of operations.

And what about the "Dam Busters"? The heroic raid on the German Dams to destroy Hitler's heavy water plants and the bouncing bombs which were crucial to hitting their mark?

We are led to believe that those pilots who missed the targets said "sorry skipper – dash it. I nearly threw a googly then by jove!" When in actual fact they probably said "Fuck it! I missed the shit!"

And when they scored a hit, the Squadron leader probably did not say "well done chaps" but something much more invective and expletive – words which were no doubt repeated by Winston Churchill, but failed to be repeated in his memoirs. Surely Winnie didn't swear? "We got the bastards" I suspect he shouted over his brandy and cigars.

And speaking of the Dam Busters – the leader, Wing Commander Guy Gibson, had a black labrador called Nigger. Today, political correctness removes that reference from the 1955 movie because it is considered offensive. That was the name of his dog. We may not like it – but nor should we shy away from it. History is worthless if we don't have the courage to tell the truth.

But some things have changed. Movies like "Saving Private Ryan" and mini-series like "Band of Brothers" and "The Pacific" are bringing WWII back to prominence and portraying it from the ordinary soldier’s point of view. Warts and all.

Yet they are made by Americans, involve Americans, and they are for Americans. If we complain that the British get only a passing reference in these productions, then it is our fault – not theirs.

Britain fought a long war and has just as much of a tale to tell. Yet we are caught in a time zone of fair play, jolly hockey sticks and quiet moral superiority. The movies the British made, from Pinewood, Ealing Studios, and Twickenham are mere idiosyncrasies of a bygone age which wallows in ideologies of Victorian and Edwardian nostalgia. 

Why are we not telling WWII as it really was. Why are film producers not doing the same as our friends across the Atlantic? Is it because of money? Is it because it's not commercially viable? Are we merely content with documentaries only? Or is it because we have lost our backbone? Are we so afraid to shout about our achievements for fear of offending others?

So kudos to the Yanks – at least they have their priorities in order and fly their flag with pride. The Pacific is not about glory – it's about pain and suffering. Yet through that pain, the reality of war is exposed. It's not about medals and honours, it's about Hell and Humanity.

The USA knows the power of patriotism and that is her strength. The UK has lost that sense, and that is her fundamental weakness.

Perhaps we are just a glorified theme park  – great for royal weddings, pomp and circumstance and hosting sporting events.The torch that lights the 2012 Olympics in London would not burn at all without Great Britain who kept the flame of freedom alive during the darkest days of Nazism.

It's time the people knew about that. It's time to stand up and be proud! It's time to educate our young people and give them a sense of identity. 

 

 

August 26, 2011 Posted by | Culture, Film, General, History | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Cautious Optimism – Philippines’ Style……

Philippines_logo
The Philippines Department of Tourism has revealed that the top five foreign markets for tourism, according to rank for the first 6 months of 2011, were South Korea, USA, Japan, China and Australia. Nothing new there then!

In a drive to increase tourism under the slogan "undiscovered treasures and hidden gems", the DOT has a goal to increase international visitors to 6.5m by 2016 (they ditched "Wow! Philippines" some months ago – personally I thought it was pretty good, but then again it really didn't mean anything, except that "wow" in this case meant "world of wonder" – but how many knew that?) 

They have some way to go to catch up to Malaysia which had 23m visitors last year, and Singapore which had 15m. I notice they didn't cite Thailand's figures, which, as pleased as I am, they may now consider to be an unrealistic benchmark. Besides, Thailand is more of a British playground which attracts the slightly more affluent 18-30 booze brigade bored with Spain and Greece, so they are welcome to it.

Not that the Philippines is entirely free from those types – but they are more likely to be Australians ranting and raving on Boracay. 

So "access and connectivity" are the new buzzwords to push for rapid expansion with secondary international airports, together with "strategic access infrastructure development programs".

When infrastructure and development are used in the same paragraph as tourism it should sound alarm bells. Words which are generally on the same side of a coin, the reverse of which is written conservation, environment, and ecology.

Which leads me to their other statement "..following the direction of President Aquino, we’re encouraging combined public-private sector partnerships to safeguard and preserve natural and cultural sites and vulnerable groups, such as native people, animals, or treasures, for posterity.”

Well, that's a nugget for the magpies to pick up!

But why are "public-private sector partnerships" required for these safeguards? Why cannot a government make statutory decrees to protect its heritage? Whilst private investment should be encouraged to aid tourism, are they saying that it is crucial for preservation? The commercial sector exists for profit, it is not renown for philanthropy.

Whilst the Philippines' government should be applauded for its perceived new vigour in recognising its natural assets, this proposed marriage will invariable have one dominant partner – the one with the dosh!

Increased tourism will be essential for providing jobs for an ever growing population, but getting the balance right will take more than grand gestures and sound-bites. Cautious optimism may be the appropriate phrase to end this post.

July 17, 2011 Posted by | Conservation, Culture, Education, Politics, The Philippines, Travel | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Royal Wedding and the Philippines…..

The global attention that the upcoming royal wedding is generating comes as no surprise. Countries with absolutely no connection to the UK are queuing up to broadcast the event. Certainly interest is to be expected from Commonwealth nations but others such as the Philippines are also hooked.

This is not likely due to the aura surrounding the British Royal Family, but more likely that in an age of celebrity worship this is the marriage of the decade. Filipinos love celebrities, and are quite willing to embrace them wherever they hail from. Prince William, the second in line to the throne should not be regarded as one.

He is not a film star, rock star, sports star, world famous fashion designer or supermodel. Nor is he a captain of industry, or a billionaire entrepreneur.  I suspect the British are inclined to accept their royals provided they can be seen to be doing something useful other than adorning magazine covers.

In William's case he is a qualified RAF helicopter pilot and his job entails air sea rescue providing a valuable emergency service. It is the measure of a man born into status and title who contributes to society with a sense of duty, when he could easily be a privileged layabout like some of his ancestors.

Whilst there has always been a republican movement to abolish this somewhat anachronistic system of royalty which flourishes in the UK, as long as it exists we may as well accept it. If we are going to have a royal family then it should be the best, so I certainly don't want to see them riding bicycles or catching the local buses and travelling in economy class. If they are going to do that then abolish them.

No, I want my royals to be royal and show it. I don't resent their position, I don't resent their wealth (even though I contribute to it), and if I was one, I know I would be very bad at it, and deserve my head cut off (metaphorically speaking). Such was the case with the French aristocracy, who were so detached from their subjects that they ended up detached from their own torsos. Indeed, this was a sulutary lesson to the British royals in the late 18th century, to the extent that it eventually produced Queen Victoria.

During her reign she saw the world's biggest modern empire develop, creating advancements in science, industry, parliamentary government and accountability. William is a direct decendent of Victoria, and I suspect he will make a great king one day.

The British don't have much of a history in the Philippines. England briefly ruled the place after beating the Spanish in 1762.  They sailed up the Pasig River and raised their flag over Fort Santiago, but under the Treaty of Paris two years later, George III gave it back to Spain in exchange for some of their dominions in the Americas (readers can visit my short and concise history of the Philippines here).

Things could have turned out very different for the Philippines if the Spanish were evicted root and branch, but it wasn't to be. The Country's name would certainly have changed. The English would not have continued to call it after a Spanish king.

The Spanish cultural influences would have disappeared, after all, their position at the time was fragile, and it was only afterwards that they really dominated and influenced the islands.

To take the hypothetical long view, there would have been no Spanish-Filipino war, nor even a Filipino-American war, but it's still likely that Great Britain would have lost the Philippines to the Japanese in 1941, just as the Americans actually did.

As for how the transition of power would have panned out after WWII is anyone's guess. The Union Jack would have lowered, and just maybe the British colonial system of parliamentary government would have remained, and the Philippines could now be part of a relatively stable, fair and prosperous Commonwealth.

Historians love hindsight, because it's a nine letter word which means what if? If history has a purpose, it is the power to envisage the future, and we ignore such lessons at our peril.

So I hope the Filipinos enjoy watching Wills and Kate walking up the aisle of Westminster Abbey. And whilst they join us all in the celebration, whether we be cavaliers or roundheads, I wonder if they will also be asking what if?

April 19, 2011 Posted by | Culture, Current Affairs, Education, Events, History, London, Politics, The Philippines, Travel, United Kingdom | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Mothers Day and the British Empire…..

Different countries celebrate Mothers Day at different times.

In the USA and Canada it is decreed to fall on the second Sunday in May, which will always be between the 8th and 14th. Mothersdayimages This has been adopted by many other nations, but just as many follow the British example on the fourth Sunday in Lent. This means that it is much more variable, and is subject to when Easter falls.

Therefore in Britain it always occurs three weeks before Easter Sunday – hence it's official title of Mothering Sunday.

As Easter depends on the lunar cycle, Mothers Day in the UK can fall on any Sunday between March 1st to April 4th. This year – 2011 – the UK and some Commonwealth countries celebrate it on April 3rd, whilst the US and 53 other countries  will hold it on May 8th.

It's commonly accepted that Mothers Day in the US was instigated by Anna Jarvis, but Mothering Sunday in the UK had more religious connotations and can be traced back to Roman times. It became more religious over time with Catholic influences, but its significance diminished when Henry VIII decided to create the Church of England. But that's another story.

The rejuvenation of Mothers Day in the UK can be accredited to American and Canadian soldiers when they came over to prepare for D-Day in WWII. They were keen to observe the date, and naturally being so far from their  parents they were eager to send messages, gifts and cards back home. This rubbed off on the British and it gained a greater significance on the calendar.

It could be argued that the British Tommy was less sentimental and more accustomed to overseas deployment. They didn't wear their hearts on their sleeves.

Nevertheless, records of love, pain and hope were a common thread with soldiers in the First World War, but they were always tempered with reserve. It wasn't British to show emotion.

The stiff upper lip was part of the armoury. In 1944 things changed, and the sudden invasion of thousands of US soldiers clearly impacted significantly on the British psyche, and those chaps brought many traditions with them. Tommy

They were a shot in the arm for a nation which had been struggling proudly in adversity. It was an eye-opener which galvanised a proud people more akin to reverence of class and privilege.

Consider that a great empire, which forged the industrial revolution, ruled the waves and possessed more military might than any before, built their people on duty and discipline, had within 30 years fought and won two 20th century world wars, built schools, educated their subjects and provided a national health service. They abolished slavery, and spread the gospel. Not of religion like the Spanish, but of democracy, parliamentary government, laws and freedom.

No other empire did that. Nor did any before or since experience total war. Total war where Hitler,Stalin, Mussolini and the omnipotent emperor of Japan came together to create the "perfect war". The Romans ruled for hundreds of years, but they were never to encounter modern industrial warfare on such a global scale.

The world was lucky that Great Britain was around at the time.

It was a culture shock for the Yanks to visit the UK,  but remember that we had been fighting the Nazi's for two years prior – the British psyche was one of resilience, resolve and stamina.

Our pals from across the sea were a breath of fresh air and hope. They even had a supply of nylon stockings for the girls. They brought Hollywood and Camel filters for the masses.

So thanks for that you Yanks! Gigirl

The Mothers Day we celebrate today is far removed from that of our ancestors. Yes it is very commercialised. Yes we have adopted the Americanisation of a religious and historical event.  But like many traditions in the world today, they were given fuel and velocity by the Victorians. They took tradition, developed it, tailored it to suit the times, and used it for their advantage. The Americans did the same likewise.

The fact that Mothers Day is a commercial event on the calendar, just like Valentines Day which is second only to Christmas for capitalist entrepreneurship, should not be frowned upon. The original message may be lost, but It ensures the survival of the English language, it represents continuity and metamorphism.

A language or country which cannot evolve and adapt will die. We may not like the commercialisation and exploitation of events, but it keeps cultures alive.

It's not a pretty sight, and it's tantamount to globalisation. Dreamers will believe there is an alternative. It's been tried with communism, fascism, and feudalism. Democracy isn't perfect, and it doesn't suit everyone, but it does give freedom of speech.

So when, or if, you buy your mother a card, or indeed are fortunate to have a mother alive to honour, consider the history, and consider that this very simple act is merely a reflection on your progress in an ever changing and devoloping world.

 

March 23, 2011 Posted by | Culture, Current Affairs, Education, Events, History, Religion, Science, United Kingdom | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

%d bloggers like this: