UNIFORM

A couple of tough cowboys
I'm the one on the left!

This week in the German press I read an article about a Lufthansa pilot that had taken Lufthansa to court as he felt himself discriminated against for being made to wear a hat as part of his uniform. Female pilots I gather are not required to! Unless you have worn a uniform seriously as part of your profession I do not suppose you have thought too much about this matter. What is the purpose of the uniform anyway?

In my life I have worn many different types of uniform, from dressing up as a child to a number of Service uniforms and recently to  what I can best describe as a form of corporate dress. To my mind uniform is worn to help identify the individual as part  of the Armed Service, or police or of the corporation in which that individuals is serving. It gives the individual a sense of belonging and fosters "Esprit de Corps". Additionally within the organisation it helps identify the individuals tasks or rank within the organisation to those within it and to those outside it. 

A rather proud Bus Conductor aged 4!

Most people who wear the uniform, particularly those of the police and armed services, do so with pride and rightly so. I even wore my school uniform with a certain amount of pride.

Me as a 1957 schoolboy.

Another uniform I wore with pride was my Cub Scout uniform and that of the Air Training Corps when I was a teenager.

Me as a Sixer Standard Bearer on a St George's Day Church Parade

A proud Cub Scout (not me, but a little boy I used to know) in Osnabrück, Germany

Me as a Butcher's boy in Germany 1958

Me, an Air Training Corps Marksman 1959

My father 1946

A very young looking me as a newly commissioned officer 1968

A Corps Head Quarters Reconnaissance Officer 1984

A smart young major 1990

Why would a Lufthansa pilot not want to wear his full uniform? Would he rather fly his A380 wearing jeans and a t-shirt? Would we have faith in his ability if he were allowed to? The uniform does not make the man, but the training does and the uniform is outside evidence that the pilot has a certain ability. If thanks to his training he cannot wear the uniform with pride, in my humble opinion he should not be a Lufthansa pilot. The court ruled in his favour and so I wonder what Lufthansa will do now . Tell female pilots they must wear hats, or be weak and let it be a voluntary thing?

Also a uniform. The choir of St George's Church, Bielefeld 1990

The bear is mine and is called Benedict.

An RYA Yachtmaster delivering the yacht RAGNA R across the North Sea to London

Me as a Volunteer at the International Football match between Germany and Australia.

I can't say I wore the rather bright yellow and black outfit as a volunteer for the German Football Association with pride. In fact I felt a bit foolish, but I did have a sense of belonging to a larger team and could easily be identified as someone who was there to help the fans have an enjoyable time. So this rather odd informal style of uniform fulfilled its purpose. 

When I was a Trooper in the 10th Royal Hussars, I used to hitch-hike home from Catterick in the North of England to my home in Aldershot a distance of some 500 miles. I did so wearing my best No 2 Dress, or parade uniform. I always got lifts quickly and often people would go out of their way to help me get home. I wore my hat at all times as it was part of the uniform.

We British when we serve, wear our uniform with pride. In Germany they used to too, until Mr Hitler spoiled it for them. Now they tend to be ashamed to be identified with any form of uniform. The hat is part of the uniform, and should be worn. If I were Lufthansa I'd sack the pilot, for I would not want a pilot in my organisation that was ashamed of wearing my uniform.

Burning Books!

Burning a book in public is a symbolic act by small minded, ignorant, intolerant, bigots. If we look at the history of such events it has happened since time began, with perhaps the first recorded example taking place in China around the 3rd Century BC. Sometimes there are far reaching circumstances from the act, like the Spanish Conquistadors burning the Mayan libraries, thus leaving us now very little written knowledge of this ancient civilisation. At other times they may serve as a warning of worse things to come, such as the NAZI book burning in the 1930s and 1940s. The Bible too, has been burnt on occasions and then by Catholics, Tyndale's  English translation of the New Testament was burned in 1526 as was the Luther translation in Germany in 1624. 

Fahrenheit 451 as you may know, is a novel about the future where books are banned and burnt as they may contain critical thought. The Pastor and his tiny congregation that arranged the burning of the Quran in Florida would fit  well into this sad future. Not only have these Occidentals demonstrated their ignorance of the true nature of the Quran,  but they have demonstrated their bigotry and ignorance of the Oriental mind. The Oriental will sadly not fully understand that the laws of America allow such freedom of expression, but instead will be quick to take offence.

When I transited the Suez canal I thoughtlessly offended my Egyptian Pilot. The incident in question occurred because I wished to stop and dive my boat as I thought I had something around the propeller. The Pilot required me to write out my request and to ensure I put the ship's stamp on the piece of paper. I did this and gave him the document. Later he required that I add another statement to the piece of paper and asked that I put the ship's stamp on it a second time!  Not quite under my breath I made the flippant remark, "Oh! You crazy Egyptians!" and though I did as he requested he heard what I had said and was ready to offer me physical harm as well as abandoning my transit of the canal for insulting him and his country! I was genuinely surprised by his violent and vociferous reaction. I virtually had to go down on my bended knee to offer my apology before he calmed down and we could proceed. 

How much more of an insult is it to a Muslim to burn his Quran? While learning Arabic in Cairo Hanna and I were invited to attend a meeting of intellectual middle class young Muslims who were studying the Quran. This was a great honour and we learnt much. During the meeting I had taken my copy of the Quran to follow the readings and discussions. When I no longer needed to follow the passages I closed the book and dropped it on the floor next to my chair. I was immediately chastised for not treating the Quran in a reverent manner. The Quran was a holy book and must be treated as such. Reading it on the toilet for example was not permitted. Any discussion on how come a bit of paper and cardboard could be Holy was pointless. It was the word of God and so must be treated accordingly. Little did they know that I used to read the Bible on the toilet!

Are we surprised therefore that Muslims in Afghanistan have demonstrated violently against the desecration of their Holy Book? I am not, but I do note that the major demonstrations were in Afghanistan and not in those Arab countries now trying to obtain free and fair elections. Here I feel they may have understood that the laws of America are designed to protect freedom of speech and the freedom of the individual in his pursuit of happiness, which is just what they have demonstrated for.   I do not think the Muslim will realise, however, how little has been made of the event in the Occidental press. The majority of the media do not want to give this bigot the publicity he seeks, and I applaud this attitude. But sadly as the deaths related to this event have shown it is not just a storm in a tea cup and alls of us must do what we can to plead for tolerance and understanding.

Motivation

What motivates you? I ask because I had cause to think about what motivated me recently. When I was younger and still serving in the Army I used to get up at the crack of dawn to run  5 kilometres every day except Saturday and Sunday. Now I am far too lazy and opt to do Tai Chi and Qi Gong in the comfort of my home, rather than pound the pavements in the cold and wet dawn. I have another excuse too, in that I have twice been operated on my damaged right knee and so have been advised against such masochistic activities. Cycling is OK, but I don't fancy it in the rain. 

What motivated me in those former times to get up out of a warm bed on a cold and frost morning? In the beginning the motivation was to pass the annual Battle fitness test and not to look a complete fool in front of the men I was required to lead. Later I discovered I was addicted to the adrenaline rush and other endorphins which I released by running strenuously regularly. 

Psychologists tell us there are two types of motivation. Intrinsic which comes from within and extrinsic which needless to say is external. My Army running was done for intrinsic reasons, but it also acted as an extrinsic reason for my men, on the basis, "if that old bastard can do it so can I"!

So what motivated me recently to act as a volunteer at an international football match? I found myself giving out flyers and free magazines to some of the 35,000 fans that came to watch Germany lose to Australia in my home town on Tuesday. It was a more or less mindless task and I had to wear an Adidas sports uniform in black and yellow. It made me look more like a Borussia Dortmund fan, which since they are top of the league maybe no bad thing. Additionally of course I was there to help the visiting fans find their way around the stadium, not that many needed such help. However, by being friendly and  enthusiastic we "volunteers" were to enhance the atmosphere  of the occasion, which I have to say did work, at least I felt it did.

I volunteered last year to be part of the FIFA U20 Women's World Cup because I wanted to help visitors enjoy their visit to Germany and help show them that Germany is a friendly country and a nice place to live. I wouldn't be here were it otherwise. I felt a need to do this as I had been given warm and friendly receptions in all the Third World Countries I had travelled to. But by volunteering I discovered that there was also enjoyment in being part of a large event. The volunteers themselves were great people and came from all walks of life. 

This then is why I found myself again standing around a football stadium in clothes I would not normally wish to wear. You get to watch football for free too. I'd like to have said a good international football game, but Germany did not play well. They played much like Borussia Mönchengladbach do at home. Lead 1:0 at half time then lose 1:2 at the close of play. Well the match was held in the Borussia stadium so what else could one expect. But it has not put me off volunteering, for my original motivation was never to see my team win, but to be part of something larger.

Environmental Pollution

Before I begin I must declare my self interest. I used to smoke! As a student I started smoking a pipe, because I wanted to be different and to stop my peers telling me I was a "party pooper" because I refused to smoke cigarettes. During my time as Editor of the College newspaper I once had to interview  the Rector, and when he said to me "Oh! You're the pipe smoker!" I knew my tactic had worked. However, I was always short of money for tobacco, but found it easier to cadge cigarettes off of the girls! So I came to smoking cigarettes as well. I was never truly addicted, for a couple of years later I just stopped, for a few years at least. Then when my mother sent me a pipe smoker's ash tray from New Zealand, I picked up my pipe again. Mainly for the image and not for much else, other than using it as a dummy substitute! I stupidly kept this up for 20 odd years until a girl friend asked me to grow a moustache. I soon discovered I had a certain stink under my nose from the tobacco smoke which I did not like so I stopped for good. I also shaved off the moustache, but that is another story. In 1989, after I had stopped, I had viral pneumonia and was hospitalised. Since then I have found I am allergic to all forms of tobacco smoke and ash. Now I am a rabid anti smoker.

Today as the sun was shining I took a walk through my town. People were out enjoying the sun.

But I was also aware of the rubbish left by the smoker. I could hardly walk three paces without coming across "fag ends," "dog ends" or cigarette butts as my America readers will know this type of litter. 

Germany prides itself at being an environmentally concious nation and a leader in environmental planning. Why then is it not possible for them to legislate against the smoker? The Federal Government has left it to the individual Lands to pass laws banning smoking in public places, yet no two Lands have managed to do it satisfactorily yet. These smokers not only pollute our atmosphere but litter the planet as well.

Smokers seem to have a perfect right to do as they please and throw their dog ends where they like.

Singapore is the only city I know in the world that has clean streets. You will not find chewing gum or fag ends littering their streets. So why can't we do it on ours. A shopping arcade is for me a public place, yet here in my town they seem to be allowed to smoke in them. This ash tray is situated in the middle of  one for example. 

Outside virtually every shop in the main shopping street, the Hindenburg Strasse you will find fag ends as customers are not allowed to smoke inside. The boundaries of Sinn Leffers are particularly bad.

Of course one can say that the wind plays its part in distributing this litter, which it does, but that is not an excuse I can accept for allowing smokers to drop their litter where they may. I found this quote on the web :

Considerate smokers don't litter. Those who do deserve criticism as much as any other litterer."
-- SmokingSection.Com (Militant Smoker's Rights Group)

Smokers will try and tell me that their fag ends are biodegradable! I am not sure this is true as the filter contains cellulose which is not so easily degradable and can take 12 years! That they can carry pocket ash trays has not occurred to them yet. Well I think it is time we brought it to everyone's attention that these things do exist.

To the residents of  my town I say it is time we put a stop to this pollution of our streets. If we can't do something as simple as this, how can we say we can control nuclear energy?

Revolution and Change in 2011

2011 would appear to be the year in which the world turned and changed. Well that is what I hoped, but now I am not so sure. It started with the Arab revolution in Tunisia. The thought that a peaceful revolution in Tunisia would lead to a domino effect throughout the Middle East was a heady thought indeed. We should remember that there is no Middle East Islamic country that has ever been a democracy at any time since history began. To be a democracy takes time. We took well over 400 years in Europe and had numerous wars as well as two World Wars in our process of evolution to a peaceful democracy. In the USA they had a very bloody civil war. The birth pangs of such evolution in Arabia is clearly evident now in Libya, Yemen, and Bahrain.  Egypt has gone to the polls to decide on changes to the constitution. I fear this may be too soon. I would prefer it for Egypt to wait before having full democratic party elections. They need time to establish proper political parties with full political programmes, or else there is no choice between the Muslim Brotherhood and yet another despot. In Libya it seems to me they are spiralling into a civil war the outcome of which is uncertain, despite the UN's rather late intervention and establishment of a no fly zone. Libya is different from Tunisia and Egypt in that their society is not a Facebook and Twitter society. Few in the country have access to the Internet so they have no real means of getting unbiased news. They are subject to  Gaddafi, propaganda, hence the pictures of pro Gaddafi demonstrations. I watch what now develops with baited breath.

The earthquake, tsunami and nuclear disaster in Japan was the other occasion when I thought the world would now change. Changes may come about, but as I listen to the various debates on the BBC I am not encouraged by it. If you have been following my rambling thoughts over these last few days you will be aware that I am becoming an anti nuclear energy supporter. However, I note with horror that Germany is building a nuclear reactor in an earthquake zone in Brazil and is heavily involved in  a controversial huge nuclear reactor, in Finland. 

The arguments used by the pro lobby is that Europe does not lie on a tectonic plate and the last tsunami to hit Britain was in the 17th century. Nuclear power is a safe and cheap way of producing large amounts of electricty. They need now only say, "it couldn't happen here!" 

For me these arguments are not the point any more. It is the human element in the nuclear reactor I fear most. Chernobyl was caused by human error. In Fukushima, I raise my hat to the men doing what they can and sacrificing  there own health to stop a melt down, but I worry about whether or not human error has not caused much of what we are now witnessing. These errors will occur again and then as we have seen they cannot be erased, or plastered over, they have repercussions. These repercussion last for thousands of years and reach  well beyond the pale.

I pray that in Europe at least we have a new peaceful anti nuclear revolution and that the common man is heard above the wealthy nuclear power lobby.

Nuclear MADness

In the light of the tragedy in the Fukushima nuclear power plant the European nations at least, are reconsidering the safety of their own nuclear reactors. I don't just think it is a "shutting the stable door" reaction, but rather they have all woken up to the fact that "Sod's Law" does exist, as I mentioned earlier and is relevant to safety planning. This can only be a good thing for all of us. 

Germany was going to be the first nation to get out  of nuclear power production, then they extended the life of their plants and now in the light of the catastrophe in Japan are shutting down 7 plants immediately and considering the position of all their other plants. It will be interesting to see at the end of the four months moratorium what the German government decides to do. Last night in my English conversation class I used Japan and nuclear power production as a main topic of conversation, but was surprised at how little they knew about the subject. Few could list the pro and cons of nuclear power yet generally they were against it all. I am gradually becoming  an anti nuclear energy person myself, but I have at least some knowledge of the subject. 

In the 60's when I was secretary of a student's union I took part in "Ban the Bomb" marches and still have my pin. Later I joined the army and was trained as a Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Warfare Officer! Now I knew more than most and learnt that NATO had a MAD strategy. MAD being Mutually Assured Destruction! What ever your views on the Bomb, and as crazy as it sounded, the strategy worked. Recently I read a novel by Nelson Demille, called "Wild Fire", which was about a similar MAD strategy, but this time directed at Islamic terrorists. The book said that the USA would set off nuclear bombs in many Muslim nations if any Islamic terrorist exploded a nuclear devise in the USA! A horrendous thought and thankfully it was a novel which ended happily. And yet...... it makes one think, just maybe that is why they have not done so yet, despite the fact that a number of nuclear devises have gone missing from the former Soviet Union.

Back to nuclear energy. What ever your own thoughts on the subject, I believe nations decide what level of risk they are prepared to take. We do this with the motor car for example. Last year in Germany 3,657 people died in traffic accidents. In the USA it was 33,808. We accept that deaths will occur on the roads. Just as we accept, or rather our governments do, that accidents and deaths may occur in nuclear reactors. Statisticians work out the risk factors and if they are low enough we accept them since the advantages can be greater.

 Japan has shown us all that my Sod's Law is at work and destroys all concept of statistically low risk factors.  Nothing in life is safe, but a nuclear accident is not like a traffic accident which can get cleared up in a day. A nuclear accident pollutes our planet for thousands of years to come. The time has come, "the walrus said" to stop this nuclear madness.

Spring is coming

Saving the Planet

Never say never! For most of my life in the army and later at sea sailing around around the world I lived by Sod's Law which says, "what can go wrong, will go wrong!" and planned accordingly. Why is it then that other planners around the world do not follow this rule. The Fukushima power station as far as I have found out was built to withstand an earthquake of 7 on the Richter scale. Actually they use a different scale called the PGA or Peak Ground Acceleration, but let's not get too technical. They did this on the basis that no earthquake of greater magnitude had yet occurred in the area. My Sod's Law says just wait it will. The actual earthquake measured almost 9 on the Richter scale.  I believe that the reactor has not itself been damaged by the quake, but rather that the earthquake brought about failures in other parts of the system. How come that there are not duplicate and triplicate redundant systems in power stations as in aircraft. If one system fails there is a back up. Someone will tell me I am sure, "but there are". So how come the backups failed too? We are back to Sod's Law for it also takes into consideration human error in planning and in operation. 

If you have read my "About Me" you will know I live in Germany. Here the Germans decided to give up their nuclear power stations by 2020. The first country to do so. Recently they discovered that their building of renewable resource power stations was not keeping up with the aim and that consequently they would need to prolong the use of the current atomic stations until 2032. This was not a popular move and now the problems in Japan have led the government to rethink the whole thing. Today Chancellor Merkel announced a moratorium of 3-4 months on the decision to prolong the use of nuclear power and that all nuclear power stations were to undergo a security review where there are to be no "taboos".

To help them with this review they might like to consider that Fukushima nuclear power station, which is one of the worlds 25 largest, was built in 1967, came into service in 1971 and was due to be taken out of service in early 2011. However, the Japanese authorities granted an extension of 10 years to this old power station. Now they are having problems! Is this because the systems are old? We can keep old cars running, but only as long as we still have original parts for it. When they run out the problems start to occur. Nuclear reactors cannot be very different. As the years go by old systems wear out and the new technology is not always compatible with the old. Yes it can be fudged and got round, but should we allow fudging with nuclear reactors?

The Germans have 17 nuclear reactors two of which were originally due to be taken out of service this year, notably Biblis A and Biblis B! I wonder if after this latest investigation they will not be taken out of service. I believe now they should be. The lessons of Japan teach us that if nothing else.

Open cast mining to feed the hungry power stations