Darfur - the unreported war

I last wrote about the Darfur war in April 2006 and in a way that makes me as guilty as the media in under reporting such horrific killings and crimes against humanity.

Today prosecutors at the International Criminal Court have named war crime suspects.

In the BBC article there is also an update on the estimated stark statistics of the war so far, in the last four years there have been

• 200,000 dead
• 2 million forced to flee their homes

The two suspects are, Minister Ahmed Haroun (Sudan Humanitarian Affairs minister) and Muhammad Ali Abd al-Rahman (janjaweed militia), they are accused of 51 crimes including mass murder, rape and torture.

"The Sudanese Armed Forces and Militia/Janjaweed did not target any rebel presence within these particular villages. Rather, they attacked these villages based on the rationale that the tens of thousands of civilian residents in and near these villages were supporters of the rebel forces. This strategy became the justification for the mass murder, summary execution, and mass rape of civilians who were known not to be participants in any armed conflict. Application of the strategy also called for, and achieved, the forced displacement of entire villages and communities."

Situation in Darfur, the Sudan
Prosecutor’s Application under Article 58(7)
Summary

The Sudanese government in response to this report has stated that they do not recognise the jurisdiction of the ICC. They insist there was no link between the minister and the militia and that the militia leader is already under detention.

The ICC will now consider the report and decide whether to instigate an inquiry which could lead to international arrest warrants being issued.

The reason this is an under reported war is because the media has limited or no access, large areas of Sudan are off limits to the press and most aid agencies. On the BBC news pages you will see limited pictures and even for this ICC report limited investigative efforts could be made within Sudan because of security concerns.

It is still clear that action needs to be taken, words can only get you so far.

The ICC is a court of last resort when a national government cannot or will not prosecute offenders. If the decision is taken to issue arrest warrants then I hope the international community will finally take positive action.

I will finish with a quote, often attributed to Edmund Burke although no confirmed source exists.

Evil flourishes when good men do nothing.

All new radiation sign

The New Scientist magazine tells us about the release of a new radiation warning symbol to compliment the existing yellow one. This is more of the stop, and run variety rather than the cryptic clue in yellow.



Its a good idea as with the yellow one unless you were in the know wasn't exactly the most obvious warning in the world, although nothing that bright yellow could possibly be good news.

However, the new one is a bit busy which kind of lead to this comedy sketch (usual disclaimer this is amusing to me probably not to anyone else on planet earth, although I do hear it has them rolling in the aisles in zephyr world 3 in the funny bone constellation)

Dim Wit 1: Oh look its one of those picture signs, don't tell me what it is, let me try and work it out. Ok so red, probably, warning or danger. OK so that thing on top must be the sun, that skull and crossbones must mean pirates. Hmm why is the man running on a hot day away from pirates.
(Dim wit thinks hard)

Shadowy figure: Erm excuse me have you got the time.

Dim wit 1: I've almost got it ... sorry about two minutes after 5.

Shadowy figure: Oh damn late again, still in your case I could be an hour late and you still wouldn't get it.

Dim wit 1: That's where your wrong, I've got it now.

Shadowy figure: I think you will find you haven't.

Dim wit 1: No look its obvious its a warning sign about the pirate fun run on a hot day, to make sure you slap on the sub block.

Shadowy figure: I think not.

Dim wit 1: Well prove me wrong.

Shadowy figure: Its a radiation warning sign, run or die.

Dim Wit 1: Well that cant be right I'm still alive.

(Shadowy figure reveals himself as death complete with scythe.)

Death: Are you sure about that one?

Dim Wit 1: Bugger.

The other thing this new sign reminded me of was how to warn future generations about nuclear waste buried deep underground. After all we don't want them to just dig it up when it will kill them all.

The US government has some fascinating ideas about big and small monuments all based around the radiation symbol with lots of different language warnings as well. A kind of modern day Stonehenge. Which kind of makes me wonder given that we are not completely certain what Stonehenge is for, will future generations have any real idea about nuclear waste storage.

On the upside it will make a great future tourist attraction, visit nuclear henge where even the ground gives you warm feelings of the past.

One possible outcome is that the legend turns into a ghost story of the site being protected by ancient spirits and anyone that digs there will die. Whatever happens in the future you can bet that no one will be saying "Don't dig there, its a Nuclear waste depository, you will die from radiation poisoning".

Nothing is certain except that the radiation will kill you whatever sign you use.

Warning Sign Images and further details from IAEE

Super-volcanos

There was on the BBC a series of programmes about super volcano's including a thrilling two part drama and a horizon documentary. The drama was based on the facts and went through what could happen before, during and after a super volcano eruption.

This is one of those events in nature that has the potential to really mess up the planet and really disrupt civilisation. The thing is it could happen tomorrow or it could happen in a million years. In that sense it is joins the other events we know about that could give everyone on planet Earth the feeling that Mondays are not really that bad after all.

The last super eruption occurred 74,000 years ago and scientists believe they happen on average ever 50,000 years which would suggest one is overdue.

There are 40 super volcanoes around the world including two in the UK but no need to panic just yet, they like many others burnt out long ago.

Yellowstone (Wyoming, US) is a dormant super volcano and again according to the statistics it seems overdue for an eruption which is where the drama takes over, Yellowstone erupts.

The facts of a super eruption at Yellowstone are incredible, 90% of the population within 1000 km would die mostly from ash which when inhaled into the lungs turns into a cement like mixture. This ash would affect almost the entire continental United States and would even have some effect in Europe. Ash would pollute water supplies, disrupt transport, disrupt electricity and reduce sunlight.

The ash and Sulphur gases released from a super eruption would cool the planet worldwide, temperatures could drop by up to 10 degrees Celsius and that effect could last for up to ten years.

Of course if you live in the US you wont be worrying about global temperature decreases, you will probably be fighting for survival. The authorities will be quickly overwhelmed and civilisation break down will be widespread.

In the drama there is a quick realisation that millions will die because the authorities cant get in there to save them in time. The solution the hero scientist comes up with is that the survivors must start walking and the authorities will drop food packs and head out to meet them.

The drama made good viewing and the scenario outlined was scary, however be reassured that such an event in our lifetimes is extremely remote.

Reality Check: No idealists here?

Is hate a stronger emotion than love?

Yes.

Everyone wants to believe in their heart that love can conquer all and that love will win out in the end but if I wrote that article arguing for love, I fear I would be ignoring the reality of the world in which we as humans live.

So this is the reality check that doesn't wax lyrical about how love is great and all conquering but considers both sides of the coin.

In considering the world in which we live I have considered which emotion has the largest, longer lasting effect not on the individual but on humanity as a whole. This is what I have defined as the strength of the emotion.

Hate will consume an individual, group or nations and will last for generations until people can no longer remember the original reason for hating but will continue to do so because it is easier than to try to understand.

We hate people for all kinds of reasons including those originally borne out of love. Love can turn to hate which can lead to death and destruction. How many times have you seen on the news stories about jealous lovers going on killing sprees.

Hate has lead to war, genocide, racism and ethnic cleansing, it has divided families, countries and the world. The acts of terrorism by small groups fuelled by hate have changed the world for ever as the effects of such atrocious acts ripple around the world changing society beyond all recognition.

Love can change an individuals life but can only last as long as they live. Love is an individual selfless act where as hate is almost always a selfish act. It is this that gives hate its strength, it requires less energy and is all about what you as an individual want.

I want love to be the stronger emotion and on an individual level it can be, we can all learn to love rather than hate but love needs to work twice as hard to overcome hate.

In arguing that hate is stronger I recognise the sadness of that argument, humanity who has the power and ability to create such beauty turns so easily to hate to cause so much destruction. We all need the dreamers in the world who state that love is stronger because we should all strive for that ideal in order to make a better world for everyone.

Kudos David Miliband, Cristina Narbona and Janez Podobnik

Just one day after I write that the UK government needs to do more to meet renewables targets, three environment ministers, including the UK, state that Europe needs to do more and aim for a 30% cut in emissions, rather than the 20% current target, by 2020.

"A bold energy and climate strategy should be underpinned by an ambitious target on greenhouse gases, and supported by challenging goals for increasing the development and deployment of renewables and other forms of low-carbon generation and energy efficiency."

"The window of opportunity is closing rapidly and a strong EU voice is necessary to provide the catalyst for UN discussions on taking effective action to cut emissions."


David Miliband - Environment Secretary, UK
Cristina Narbona - Environment Minister, Spain
Janez Podobnik - Environment Minister, Slovenia

Well done to all three of you for taking a stand and outlining where Europe should be heading.

Renewables: UK Wind Energy

The UK on February 9th 2007 passed the 2 GW mark for generating electricity from wind energy. For those who like comparisons 2GW is enough electricity to power 20 million 100w light bulbs or enough electricity to light up 16,667 Eiffel Tower's [1]. or 1,250,000 homes [2] or replace two coal powered power stations [2].

Government targets for renewables is 10% by 2010 and 20% by 2020. It would be fair to say that the bulk of this will come from wind energy. Our current achievement to target is a poor 4.2% from all green sources.

I don't know what the odds of reaching our target by 2010 are but I think they are probably slim. However, given the forecasted exponential growth of the industry the 2020 target remains realistic.

The reason the BBC article and the target achievement caught my eye was first it was a celebration of a milestone reached but also a chance to reflect on how far we still have to go.

In the article it ranks the greatest renewable energy producers of the world, the UK is eighth. Considering we are a member of the G6 group of countries how exactly did we get to be eighth. We are even behind the USA the oil addicted country, OK so maybe a bit of an unfair comparison the US has a land mass the size of a continent, the UK is a small island.

There are other countries we should be ahead of Italy, Denmark, Spain, Germany.

On the subject of Germany it has long been known that they are leading the field in renewables electricity generation. They have supported solar panels and there is a much greater market penetration in the domestic sector of green technologies.

In the UK the planning system is part of the problem in nearly every case wind farms are having to go to a public enquiry which can take up to 16 months. Now it is important to take into account all opinions and concerns as part of the democratic process but 16 months is too long, nothing takes that long to make a decision. There should be a statutory maximum of 6 months and the government should start intervening and if necessary penalise planning authorities that are dragging their heels.

There are currently 7,940 MW of onshore wind power held up in the UK planning system. Not all of these will go ahead because of reasonable objections by the public, but these decision need to be made quicker so the industry can advance. Only a quarter of these planning applications need to be approved to help meet the 2010 renewables target but they need to be approved by the end of this year.

In order to reach our renewables targets the governments really needs to start to take some positive steps. I would like to see all groups come together to find some simple plans which the government can do to prime the pump and allow renewables to grow.

I believe that this is a green technology revolution and that the countries that get in on the ground floor will reap the economic rewards. Germany has already reaped the rewards isn't it time the UK gets involved before it is too late.

UK wind statistics from the British Wind Energy Association

Are computer games a waste of time?

Playing computer games are just another form of recreation. No better or worse than any other.

Why participate in any form of recreational activity?

To relax, to switch off, to join in with other like minded people and to have fun.

Gaming fulfils every one of those criteria especially if you play in a group such as in games like World of Warcraft where you play in a virtually society or in one of the military shooters such as Battlefield 2 or Call of Duty where you can play in a clan. In a clan or team it even becomes a team sport with strategies, playing to the individual and teams strengths and weaknesses.

Online gaming expands your virtual social networks, you make friends, find that you can share in other areas of interest and expertise. There are even instant messenger programs like Xfire to keep in touch with gaming friends. When I was looking to upgrade my computer I was able to turn to my clan mates for good advice and tips all because of playing games.

For young people or for socially awkward people it can be an ice breaker and help them feel part of a group. Often shy people who would find it difficult to relate to people face to face participate in gaming social environments and you would not even know they were shy in real life. The detachment and gaming environment allows people to be who they really want to be without worrying about what other people think.

Computer games also improve hand eye / co-ordination and reaction times in a similar way to other sports such as tennis.

Yes, computer games can be violent but so can sports and provided we regulate and treat games in the same way as sports there should be no problems.

Yes, computer games can be addictive and possibly cause psychological problems but again so can some sports. No one is calling them a waste of time and calling for them to be banned.

Different people like different things, there are large numbers of us that play computer games, there are large numbers of people that play golf. If you don't play one of them you might thing them a waste of time but they are not, different games for different people.

So although it may seem like computer games are a waste of time, in reality its all media hype and provided as with all things they are played in moderation they are a perfectly normal way to have fun and relax.

Democracy - Mono-ocracy, small-group-ocracy and major-ocracy

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, its the only thing that ever has."

- Margaret Mead

This quote runs counter to the ideas of democracy defined as the will of the majority which by definition is a large group.

Perhaps Democracy can include both ideas, being a multi-faceted organism consisting of different power groups both large and small.

I have subdivided democracy into three different groups based on size:

Mono-ocracy

This is the power of the individual to influence the political process.

There are three types of power utilised by individuals, some people only use one type while others use a mixture:

• Charisma: Individuals use their personality to persuade people to their way of thinking. This is generally used by the celebrity type, who have no professional influence but popular support.
• Resource: Individuals use resources such as money as a grease to support their way of thinking. This may be by indirect or direct influence. Direct influence includes payments for politicians or funding programmes in keeping with their ideals. Indirect would be supporting trusts, charities or research groups who share the same general ideals.
  
• Professional: Individuals use there professional status to influence the debate as a recognised expert in the field. An example would be judges or police chief constables talking to the media about the criminal justice system.

The power of the individual is not always obvious and influence can easily be hidden from the general public. However, by in large no one individual in the UK has an unfair or unethical influence on the political process. In a sense there is no shadowy Mr Big.

Small-group-ocracy

This is the political influence that Mary Mead talks about, small groups of committed individuals influence the political agenda.

These groups can be the protesters or single issue pressure groups. Whether it is immigration, the local hospital or hunting with hounds these groups push an issue and try to get majority support to force a change.

Interestingly enough the change may not be in accordance with the view of the majority. In single issue pressure groups only one side turns up to the debate, there is no count of the yes and the no votes only of one side only. So what seems like a majority may in fact be a minority.

There are exceptions, in Oxford (UK) the university is building an animal testing lab. At the start there was an anti-lab protest group but then a pro-lab protest group was set up. At times it can be difficult to see who is winning the debate.

Another exception is the hunting with hounds lobbies, the anti-hunting lobby influenced the political process and got a law outlawing hunting with hounds. Now the law is in, the hunting lobby has significant support and there is the possibility of the law being repealed.

In a sense the majority may be changing sides / being indecisive or there are two small groups equally influencing the debate but the side in opposition, being the under dogs, are always winning.

There are other small groups in society, the media barons wield power to influence the political debate. The editors of newspapers or television news shows can swing the vote on general election day my merely changing a headline. One group wielding so much power and so many votes.

Major-ocracy

This is the rest of the population, "the others". The majority are the followers they vote the way the individuals and small groups tell them. Perhaps they are locked in a "group think" situation where they vote as everyone else does or they may be individuals who share society norms and beliefs.

They the majority listen to what the media and individuals lead them to believe. They bring strength of numbers and validation to the political debate and are therefore charmed by both the individuals and small groups.

In some senses the majority are lead by the minority.

Democracy

Democracy is not the will of the majority but the will of the minority which has been adopted by the majority.

This is where democracy has its blemishes:

• Everything would be fine if the minority could be trusted to be altruistic and honest but as humans do, they have their own agenda's which may not be in the best interests of the majority.
• The majority can be persuaded to give its vote to the loudest shouting group or the one with the best PR. This is how cigarette companies managed to persuade us that cigarettes were not really harmful for so long.
• The majority do not always turn up to participate, there is wide spread apathy towards some issues allowing the groups that care about an issue to swing the debate. The best example is a general election. In 2005 ( BBC election results) the voter turnout was 61.3% of which only 35.3% supported the winning party, making only 22% of the total electorate voting for that party. So in reality a significant minority elected the government yet that minority has now set the political agenda for the next five years.
  

All of these examples could lead us to believe that the majority may not exist or is certainly not represented in today's political environment.

Conclusion

Democracy cannot be said to be the simple will of the majority but instead can be defined as the freedom of individuals and small groups to influence the political process.

The majority currently takes no part in democracy. Today's majority view is simply a larger version of the small group.

About being different

Renewables: Storing Wind Energy

Reference: Thwaites, Tim (2007)A Bank for the Wind. New Scientist,193 (2586)13 January 2007 pp39-41.

(The link above only leads to a preview of the full article but if you are a New scientist subscriber or have other access you can view the full text.)

One of the problems with renewable energy is the fluctuations in energy production. With wind energy on a strong day it can produce too much energy and on a poor day too little. So in reserve you have to have non-renewable energy sources such as oil fired stations always available at a flip of a switch. Without being able to store energy you can never just rely on wind energy.

King Island which sits between Australia and Tasmania has a storage system in place.

King Island is a small self contained electrical system. It has a number of wind turbines backed up by diesel generators with no main grid access.

In 2003 the local utility company installed Vanadium flow batteries. The new installation halved the quantity of fuel burnt in the diesel generators and reduced carbon dioxide emissions by 2000 tons per year.

Normal batteries are self contained units but with flow batteries, chemicals cross the interface. Think of Vanadium as an electron storing chemical push it through the battery to store electricity pull it back to release the electricity (For a more technical description try the article or google).

One of the most obvious applications for grid connected wind farms is that Vanadium batteries could be used to guarantee a minimum supply rate, Therefore removing the need for a back up power supply which is often one of the main arguments against renewable energy sources. In fact VRB Power Systems has a contract to construct a 12-mega-watt-hour Vanadium battery at the Sorne Hill wind farm in Donegal, Ireland. Not only will they be able to offer a guaranteed supply of energy but they can sell stored energy at peak times for higher prices.

Or for a blue sky idea how about a new housing estate with a couple of wind turbines, solar panels and a Vanadium battery unit. It would have the potential to be a self contained distributed power grid.

Vanadium as an electron source may have other uses too, as an easily transportable electron source it could be used to power cars. Will we soon start to see petrol stations with a wind turbine attached?

Dickin Medals

Dickin Medals are the equivalent of a Victory Cross for animals.

Sadie, a Labrador has been awarded the medal for her work in Afghanistan in 2005.

Sadie won it for saving the lives of hundreds of soldiers and civilians by finding a bobby trapped bomb in a pressure cooker which was hidden behind a 2ft thick wall.

The Dickin Medal was created by the PDSA's founder Maria Dicken CBE and the PDSA has a web page on the history of the Dickin medal.

The medal was originally created to reward animals for bravery and devotion to duty during world war 2. From that period the medal was awarded 54 times to 32 pigeons, 18 dogs, three horses and one cat.

On the PDSA website you can read all about the stories behind some of the medals awarded. All the stories are just as fascinating as Sadie's.

There has been some discussion over whether animals have the free will to choose to be brave or not or whether they are just following training. Can they truly go beyond the call of duty.

I have no doubt that dogs, horses and even cats have a sense of loyalty and devotion to their adopted families and friends. At some level they are able to weigh up threats and act appropriately to protect those families.

Where I have doubts is on the pigeons, can they really understand the consequences under which they carry messages. Can they realise the gravity of the situation and make every effort to carry a message back to their home base?

For me the answer has to be no, they follow their homing instinct and head home, they are unable to make any conscious effort to go faster. If they do, it is more by happy chance than judgement.

Snow Watch 2007 Update

Early on Thursday morning it started to snow, and by the time I got up in the morning the place was covered.

I only got the one photo just after 7 am. That is a picture of a road, even though the snow has completely filled between the pavements. If you look very closely you can just about see the lines of the pavement edge. I did try to take a few more pictures but the light level was too low and they came out all blurry.

I then had to catch my bus to work and crawled twelve miles taking a total of 3 hours where it normally takes 1 hour. Average speed 4 miles per hour.

On some of the back roads it was terrible even with careful driving the back of the bus would occasionally swing out.

Then we got stuck in a traffic jam and the snow fall picked up. I had visions of being trapped all day just like what happened to others in East Anglia a couple of year ago. Even the bus driver wanted to turn round but luckily the traffic suddenly cleared and we cruised down the roads.

Thursday night I got home and took a snow measurement. On the front lawn of the great house at 17:02 on Thursday 8/2/07, North Oxfordshire it was 12 cm deep. This was duly submitted to the Met office by the snow report link I gave earlier.

On Friday the snow was well on its way to melting and despite the Met office issuing a flash warning for more heavy snow nothing came of it.

As I write now on Saturday only the stumps of melted snowmen have survived and even they will soon be gone.

So that is the end of Snow Watch 2007 - Leg 2. Will there be a leg 3?

Snow Watch 2007 Update

The met office have now updated the Heavy snow severe weather warning running from 0100 to 1500 on Thursday 8th.

The same amounts of snow have been predicted but the probability of disruption in Oxfordshire has risen from 70% to 90%.

Another thing I wanted to mention is that the met office are asking you to report the depth of snow to them when it snows. The inner geek in me gives that idea two thumbs up. I shall be out in the snow with my ruler and sending in my report.

Met Office snow report link

Barometer reading currently 998 mB and falling slowly. No snow as yet.

Snow Watch 2007 Update

The met office have now issued a sever weather warning for pretty much all of England and Wales from 2300 7/2 to 1500 8/2 for Heavy Snow.

This is the first flash warning which will be updated tomorrow.

Accumulations of 2 -5 cm snow are expected widely in land. In some areas of the Midlands and Wales 10 - 15 cm.

This could cause severe disruption to the travel networks especially as it is expected to hit the south east during the rush hour.

For the Oxfordshire area it states there is a 70% risk of disruption (Note not just snow but disruption) from heavy snow.

The met office even tell you what to prepare for when they issue a severe weather warning. Of course this helpful advice is by in large ignored by the vast majority of the general public who try to go about their normal lives, all the roads block up and then they blame the government.

People should take responsibility for their own actions.Better to be prepared for the worst and be pleasantly surprised than be unprepared on your own and in trouble.

I will post a further update tomorrow based on the latest update from the met office.

Should prospective parents be able to determine their child’s gender?

A love to lead weekly discussion topic

No.

The beauty and intrinsic value of nature is in its random chance. To allow one set of parents to determine a child's gender is to start to define society along populist lines. Do we really want to create a fashion trend or a society where we can no longer celebrate our own individuality because we are all the same, predetermined at birth.

Can you imagine trend spotters on the news coming on saying this years must have baby is a boy with blue eyes and blonde hair. If we allow interference with natural selection of gender it will not stop at gender, it will be hair, height, mental abilities and other common variable.

It will become like a role playing computer games where you set up your characters starting characteristics such as charm and intelligence.

It will create armies of David Beckham's or Harry Potter's. Everyone will be the same just as today children have the same names, as they go in and out of fashion.

Children instead of a blessing will become a fashion accessory to show off to your friends.

The uniqueness that makes a person them can be based on their gender. Although there is equality of the sexes there will always be different ways of looking at things based on gender.

Take some historical figures, a female Einstein may well have been a great scientist in maybe a different field but they would not have been Einstein.

Take Margaret Thatcher, as a man he would have been a different leader with different views, would he have become the leader of the Tory party?

A person's opinions and actions are directly linked to their gender. This can both be a strength and a weakness for both genders, but just as twins can be exactly the same they will have different lives and personalities.

As well as the sociological factors there are also the scientific factors. Gender selection in the womb can be determined by changes in the external environment. As such should we really interfere, could we be putting our children at risk by deciding that we know better than nature?

In Summary

A child gender should not and can not be decided in the same way as we would choose a child's name.

To allow such selection would open up Pandora's box of children becoming the latest fashion accessory.

There are sometimes reasons why nature chooses one sex over the other, should we really interfere?

Snow Watch 2007 Update

Well we are three days out from the predicted snowfall. The BBC weather service for Oxford says snow on Thursday / Friday and the met office (virtually the same data) says light snow for Banbury, N. Oxfordshire on Thursday / Friday.

No early warning of severe weather and although I looked at the pressure charts on the met office website it is very difficult to tell what is actually going on.

Current barometer reading 1014 mB falling.

This could mean snow earlier rather than later as the barometer is dropping through the change area towards rain (snow in this case)

Still too early to say what will happen, watch this space.

The Articles of War - 1749

If you read any of Patrick O'Brien or Dudley Pope's book or indeed any other book about the Royal Navy in Nelson's time you will come across the articles of war.

These in a sense were the ten commandments of the day, read out in the same reverence as a sermon. To some seamen they were the closest thing to a naval prayer and although probably not known by heart were as familiar as the bible's ten commandments.

The way the sentence of death follows several crimes is like a full stop or "Amen" after a prayer.

A seaman's life was harsh and punishment was often cruel and swift. The Captain of a ship was a virtual dictator, a giver and taker of reward and punishment. The Captain was always right by virtue of the articles of war even if questionably sane.

The questioning of command was to face a court martial which could result in your death especially if the Captain had friends in high places.

The articles of war were essentially to keep the lower ranks of often pressed men ( men grabbed by the navy from on shore or from merchant ships) who were often rebellious and un-compliant under control.

It was not a fair or just system but one which was believed to be necessary to counter the threat from the European navies of the era.

The articles of war were the basis of power in the navy. It regimented discipline in an at times unruly mob.

However even these harsh threats with many actions resulting in death did not prevent widespread break downs in discipline. Entire fleets mutinied at Nore and Spithead as well as other mutinies in individual ships. Leaders and other participants were often hung as a result in accordance with the articles of war.

The authors lead us to believe that good Captains barely resorted to the punishment set out in the articles. These Captains maintain discipline as good military commanders do, by giving firm leadership, inspiring loyalty and when offences were committed dealing with offenders fairly and leniently if appropriate.

The bad captains used the articles as a crutch pouncing on any small infraction and punishing the offenders swiftly and severely, these captain were weak leaders who ruled by fear and threat of punishment.

The articles of war could never be described as a pleasant rule book and lives depended on senior officers interpretation of the articles.

It comes down to whether the ends justify the means. Our forces by in large withstood attacks from Europe but sailors suffered grievously under the articles of war disciplinary regime.

As always there is a balance to be maintained between the eventual outcome and the immediate rights of the individual.

Audio File - Article 12

How Technology Moves On

(Hopefully the link works sometimes New Scientist stuff is subscriber only)

From issue 2589 of New Scientist magazine, 03 February 2007, page 14
From The New Scientist, 7 February 1957.

New Scientist has a weekly column entitled 50 years ago this week. Well for this issue it goes back to an article from February 1957 talking about the upcoming developments in telephone calls. The article talks about systems which we now take for granted which were only then in the earliest of trial stages.

The first paragraph starkly outlines the difference between then and now:

The ideal telephone service, one supposes, would make it possible to pick up any telephone in the world, dial the number for any other telephone and, having been instantly connected, talk for as long as one liked

We achieved that and more, what would the original author thing of mobile phones, satellite phones, fibre optics and the interweb.

It then goes on to describe three developments that would make that ideal nearer:

1. Subscriber dialled trunk calls.

The first facilities by which a British subscriber can dial their own trunk calls - direct calls without the need to be directed via an operator between cities with different area codes are scheduled for 1959.

2. Automatic exchanges scheduled for 1961

3. radio telephone links for such remote places as Orkney.

The article concludes with two more stark examples of how far we have come.

But how will this affect the subscriber in the long term? With the introduction of trunk-dialling the current time-limited, three minute call will probably be abandoned and replaced by a system of charges based on time multiplied by distance.

There may even be a time in the foreseeable future when a flat rate for all UK telephone calls becomes a reality.

Where will the next fifty years take us? Judging on this small example it will be beyond our wildest imaginations.

Snow Watch 2007 - Leg 2

Snow Watch 2007 is back with the beginning of leg 2. As seen on the "Country File" weekly weather forecast. Snow is likely towards Wednesday / Thursday of this week.

This sudden return to winter cold follows on from the second warmest January on record. Yet another warm or dry weather record broken in recent years.

From Monday a cold weather high pressure system will take root over most of the UK. Then from Wednesday onward a mild weather low pressure system attacks from the western approaches.

This is a battle of the titans and where they clash snow is expected. This is very early on the game and even the met office are not sure what or where anything may happen.

It all depends on how strong the high pressure is, if the Atlantic lows keep breaking against it we can expect to see significant snowfall but if the lows force the high out it will be the usual cold damp rain.

The met office website is forecasting sleet on Wednesday followed by rain on Thursday. So it could be nothing or it could be snow.

More updates as ever to follow.

West Wing Quotes

I found the imdb quotes page for the West Wing by Aaron Sorkin. I should mention that the internet movie database which I would think most people have found by now is a fantastic encyclopaedic reference site for anything film or tv related.

Anyway here are a few of my favourite quotes:

[Charlie seeks and obtains the President's permission to date his daughter]
President Josiah Bartlet: Just remember these two things: she's nineteen years old, and the 82nd Airborne works for me.

Charlie is the young bagman to the president for those that have never caught the show.

[the President neglected a formality transferring executive power before going into surgery]
Margaret: Can I just say something for the future? *I* can sign the president's name. I've got his signature down pretty good.
Leo McGarry: You can sign the president's name?
Margaret: Yeah.
Leo McGarry: On a document removing him from power and giving it to someone else?
Margaret: Yeah. Or do you think the White House Counsel would say that's a bad idea?
Leo McGarry: I think the White House Counsel would say that's a Coup D'Etat.
Margaret: I'd probably end up doing some time for that.
Leo McGarry: I would think. And what the hell are you doing practicing the president's signature?
Margaret: It's just for fun.
Leo McGarry: We've got separation of powers, checks and balances, and Margaret, vetoing things and sending them back to the hill.

Leo McGarry is Chief of Staff and Margaret is his secretary.

Sam Seaborn: Toby, do you really think it's a good idea to invite people to dinner and then to tell them exactly what they're doing wrong with their lives?
Toby Ziegler: Absolutely, otherwise it's just a waste of food.

Sam and Toby are the speech writers

Mandy Hampton: You guys are idiots, did you know that?
C.J. Cregg: You know, in our defense, we actually did know that.

CJ Cregg is the fantastic Press Secretary, can't remember who Mandy Hampton was.

I could go on, as there literally are 100's of quotes on the page.

I have to say it is difficult to pick favourite characters from the show as they are all damn good actors but I would also like to give special mention to the character Donna Moss who is not mentioned here, I could fall in love very easily with a girl like her.

Current Affairs

I do think about writing about current news items, the reason I often don't is because other people express opinions better.

Take the recent prison story of all the UK prisons being full up.

There are no great answers and it is a very complicated situation trying to balance suitable punishment with effective rehabilitation.

If the prisons are full then I am sorry Mr Reid you have to build more prisons not release prisoners early or send memo's tell judge's who are trying to keep Britain safe not to send people to jail.

Of course the media loved this story, they camped in courts waiting for a judge saying he was giving a lesser sentence because of a memo. Even better if it was someone like a persistent violent offender or a sex offender.

Sadly if you read some of the blogs like the most excellent Inspector Gadget you will see that there is a lot wrong with the criminal justice system and lenient sentencing was rife even before this latest furore. The only difference is that this time the media could try to force a politician to resign.

Mr Reid is proving to be a bit of a Teflon minister (Teflinister or Teflonitician), however much criticism the media throws at him none of it seems to stick. Perhaps he would even make a suitable prime minister, a steady hand at the wheel.

Anyway back to prisons, I worried about the figure of 80,000 prisoners after all it is a prison population three times the size of my town. In reality it equates to less than 0.002% of the UK population, however again the prison population doesn't represent the number of people that should actually be in prison.

On rehabilitation I have mixed feelings, at least if people are locked up they are not out on the street. On the other hand they will be at some point and rehabilitation is the only chance of breaking the cycle of crime and reducing itin the long term.

On rehabilitation I would say that there are a lot of very dedicated professionals who work for little or know pay making a difference to people's lives. In many instances they save lives.

You could consider military service as a suitable intervention, a lot of troublesome teens have joined up, get straightened out and on leaving go on to better things. Perhaps military service could be an alternative to prison sentences.

After any length of thought you can only come to the conclusion that being locked up can only ever be a short term solution or for the most serious of cases. There must be another solution and one that is not a media led knee jerk reaction.

This is why I don't often write about current affairs, there are no easy answers, no solutions that haven't already been tried and far, far greater minds with greater ideas.