Members' latest posts

Give an English equivalent if you can:

1.  Lege et lacrima
2.  Justitia omnibus
3.  Spectaculorum procedere debet
4.  Vincit omnia amor
5.  Carpe diem

Answers

Read it and weep, justice for all, the show must go on, love conquers all, seize the day

This is another exhibit from the V&A’s cast court collection.

This cast was acquired in exchange with the Belgian Royal Commission for Promoting the Reproduction of Works of Art in 1877.  The original is made of brass and was created before 1118 by Rainer of Huy.

The font is decorated with representations of St John the Baptist baptising the Publicans, a group of penitents, and Christ; St Peter baptising Cornelius; and St John the Evangelist baptizing Cato the philosopher. The oxen carrying the font are an analogy to the molten sea supported by oxen in the Temple of Jerusalem (I, Kings, vii. 23) and identified as symbols of the Twelve Apostles by Rupert of Deutz in his treatise De Trinitate written at Liège about 1117. Rupert of Deutz probably sketched out the iconography and symbolism of the font which was commissioned by Abbot Hellinus (1111-18), cast by Rainer of Huy for Notre Dame aux Fonts, and is now in the Church of Saint-Barthémy, Liège.

1. Constantly Furious finds another reason why we need a change of government.

2. Anna Raccoon learns that not everyone in Unite is united behind Labour.

3. Ranting Stan is annoyed that Simon Heffer wants his own cake and wants to eat it too.

4. Adam Collyer catches the BBC Economics Editor putting her foot in it.

5. Counting Cats informs us that Nadine Dorries is completely nucking futz.

All Saints church Cranham

Reading the newspaper coverage of the planned British Airways strike, you could be forgiven for thinking we were back in the 1970s with mad union leaders hell-bent on suicidal militancy. Even CEO Willie Walsh has accused the union Unite of cynically misleading the cabin crew. The image of politically motivated union leaders calling reluctant workers out on strike to further their own ends is a well-established stereotype but does it really stand up in 2010?

Although they complained bitterly about them at the time, Thatcher’s trade union reforms gave the unions a democratic legitimacy they had previously lacked. Their leaders now have to be elected and no-one can call a strike without a secret ballot. Leaders are, therefore, only militant if their members want them to be and they can only call people out if a majority want to strike. Sixty-four percent of the British Airways cabin crew, eighty-one percent of those who voted, backed the strike action. That’s a pretty clear majority. If that many staff really have been cynically misled by union leaders, BA must employ must employ more than its fair share of dupes.

It is clear that, unless the BA cabin crew are somehow more gullible than the rest of the population, the majority of them support this strike. So why would they back a strike that might endanger the future of their company?

A feature of the culture in many organisations, especially uniformed ones, is an attitude which I call organisational patriotism. Just as people can be patriotic about their country while, at the same time, thinking that the government stinks, employees can strongly identify with a company while being ambivalent or even hostile to its leaders. Such attitudes are often found in uniformed organisations, such as airlines, ambulance trusts, fire brigades and railway companies. The first time I came across it was when I worked for a breakdown organisation. There, a roadside patrolman summed it up when he said, “A lot of us don’t like what the managers are doing to our company.”

In other words, it’s our company and that crowd are ruining it. Business leaders spend a lot of time trying to get employees to identify with the organisation in the assumption that this will make them more favourable to the viewpoint of the management. That isn’t always how it works. It is possible for employees to identify strongly with their company yet still be strongly opposed to its current leaders.

Something like this seems to be happening at British Airways. Many of its staff have worked for the company for years. People joke about having the company logo stamped on them and bleeding red-white-and-blue. Their fear is that the current leadership wants to completely change their airline. This comment from Julie Parks, a stewardess quoted in the Times, neatly expresses this attitude:

I have always wanted to fly. It is one of those things that you just seem drawn to. It is not an easy job to get into. It is quite lonely. You are away from friends and family, you miss parties, weddings and birthdays. But you get into it. It breaks you down and then builds you back up. That is why we are so proud to work for British Airways — we are BA, it has become our lives. You are living with your colleagues. When you put that uniform on you are so proud. That is why I feel it is so wrong, what is happening to the company.

I appreciate there are a lot of jobs that take it out of you. We are happy to compromise for the love of our job and the rewards we get out of it. I love my job and I think most of us do, and that is why we feel so passionately that BA is being led in the wrong direction.

Hardly the attitude of someone who wants to bring the company to its knees is it? The last line conveys a similar attitude to that of the breakdown patrolman quoted above; it’s our company and they are ruining it.

None of this is to say that the strike action is justified. In all probability, if the strike is successful and BA is stopped from re-organising its working practices and cutting costs, the airline will continue to decline. Its financial situation is dire and it faces competition which will only get fiercer. It might not go bust next week or even next year but, unless it can reduce its costs, eventually it will go the way of Alitalia – dependent on bailouts and prayers for its survival.

It’s not going to be pretty. A management team determined to reduce costs facing workers who believe that the managers are out rip their company apart and change it into something unrecognisable. Hints that British Airways might sack union activists and the union’s  attempt to globalise the strike will do nothing to ease the confrontational atmosphere.

It is probable that we will see a number of disputes like this in the coming years. Patriots often hark back to a golden age and organisational patriots are no different. What they cherish is the memory of a country, or a company, as it was. They feel unsettled by what it has become and fear the direction in which they think it is going. Many of the organisations which will come under the strongest pressure to change are those with high levels of organisational patriotism.  Public sector bodies, such as hospitals, ambulance trusts, some local authorities and, especially, the BBC, have workforces which strongly identify with their organisations, although not always with their management.

Many of these organisations which will be transformed beyond all recognition over the next few years. A lot of the patriots won’t like it and will resist just as bitterly as the BA staff are now doing. Expect to hear more employees like air stewardess Julie Parks complaining that the managers are destroying the organisation they know and love.

It’s somewhat ironic that, at a time when companies spend large sums of money on employee engagement and getting workers to identify more strongly with the brand, many of those organisations which have this in spades are being dismantled. Senior executives might say they want employee brand-identification but they only want it if it’s the right sort.

There is a census next year- your personal information is going to be dished out to all and sundry.

Its Herod time- even the Bible admits taking a census is about taxation, none of this cock waffle about providing services.


there were 3 major censuses conducted by Augustus - in 28 BC, 8 BC and 14 AD but these were for Roman citizens only. In 6 AD, Josephus refers to a census in Judea for non-citizens for purposes of taxation (10 years after the death of Herod the Great). But if the census was one of allegiance to Caesar Augustus the problem is solved.

The 5th century historian Orosius said Augustus ordered a census of each province everywhere and all men to be enrolled. Josephus notes that "When all the people of the Jews gave assurance of their goodwill to Caesar, and to the king's government, these very men [the Pharisees] did not swear, being about six thousand." This census of allegiance to Caesar Augustus occurred about a year before the death of Herod the Great, which fits well with the census in Luke 2:15. It is thought this census happened before Quirinius became governor of Syria, which would place it in 5 BC.

From the 2011 Census blurb

The main objective of the 2011 Census is to provide high quality population statistics as required by a wide range of users including policy makers, service providers, academics, commercial enterprises and the general public. To achieve this, ONS is consulting widely with users to make sure our population estimates are relevant and practical for them to use. Consultation is now focusing on outputs and we are inviting users to provide feedback through a series of online consultations over the next twelve months. These will allow users to help us define the statistical and specialist products that will be produced from the 2011 census.

Already Libertarians in the States are taking issue with their census

Some of the Questions the Government,service providers,academics, commercial enterprises and the general public would like to know about you-

How many Company Cars have you got

What was your previous address

What is your health like

Are you in a same sex relationship

Are you looking for work

If a job was available could you have started it

Give your specific Job Title

What qualifications have you got

Most of these seem to come from HMRC or the DSS. The test form assures you that all this information confidential and will not be used outside of the census organisation.

How far do you believe that ?

With the dropping of Jonny Wilkinson, rather than put in Toby Flood, how about Mr. Blobby?  He’s been well trained.

Have an Indian Head massage.

Its a truly divine Treatment.

Look here for details 

a

The Ex auditor generalhas been charged with child porn offences
Jeremy Colman has appeared before magistrates in Cardiff to face 14 child pornography charges.
He , is charged with making and possessing 429 images, of which 126 were of a more serious "level four".
He also faces one charge of failing to disclose a key to protected information. He did not enter a plea.
This is chilling and he used his works computer to access and make these vile and odious images
So he didnt enter a plea
I hope they throw the book at him

Myth # 6. The Private Sector props up the Public Sector

REALITY. The UK economy depends on a thriving public sector as well as private sector

What are the Facts?

It is not a one-way street, but a complex relationship. Public sector workers and employers pay for the vast majority of pensions in payment through contributions. But without an effective public sector, the private sector would be far less productive. It directly benefits from the public sector through transport and information infrastructure and an educated workforce, whose social, health and welfare needs are attended to by the public sector. Third, it is also true that all workers pay for everyone’s retirement income in one way or another. Private sector pensions are paid for through the price of goods and services, much like tax levels include the cost of public sector pension provision.

In short, the private sector could not function without the public sector and vice versa. The public sector contributes significantly to GDP and it is entirely unfair to suggest that the public sector is any way a drain on the private sector.

Public sector pension schemes also play an important economic role in other ways. For example, funded public pension funds provide billions of pounds worth of investment in the UK economy. Pensions are also an important element of the remuneration package and an essential recruitment and retention tool to attract people to deliver our vital public services. In addition, they play an important role in ensuring individuals have a reasonable income in retirement. They are an effective way of encouraging saving for retirement among a large part of the workforce, at a time of great turbulence and uncertainty.

Conclusion

The recent attacks on public sector pensions have used the economic crisis as excuse to attack pensions. The key issue about pensions should be ensuring every worker has access to a decent pension scheme; about levelling up not down. Public sector pension schemes are good quality and this should be applauded. The UK need good pensions for all, not lower pensions and poverty in old age for all. Society depends on public services, delivered by public servants who deserve decent pay and pensions.

Index - Media myths about civil and public services.

CNN reports:

The Celebrity Mercury cruise ship is returning to port a day early and delaying its next sailing to address an outbreak of gastrointestinal illness that sickened 350 passengers. The outbreak is the third consecutive outbreak on the ship in a month.  The latest outbreak is the ninth incidence of gastrointestinal illness reported to the VSP this year affecting more than 2 percent of passengers on a cruise ship.

The agent in question is Nonovirus, spread by contact with surfaces.   One commenter said:

Why would anyone ever want to go on a cruise? Do you REALLY want to vacation on a floating suburb, your days planned out for you, stuck with slack-jawed yokels dressed like an exploded Wal-Mart who think that spicy McNugget sauce is “exotic,” and expect every port of call to have a Starbucks and gift shop?

It’s a walking disease factory in these days of “sleep anywhere and with anyone” and the chances of picking up some sort of infection is multiplied by the numbers the ship is carrying, let alone what the crew are carrying from last time, the notorious salad bars at mealtimes, the wet surfaces around pools, what passengers drag back with them from trips ashore and so on.

Then comes your reliance on the personal hygiene of all those around you and if you slacken off on that, then the rest of the hothouse gets it too.  Good luck on your expensive cruise.

Aberdeen Sheriff court was privy to a very strange case yesterday.  A 28-year old man was charged with, found guilty of, and fined £600 for assaulting a female police officer.

Nothing strange about this so far but this was no ordinary assault because he assaulted the police officer with his penis. 

The BBC website states,

“The court heard he had been drinking heavily and could not remember committing the offence at his home in Aberdeen.  Police were called to his home by his girlfriend, who had complained about him being drunk last November.

They arrived to find the self-employed engineer sitting on the sofa wearing a pair of underpants.

Fiscal depute Elaine Lynch said: "The accused got to his feet and was standing over the police officer exposing his penis and thrusting it in her face, forcing her to take evasive action to avoid getting struck."

Did she need to sit and simply take evasive action.  What is her baton for if not this?  Could she not have used her  handcuffs to restrain him?

Whatever, given that he was very drunk, this could not have been the hardest case she’s had to “handle”.

Farouk Sha is a happy man to have a cat that appears to have the word “Allah” on its side.

Osama was born a year ago with the inscription on his fur and it has become more pronounced over time.Other imprints on Osama include a moon and a star.

Talking about why the cat had been named after Osama bin Laden, Sha said some people considered the man to be a terrorist, but he was, in fact, a freedom fighter and he thought it was appropriate to name the cat after him.

Well it makes a change from appearing foodstuff...

That said, I’d no more name a cat (or any pet) in honour of that murderous fanatic bin Laden than I would Hitler though.

“The most habit-forming, dependency-creating, narcotic substance known to man is the milk which flows from the collective breast of the taxpayers”

- Lord Tebbit on ‘welfare junkies’

I’m going to be taking my own advice and taking a break from work and blogging for a while.

We’re off to Italy to visit our daughter, who is in Rome studying abroad.

Interesting way for an Irish guy to celebrate to celebrate St. Patrick's day, right?
We also have a 25 year anniversary coming up, so we figured we would use that as an excuse to as well. Mrs. Great Leadership has always wanted to ride a gondola in Venice.

I’ve got a couple guest posts scheduled, and will still be able to publish comments and respond to a few emails remotely (as long as my iPhone doesn’t fail me).

How about if we all take a little break from leadership development for just this one post.

Here are a few questions for you – please comment and I’ll read and publish from afar:

Any tips or advice from you world travelers? Favorite Italian experiences? Favorite food?

What’s your opinion on study aboard programs? Rich development experience or a glorified vacation? Did you do one in collage, and how was it for you?

How about vacations and work? Do you completely disengage, or keep up with emails?

Best and worst international travel experience?

Ciao!

Afshin Ellian is blogging today on the rich pre Islamic cultures and religions of Iran. This Wednesday marks an important day in the tradition of Zoroastrianism. But it's caught up in the crack down of the regime on dissenters. Rather than translating the entire post, due to time constraints have chosen in part for the descriptive style. Iran is the only Muslim country with a strong pre Islamic consciousness. For centuries people have been trying to keep the traditions alive, none to the...

[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]

but it's hard to focus on a bible study when the lad sitting next to you is scratching all evening.

It was very full again in Zac's last night. We're regularly getting 30 people - in a room that's made for 29. And it was a little chaotic. Several were under the influence - one young man said he'd dropped acid (is that the right terminology?) before he'd come in and Jerry, after several weeks of being what is sober for him, was ... not quite so.

And Ruby, well, Ruby was not quite herself, and was very enthusiastic with her hugging. Nigel bore the brunt ... I mean, came in for particular attention, while Ric and Martin both left early to avoid it. (Yeah, yeah, they said they had excuses but we know the truth.)

But the fact that so many people come either regularly or occasionally, that, on the whole, they sit quietly, participate openly and honestly, and are polite, seems to suggest a great need, not just of the place, the evening, the coffee, but of something much more. We'd say it's God although they may not recognise that.

But when they find respect and acceptance in Zac's, it's the spirit of God inspiring it.

Cristina Odone, in the Telegraph, wrote:

I’m sick of the feminisation of politics. If it means having to meet Dave’s mum, Gordon’s auntie and Nick’s granny, give me macho politics any time.  Politicians once needed to prove their trustworthiness, efficiency, authority. Apparently these days they need an emotional hinterland to appeal to voters.

Don’t get me wrong, Samantha Cameron, like Sarah Brown, looks nice, bright and down-to-earth. But does she know how to plug the deficit? How to cure the NHS? How to ensure children leave primary schools knowing their ABCs and that 2 plus 2 makes four?

Sarah Brown is an indefatigable and admirable charity worker, but does she keep her husband from lying about Army cuts? Or give him a reality check – “No, Gordon, you are not an asset for Labour, you are a liability”? Or perhaps feminising politics means satisfying middle-class mums, as Labour’s latest campaign strategists believe.

This will sound strange coming from a Feminazi-detester but show-wives who stay in the background and keep their mouths shut are not really what we should be fighting for.  What we need to fight for is the right of women to be women again.  The damage done to the interests and welfare of women in the last few decades is immeasurable – they’ve largely alienated men instead of bringing them on board and it’s just one assault of misandry after another.

Women still not poisoned with these false constructs just want men to get on with the business of being real men and to recognize the abilities and talents of their better halves.  That’s all.  Everyone knows, in his/her own heart that a man succeeds best with a good woman behind him and it’s so for a woman too.  She can flourish if there’s someone behind her supporting, helping, offering that shoulder, standing up for her and the best one for that, historically, is a man.

All I’m saying is that we aren’t two different species – we’re two halves of the same species and the symbiotic relationship between those two halves can be deliciously intoxicating if it’s allowed to develop, free of false constructs by Marxist Feminazis and their token male hangers-on.

Women, on the other hand, who go in to bat for both women and men at the same time are worth all the gold in the world:

The feminist manifesto is:

The feminist principle of leadership means embracing and sharing the skills and knowledge of individual women, and providing opportunities for all women to develop their leadership potential. As feminist organizations, we invest power and trust in our leaders with the expectation they will draw upon feminist practices and processes in our efforts toward equality and inclusion.

Equality and inclusion are lovely, fuzzy buzzwords that sound great so let’s get behind the people uttering them, eh?   But as women worldwide are recognizing, from the mouths of Feminazis comes only empty, socialist rhetoric, disguising itself as support for women.  “Embracing and sharing the skills and knowledge of individual women?”  BS in the extreme.  What they mean is sitting round indoctrinating themselves about why men are so awful to them while real women go out and do it for themselves, unfettered by the mind-numbing narrow-mindedness of Feminazis.

But don’t take my word for it. Linda Lichter puts it nicely *:

At least a decade before the siege of political correctness, I was silenced by the unconscious but relentless intimidation of female friends and colleagues who are educated, self-sufficient, and eager consumers of the latest feminist books.  I am supposed to owe the authors of those books unqualified gratitude for all the hard-won rights the Titanic women never enjoyed.

I would add another [thing here]: that emotional and physical esteem for women is central, not tangential, to manhood. The British statesman Lord Chesterfield, a favorite source of Victorian etiquette writers, believed everyday deference was due to all women because it provided their only shield against men’s superior physical strength.

He added, “no provocation whatsoever can justify any man in not being civil to every woman; and the greatest man would justly be reckoned a brute if he were not civil to the meanest woman.”

Kelly Mac wrote:

Namely, where were all the “good” women when feminism started? Why didn’t the women who knew they were not being abused do something to stop the misinformation that spread like wildfire? Aren’t these women just as deserving of men’s contempt as the hardcore feminists who started it all?

Ruth Malhotra gets down to specifics:

The notion of victimhood, that “women are oppressed and exploited,” evokes strong anti-male sentiment.

Many influential feminists demonstrate extreme animosity towards marriage and family life, even likening the institution of marriage to that prostitution.

In Feminism: An Agenda, radical feminist author Andrea Dworkin declared that the home was a dangerous place stating, “Like prostitution, marriage is an institution that is extremely oppressive and dangerous for women.”

The feminist agenda is offensive to women. With Eve Ensler and her contemporary cheerleaders in the feminist movement, initiatives such as the “Vagina Monologues” have become a central part of Women’s Awareness Month programming on campuses around the country.

The “Vagina Monologues,” often promoted as a wonderfully inspiring event to empower women, is, in reality, nothing more than an atrociously written anti-male tirade, portraying women as pathetic sexual objects who will forever be victims. Such programs are not only blatantly offensive towards women but are vile and vulgar.

Elizabeth Fox-Genovese:

It has not been easy to acknowledge that feminism has promoted the unraveling of the most binding and important social bonds. Not easy, but unavoidable. Like countless other women who cherish improvement in the situation of women in the United States and throughout the world, I was initially quick to embrace feminism as the best way to secure our “rights” and our dignity as persons. Like countless others, I was seriously misled.

In practice, the sexual liberation of women has realized men’s most predatory sexual fantasies. As women shook themselves free from the norms and conventions of sexual conduct, men did the same.

There can be no doubt that women’s situation has demanded improvement — and continues to do so throughout much of the world. But the emphasis upon individual rights at the expense of mutual responsibility and service is not the way to secure it.

Worse, it is destroying the fabric of our society as a whole because it is severing the most fundamental social bonds. Binding ties constrain women, but they constrain men as well.

As Danielle Crittenden has noted, the family “has never been about the promotion of rights but the surrender of them — by both the man and the woman”.

Another golden girl who has her own way of saying things:

Up to their same old tricks, the Feminazis trot out this dictum:

Feminism is the radical notion that women are people.

… and then proceed to alienate the other half of “people” by urging women to hate men.  In fact, it does the precise, diametric opposite of its dictum.  To be honest, their dictum is:

Feminism is the radical notion that women are a separate species, in isolation and dedicated to irrevocably separate the sexes so that they are more easily controlled by the State.

And the new type of young woman it’s produced is low, really low.  Kelly Mac writes:

It’s about the fact that dating today has become nothing but a series of pick-ups and one-night-stands (thank you sexual revolution).

It’s the new vulgarity in young women, societally enforced, which upsets me. I don’t know if they are trying to shock [and girls are emotionally maturing much later these days, babies or no babies]; it’s the lack of graciousness in John Edwards’ two harpies, for example [here's one of their political comments, courtesy of Michelle Malkin]; it’s the desire to be some sort of hard nut hoe for the boys – who knows?

If we’re still around as a species many years from now, history is going to severely admonish the insanity of the Feminazis and those behind them because by then, sanity might have reestablished itself and the sane will write the history.

*  A number of links in this article seem to have gone to link heaven, one lady has moved her entire blog across etc. so you’ll have to either believe me or not that what I’ve quoted above they actually said.