Conmen are everywhere

We have now been in the new house for just over a week, and unfortunately chaos is still the order of the day. Fairly organised chaos, but chaos nonetheless.

The day of the move started bright and early as I was picking up the van at 0730. First port of call was m'Julie's mum's house, where we loaded the van, pausing briefly to sign the lease agreement and collect the keys of the new house, before taking the first load.

After we'd unloaded, myself and Drew then headed off to Big Yellow for the first trip. We worked well and it wasn't long before the van was loaded to the gills and making the 8 mile trip back to the house. We then had the second trip, finally finishing the unloading at 0030, all of us knackered and all of us ready to sleep.

Again, it was a bright and early start as I had to take the van back and then it was back to try and get some order into the piles of bags and boxes that we were now facing.

And this has been the order of the day for the last week, although it has been mainly down to m'Julie, her mum and Drew as I was back at work on Monday.

Unfortunately, today we received a letter from the letting agents, and it appears that our previous landlord is now trying to rip us off. According to his calculations, the "dilapidations" that we have caused to the property are in excess of our deposit and therefore, this will not be returned. Unfortunately for him, I am not very tolerant of conmen, especially one who is trying to charge us for hanging a painted a door that was purchased, pre-painted, by us and re-hung long before we moved out.

What this now means is that I will answer the letter and if I believe that I am owed a rebate from the deposit, I suspect that I will have to pursue this through the small claims court. To be honest, this is something that I could do without, on top of everything else.

On the upside, it is likely that we will have the kitchen in enough of a semblance of order so that the whole family can sit down at the table to a proper Sunday lunch tomorrow. I say whole family, as Maggie is staying this weekend, but we may be missing one, as I will need to collect Alec from Tunbridge Wells, and if the threatened snow arrives, I have no doubt that the entire country will grind to a halt again.

Money isn't the route of all evil, oil is!

I commented last year that I believed that much of the involvement in Libya was fuelled by the fact that Libya was an oil producing country. And now we're seeing a former military dictatorship attempting to flex its muscles again.

In 1592, an Englisman by the name of John Davis discovered a group of isolated islands, but it wasn't until 1690 that another Englishman, John Strong, actually explored these islands.

Then, in 1764, these islands were inhabited by a group of French sailors, who established a colony, which lasted until 1766, when the Spanish deposed the French and settled the islands themselves on the east side, not realising that there was already an English colony on the west side that had been established in 1765.

In 1774, the English left the islands, the Spanish also leaving in 1811 and they remained uninhabited until they were colonised by Argentina in 1820, The Argentinians remaining until the British navy recolonised the islands in 1833, sending the Argentinians packing.

And so the Falkland Islands, for that is their correct name as they were named in honour of Anthony Cary, 5th Viscount of Falkland, the man who had financed Strong's expedition in 1690, remained a largely peaceful British Territory.

That is until 1982, when the Argentinian junta, increasingly facing difficulties at home decided to divert attention from domestic matters by launching a full scale invasion of the Islands. Seventy-three days later, the invading force had suffered ignominious defeat and the Argentinian junta, by their actions, was responsible for the deaths of 907 British and Argentinian service personnel.

Now, thirty years later, the sovereignty disagreement is being cranked up a notch again, including the Argentinians burning Union Flags outside the British Consulate in Buenos Aires. Why? I'm sure that it has nothing to do with the fact that it is looking increasingly likely that there is oil in and around the islands!

Let Chaos Reign

One of the changes that is occurring that I failed to mention in my last post is that fact that we are moving. Not far, but moving nonetheless, into a slightly bigger house, and last Saturday saw the start of this process.

One complicating factor has been that although we anticipated moving out of the old house last weekend, we cannot move into the new house until the end of this month. In the meantime, we are staying at m'Julie's Mum's house.

This has meant that we have had to put the majority of our belongings in storage. This has meant returning to Big Yellow, a place that both me and m'Julie had grown to dread after having to store my stuff there in 2007 for five months before we moved into the last house.

Unfortunately, not everything has gone completely as planned and we have found out that we both have far too much stuff and we need to "downsize" before we move again, particularly as, having booked one room in Big Yellow, we had to book a second room.

The old landlord has also been a bit of a pain, as we had told him that we anticipated moving out by last weekend, even though we are fully paid up until this Thursday. Now he's unhappy because we won't have moved everything out until tomorrow (*Wednesday). It appears that he has new tenants moving in this weekend and is concerned that they won't be able to do so. Personally, I think that he should have anticipated needing more time for the handover.

So now we have ten days of living out of boxes and then the chaos of sorting out a new home, with Maggie and my birthdays in the meantime this weekend. Should be fun!

Damn!

Having started 2011 full of good intentions about continuing to blog, I got as far as May, and then I'm not quite sure what happened. What didn't happen was my continuing to write this. Having said this, its not as if the last seven months of 2011 passed without anything happening.

In August, Drew, my No. 2 Son finally had enough of his mother and chose to move in with me. This did not impress my ex-wife, but as he is now 16 there was very little that she could do about it. The major down side of this has been that once again I have had to have dealings with the genetically challenged employees of the Child Support Agency, and as per usual, they have proved that they remain as incapable as ever.

I initially contacted these morons at the end of August to report the change of circumstances. Having learnt from my previous experience, I informed the cretin with whom I spoke that they had two months, until the end of October, in which to sort out my claim after which time I would have my MP, Greg Clark, sort it out.

Towards the end of October, I again contacted the CSA, who informed me that they hadn't actually managed to do anything due to their utter incompetence, so I was forced to write to Greg Clark. Interestingly, following his intervention, I did receive a letter from the CSA, admittedly one that was full of untruths, but it also moved on my case. To this end I received a letter from these incompetents informing me that I would receive payment in mid-December.

Having received no money, I called the CSA on the 16th, to be informed that the money had left their account and I would receive it within 3-5 working days. I was surprised that this now seemed to be moving on, but m'Julie was more cynical. Unfortunately, she was right! When I contacted another of the morons about this on the 29th December, still having received no money, he informed me that the Agency had put a block on the payment as they weren't sure they had the correct bank account details. This was despite the imbecile I spoke with on the 16th confirming my bank account details! I also have no idea why I wasn't contacted to verify the details.

The upshot is that I should receive the money this week. But I have again informed the latest cretin that I will be reporting this to my MP, and I think that the Secretary of State, Iain Duncan Smith, should also be made aware of this Agency's incompetence. Sadly, he cannot sack them all as every one of the employees is too stupid to find employment elsewhere and would therefore become a huge burden on the state.

Drew did well in his GCSEs and has succeeded in getting a place at the local college to study the computer programming course that he wanted with a view to becoming a games designer.

Another piece of bad news from 2011 was regarding Alec's injury to his ankle. Unfortunately, rather than being just badly sprained, he had torn several of the ligaments and tendons in his right ankle.

As a result of this he has undergone one operation, which was only partially successful, and now has to have a second one.

Following the second surgery, he will be unable to train for about two years, so he will be discharged from the Army once he has had the surgery and had some rehab, although they will keep a place at Sandhurst for him for the next 6 years.

The advantage to this is that he is looking to go to university and get a degree, although had he done it before going to Sandhurst, he would have had sponsorship from the Army, something that he no longer has.

Workwise, I have had the "joy" of moving from the hospital that I was workinjg in to the new, purpose-built one five miles away. An intersting, and at time chaotic, period, but it seems to be settling down. I have been on leave since 22nd December, returning to work tomorrow, and having just checked my pager, it appears that I will have more than 30 emergency calls to follow up. No peace for the wicked!

M'Julie also has the prospect of change, having become very fed up with the dental practrice where she is working. As a result of this, she has applied for, and got, a new job in the new hospital.

So it looks as though 2012 is to be a year of change for the whole family. And who knows, I may even carry on with this.

All over

So that's it then. After weeks, if not months, of build-up, including countless television programmes about various Royal weddings and some very corny films about the "Royal romance", last Friday William Arthur Philip Louis Windsor and Catherine Elizabeth Middleton said their vows under the glare of worldwide publicity and married in Westminster Abbey.

The big advantage to this was that it gave this country an extra Bank Holiday, on a Friday before a Bank Holiday Monday. For me, because last weekend was Easter, and therefore a four day weekend, I would have have only had to work three days, but because of time owing, I was able to take the whole week. So for the outlay of zero annual leave, I have had 12 days off! The downside is that I now have to go back to work tomorrow! At least its only a four day week.

So what of the wedding? Yet again, the UK has proved that when it comes to ceremonial occasions, then no-one does it better. William looked more nervous than anyone else, although I don't know why he chose to marry in his uniform of Colonel-in-Chief of the Irish Guards, rather than his everyday Royal Air Force one.

The bride looked lovely. I thought the dress was quite reminiscent of 1920s fashion, but I think that it definitely suited her. Her sister also looked fabulous and turned a few heads!

One of the heads that she appeared to have turned was the best man's, Prince Harry's. Now the press are full of speculation. As for Harry, I don't know if his brother had insisted that he wear a uniform that looked like he'd borrowed it from someone else much bigger than him, or if he'd lost weight since he purchased it, but he definitely looked a mess next to William.

The good news is that the threatened rain never appeared, so the trip back to Buckingham Palace in the open top carriage didn't result in a soaking wet husband and wife. And despite the defence cuts, the rumours that the flypast by the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight was actually all that's left of the Royal Air Force isn't true!

The other thing that was nice was the fact that the whole family were there, having picked up my youngest two on the Thursday. However, Maggie spent a lot of the time playing with m'Julie's new toy, a toy which will hopefully mean I get some peace and quiet!

m'Julie is on my mobile phone contract, and she was due for a phone upgrade at the end of last week. I knew which one she was likely to go for, as every time someone has been on TV with one, or even seeing someone in the street with one, I've been told "See, he/she has an iPhone!"

So last Thursday, off we went to the Orange shop and m'Julie told them what she wanted. The guy behind the counter then informed m'Julie that they had just had a delivery of the new white iPhone, which weren't due for release until the following day, but that they were willing to let her have one that day. How she managed to contain herself, I'm not sure. Although she stood there and calmly said that she would like to go for that phone, I knew that inside she was jumping up and down and whooping like a four year old!

So that was what Maggie was playing with, as well as complaining that her phone (an iPhone 3) isn't due an upgrade until next May.

However, whilst they were distracted by weddings and gadgets, I was indulging in my new "hobby", making cocktails. Finally, a couple of weeks ago, I purchased a cocktail shaker, something I'd been promising myself for years, and just about every evening since I can be found with various spirits, occasional mixers and plenty of ice, shaking like a demon. In fact, I think I've drunk more spirits in the past two weeks than I have in the last two years! My efforts have been greatly aided by Alex's Cocktail Recipes.

I guess that I will have to have one this evening to celebrate today's news. That the the world's leading terrorist, Osama Bin Laden, has finally been tracked down and killed. It is a pity that they were unable to capture him alive so that he could face proper justice, assuming the special forces team even tried.

There will be enough on the worldwide news bulletins without me going into all of the details, but there is one thing that I am curious about. It appears that Bin Laden was living in a compound that was a mere 200 metres away from the Pakistan Military Academy, was about eight times larger than every other compound locally, had higher walls, topped with barbed wire, than any other local compound and had no telephone or Internet access, and yet the Pakistani authorities were not curious about this and had "no idea" that he was living there. Really?

I saw a television interview this evening with the Pakistani ex-president, Pervez Musharraf, who was objecting to the fact that the American special forces team had flown into Pakistan, attacked the compound and killed Bin Laden, but had not informed the Pakistani authorities of intentions until after the whole thing was over. Is he really that surprised, given that Bin Laden appeared to be living unmolested in the lap of luxury in a Pakistani town, that the Americans chose not to share the information prior to the attack, and therefore risk their target being tipped off and disappearing.

There was also another interesting interview this afternoon. A Pakistani official was being interviewed and again repeated that they had no idea that Bin Laden was in this compound, and then in the next sentence stated that he'd only been there a few days. When the reporter asked him how he knew that Bin Laden had only been there a few days if he had no idea that Bin Laden was there he became very evasive.

I'm sure that there's far more to this whole episode than we will know for about one hundred years, not unless wikileaks restarts.

Double Standards

In recent weeks, there have been a lot of headlines regarding various things which, to my mind, display very obvious double standards.

The first example of this is the bankers. It may seem that I have an unnatural dislike of bankers, but my main dislike of these people is the arrogance that they so often display. Just a few years ago, these people almost destroyed the economy of this country. They were rescued by the Government stepping in and bailing them out with billions of pounds.

Yet there seems to be no acknowledgement on their part that they may have done anything wrong, and their insistence that they still receive bonuses seems to support this. However, the latest thing now is that there have been threats by certain banks that if the Government increases their tax liability further, they will relocate their headquarters abroad. So they are refusing to acknowledge any fault for their dire financial position and they want all the rewards that come to someone who is successful. And if they don't get their way, they are threatening to leave.

So what should the Government do? Should they submit to what is essentially a ransom demand? Personally, I would tell the bankers to go. But there would be conditions. The first of these would be that they would only be permitted to relocate abroad once they had paid back all of the money that they had received during the Government bailout. If they are unable, or unwilling, to make this repayment, they can either remain in this country and accept their liabilities, or they can continue relocation but face having assets to the value of what they owe seized and sold off to recoup the money. And if that leaves the bank unable to continue trading, tough. The bankers can go and claim the equivalent of dole in the country where they intended to relocate.

We've also seen double standards displayed by the Government of this country regarding Libya. What has been and is still happening in Libya is appalling. Gadaffi, desperate to cling onto the power that he seized in 1969, has had no hesitation in using the full force of his military to quell the uprising that has occurred this year.

In response to this, initially the United Nations and now NATO have launched an aerial attack on the heavy weapons of the incumbent regime, in an attempt to stop Gadaffi from attacking Libyan civilians. Britain has subscribed to this wholeheartedly, sending aircraft to enforce the no-fly zone and to attack the heavy weapons used by the pro-Gadaffi forces. And despite the initial claims that this was nothing to do with regime change, it can clearly be seen that this is exactly what the whole thing is about, with the various politicians insisting that there is no place for Gadaffi in a "new" Libya.

Yet, just under four thousand miles from where all this conflict is taking place in North Africa, for the last ten years there has been a very similar thing taking place in South Africa, including a Government that it is accepted has no legitimacy following "rigged" elections and that has no hesitation in using its armed forces against its civilian population to ensure that it remains in power.

Yet despite this continuing and despite there being lots of political hot air stating that this should not be allowed to continue, Robert Mugabe remains the President of Zimbabwe. Why? Well, as I've said before I'm sure that it has nothing to do with the fact that Libya is a wealthy oil-producing country and Zimbabwe is a dirt-poor mineral exporter.

So whilst this country appears to be taking the moral high ground in an effort to assist the oppressed population of Libya, it is only because there is a possibility of there being benefit to the politicians, a benefit that the oppressed people of Zimbabwe cannot give them.

The final area of double standards relates to the recent French law that bans anyone from concealing their face in a public place and seems to specifically relate to Muslim women who choose to wear a niqāb.

My personal opinion is, because in Britain we live in a democracy, people should be allowed to wear what they like as long as it causes no harm. If they want to walk down the street wearing a purple bin bag and a felt top hat, they have the right to do so. The same with regards to a burka or a niqāb.

Whilst there are some security issues regarding the use of burkas, specifically the case of the 21st July 2005 bomber Yasin Omar, who attempted to evade arrest by fleeing London disguised in one of his mother-in-law's burkas, but the majority of women who wear these items do so because they wish to, not to conceal evidence of wrongdoing.

However, since the ban in France, there has been an outcry by certain groups objecting to the fact that Muslim women are being dictated to about what they can and cannot wear in public. And many of these objections are originating from middle-eastern countries that will arrest and jail women for wearing what they consider to be indecent clothing. Yet you hear no objections from the west when this happens, because it is the law of those particular countries and is respected as such, just as the no-face coverings law in France is the law of that country and should be respected.

A Day Off!

It’s been over a month since I last wrote, and a very busy month it has been, as I've worked all but one weekend since last writing, either directing resuscitation courses or away with the TA. Unfortunately, I had to complete both of the courses that I was to direct in the same month, as if I hadn't directed the paediatric course this month, I would have had to wait until next year, because the next paediatric course that we're running is in November. Because this course is running over the weekend of Remembrance, I will have other commitments won't be able to participate.

These courses are long days, starting at 8am and finishing at 6pm, and intense for both the faculty and the candidates. And you are unaware of what is happening outside the confines of the course, which is why it was not until after the faculty meal last Saturday and when I returned to my hotel room that I found out that, yet again, a peaceful protest in this country had been hijacked by rent-a-mob.

Last weekend, there was a protest march organised in London to protest against the Government cuts that are being implemented in an effort to reduce the deficit. The march made its way through London and was addressed by Ed Milliband, the Labour Party leader.

Unfortunately for all concerned, and like every other protest in this country in recent years, the cuts protest has hit the headlines not because of the peaceful nature of what occurred, but because a few hundred thugs used the excuse of this march to attack buildings on the route, and then the Police Officers who attempted to stop them.

And this is the curse that we now face. As a democracy, we must allow people to protest peacefully, but every time that this is allowed, the scum element will hijack it for their own purposes and cause untold damage. And then to top it all off, those thugs that are arrested and put before the courts will, nine times out of ten, walk away scot free because our legal system is so lenient.

But at least we don't deal with protesters in the way that the Libyans have. Unfortunately, their actions have now resulted in the armed forces of this country becoming embroiled in the whole thing, enforcing a "no-fly" zone and participating in strategic bombing.

From a purely practical point of view, each of the bombs that are dropped by an aircraft of the Royal Air Force will add to the debt deficit that we have already discussed. From a military point of view, it is known that it is impossible to win a conflict by air power alone, and it has been seen that despite the nightly bombing raids, the Libyan ground forces have continued to attack. Are we going to have to deploy ground troops as part of a NATO force? And if so, with all the cuts taking place to the British armed forces, where are we going to get these troops from?

Maybe it won't come to that, as Colonel Gadaffi's allies and colleagues appear to be deserting him at a rate of knots. Mousa Kousa (whose name suggests that he should be a character in Team America) arrived in the UK this week, having resigned his position as Libyan Foreign Minister because he was unhappy with the regime's attacks on civilians.

It's interesting that this is the same man who, in the 1980's, could see no problem with telling a British newspaper that his Government intended to eliminate two political opponents who were living in the UK. This led to his expulsion from this country. And now he's back, apparently claiming asylum. But with his history, should we grant this, or should we put him before the International Criminal Court in The Hague, to answer for his crimes. He is also thought to have been heavily involved with the Lockerbie bombing and is wanted for interview by the Scottish police.

It is also rumoured that there have been various other Libyan officials visiting London in an effort to negotiate a peace, and the debate is now whether Gadaffi should be allowed to disappear off into exile, ort whether he should face the consequences of his actions. I would imagine that if he is eventually removed from power and no longer control the oil, then it will be the latter. And I'm sure that if the British Government has been instrumental in removing this dictator, they will be in a better position to negotiate a good deal for oil with the new regime.

Whilst on the subject of consequences, it may be time for previously convicted jailed terrorists to face the consequences of their actions. I am, of course, referring to the recent murder of a Police Officer in Northern Ireland.

Thirteen years ago, the British Government signed the Good Friday Agreement. Part of this agreement was that prisoners currently serving sentences for terrorist activities would be released early if the organisation to which they belonged abandoned armed conflict.

Initially, this seemed to be working, but there have increasingly been breaches with the extremist elements continuing the "armed struggle". The latest example of this is the murder yesterday of the 25 year old Police Officer, killed by a car bomb in Omagh.

What this shows is that despite their reassurances told renounce violence, many of these terrorists are continuing to kill and maim. Many of these terrorists will have the support of their families and the communities in which they live, which makes their detection and apprehension much for difficult for the Police. So perhaps the solution is to round up all those who have been released early and place them back in prison to complete their sentences. Perhaps the impact of this would encourage their families to be less supportive and actually put a stop to this criminal behaviour.

I don't think that anyone wants a return to the days of soldiers having to patrol the streets, people checking underneath their cars and people living in fear of indiscriminate death from a terrorist bomb. I lived in Northern Ireland for a couple of years as a child at the start of "The Troubles" in 1969, my father serving out there at the time. I had hoped that my son wouldn't have to do so.

Unfortunately, Alec has been backtermed as a result of the injury to his ankle and is currently spending his days either receiving intensive physiotherapy ands remedial PT or studying for the War Studies course that he will complete when he joins the next intake.

However, the good news is that he recently visited Cranwell, where he was tested for his flying aptitude, which he passed. Now he just has to undertake his flight grading, which he had hoped to complete during his leave in this month, but he will be unable to do so because of his injury.

If he gets through the flight grading, then he will be able to commission into the Army Air Corps, and then begin the process of learning to fly helicopters.