At Primary school




this poem by a prescient teacher. She was brilliant with kids, very wise, older than ancient and is by now long dead.

For Ark … wisdom lives on:


Screen Shot 2015-11-29 at 08.04.59

—and who knows if there was a message in her method, or simply appreciation for art?

The rotten old bat didn’t even interpret it for us. Or tell us how to find meanings. She just delivered and left the rest of the work to us. Like my classmates I could gabble it off by heart … took me years to revisit, and eventually appreciate it.




“It was necessary,”

he said sagely, fingers steepled and a look of all sweet accord softening his wise old face, “to destroy Freedom in order to save it.”


one of them self-contratri conterdick puzzling statement things. I love them.

THE ONLY FREE Screen Shot 2015-11-26 at 08.24.14

(ish) people on this planet that I know of would be the Swiss, but how long they’ll stay free(ish) is anyone’s guess. So why have some ‘free’ people in a wee Swiss Canton voted to curtail freedoms?

Yep. Definitely a conundrum.    CLUE:  —> —> —>

Wrap your eyes around this—

He added: “Those who want to integrate are welcome irrespective of their religion.

“But those who rebuff our values and aim to build a parallel society based on religious laws, and want to place it over our society, are not welcome.”

Amnesty International termed it a “black day for human rights in Ticino.”

Read more:  CLICK HERE

—and bear in mind that I love Brit sensationalist tabloids, especially the Express. And I love contradictions (not that you’ll find any in my statements—neither outright nor allusional). Tut~!


being a racist, and for all I know of being anti-Islam.

But no … I’m not a racist. Race is just a silly label applied by the self-important to make a trap for fools. Convenient though, and like any slogan spares the need for thinking. Me? I simply call things as I see them. But—

—anti Islam?

Of course.

If you’ve read my posts you’ll know that I’m pretty well anti any religion—so why single out Islam? I imagine that anyone singling out Islam as a special case deserving of undeserved respect is either a full-blown Islamist or a closet case.

Not good. At least I call it as I see it, no more and a lot less.


that Amnesty (as above) has a good point?

Or is Amnesty flying a flag on behalf of someone else? Quite possible. Quite probable, in fact. So let’s look at it a little more closely: what does Amnesty mean by “human rights”? I have no idea … do you think they have any idea themselves?

HUMAN RIGHTS are something that comes with the turf, an entitlement that applies equally to all human beings, everywhere* … you know, those oft-touted ‘freedoms’ things. We all have it, Freedom. And Rights.

But in many places brute force usurps those freedoms and rights. Shouldn’t be so, but is. Thus ‘Rights’ become privileges for some, and who those ‘some’ actually are is determined by the stronger. Strongest. So now a truism—


—which is a universal on this planet. Not nice, you might be thinking? But certainly you aren’t thinking ‘not true!’ (if you are, then I have this wonderful bridge in Sydney Harbour that I can let you have at a giveaway price … just send me all your credit card details).


sufficient unto the day is the effort thereof and I await your broadside with bated breath. In the meantime have a nice Muslim fashion statement—

Screen Shot 2015-11-26 at 08.28.34

—courtesy of the cynics at The Express (long may they do so and be free to be so). And for the fashion-conscious Islamic women (if their men will allow them) here from the web is the latest catalogue of autumn style—

Screen Shot 2015-09-15 at 07.24.20

—where beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder. Or in this case of the beheld, I defy anyone to say the lady concerned isn’t beautiful or ‘modest’—

Screen Shot 2015-09-15 at 06.44.17

—which makes one wonder: how secure are Islamic men, that they have to lock away ‘their’ women in purdah and hijab and chadors/burqas/black bags?

Do they not trust (a) their women to be out in public without visual chastity belts or armed escorts; or (b) their fellow Islamic men—who presumably will fall slathering on any unescorted unprotected woman like the proverbial wolves on the fold?

Don’t ask me—the ways of the One True Faith are inscrutable to us poor ignorant atheists (whichever OTF you subscribe to) (there’s lots of them) …



 * The American Founding Fathers covered this one pretty well (and that was over two hundred years ago). The US Dec of Ind should be on everyone’s reading list.

In Town

yesterday I had a chance to photograph an obvious cliché


and here below is our cliché.

Take it for all in all, you shall often see its like again …

Inver WW Memo

The detritus of transient real grief mixed with PC window dressing and the lachrymose decoration of earnest self-serving crocodiles—it’s all there.

I’D JUST BEEN taking snaps of blowing poppies and was heading towards the park when en passant I noticed the above alignment. The wreath (one of quite a few) left over from the Armistice Day commemorations a couple of weeks ago (the past: lost hopes and dreams); the colours of blood and ‘glory’ aligning nicely with the focussing hopes and dreams of present day reconstruction (creation and refurbishment).

Death contrasting with life.Screen Shot 2015-11-26 at 06.50.44

The silence of the grave versus the buzz and vitality of a living building site and all that sort of thing.

The wreath silent, unmoving, quite dead; the site beyond vibrant with creativity, noise, effort, mobile — alive. For now.


I got my shot and went off for a coffee, leaving Lord Kitchener standing there like a great stuffed dummy presiding over nothing he could affect. Chosen in fact to be the very epitome of his times: “Come and join us, we’ll teach them bloody Huns!” Yeah, right. (I think it was Kitchener*. Might have been Jellicoe … does it matter?)

And the beat goes on …



*  That statue (pigeon perch covered in glory)



As a CCCT*

from way way back


(often, actually) when with wide-eyed indignation people come up with gems like this—

Screen Shot 2015-11-25 at 20.21.44to read more:  CLICK HERE

—the list goes on. And on … and so it should, it’s effectively endless. But why is this article written in a tone of such outraged surprise? (Some people must be a bit naive.)


(and still do) in England. And the whole of Britain, and the Empire on which the sun never set. Fair enough too — much the same as Skulls and Boneses and others such (Masons too? Heaven forbid) rule the American Empire today. Good on ’em—I admire folks who know what they want and which strings to pull, regardless:

“Mr Argus, Sir?”

“Yes, Little Virginia?”

“Sir—wasn’t that nice Mr Washington a Mason?”

“I do believe so, Sweetie.”

“And the nice Mr Franklin, and Jefferson, and oooodles of others of the American foundi—”

“That’s quite enough, child. You’ll be telling me next that even modern US statespersons are Masons—”


“Enough, kiddo. Let ’em all hang out—no business of ours.”

HydraTo go down that track is to suggest that bodies of Italian Catholic papal bankers found dangling under London bridges were Masons too, after a wee domestic squabble. (They play rough, them Masons.)

Or the upper echelons of the Brit police are … were … naaaaah; inconceivable.

Where The Law and Freedom are concerned, and even the foundations of Democracy itself … oh come on:  we’re above all that. Childish rubbish. Fancy dress, secret meetings, and funny handshakes—in this day and age?

Let the dead bury their dead.


some CT folks raise interesting theories to the effect that the actual Titanic wasn’t really itself but an older variant, a sister ship, disguised as brand new but fitted out with old revamped kit and deliberately sacrificed for the insurance … all very entertaining I’m sure, but would a Mason actually do anything like that? Could anyone hope to get away with it?

I mean … do grown up men really run around half undressed with a kipper stuffed in each sock, hoodwinking folks and pointing swords at each other?**



* CCCT:  Card-Carrying Conspiracy Theorist

**  … yes






At last: once again my snaps are clickable and will take you (lucky you~!) to a larger image. Enjoy!


Taking an active interest in my camera and poking about in what seems an infinite box of tricks I discovered that I, too, could do it—

RED will dominate any photo ... (why is that?)
RED will dominate any photo … (why is that?)

—all good clean fun and sure beats running with scissors and/or sharp pointy things.

Screen Shot 2015-11-24 at 18.00.49 Aaaaah, just sometimes I dream of golden days—those halcyon yesteryears where all we had to worry about was shutter speed and aperture (after setting the focus, of course)(not everything was done by computers).


in those days we loaded our guns from the other end* …



*  But the bang still comes out the same place, though