Friday, July 18, 2014

MH 17


What on earth possesses someone, anyone, to shoot down a civilian aircraft?

Once more we are deep into tragedy involving a Malaysian Airlines aircraft.
Once more we are being dipped into the morass of conspiracy and unspoken threats.

The facts appear, and I emphasise ‘appear’, to be that a Boeing 777 of Malaysian Airlines bearing the flight code MH17 has been shot down by a ‘Buk’ ground to air missile over the Ukraine.

Now the recriminations start. Now we are hell bent on blaming innocent people.
The reports say that the aircraft was flying around 300 miles too far to the north.
There has been, we are told, an advisory telling pilots to follow a more southerly route.
An advisory. Please note that.
This is not a mandatory ‘No Fly Zone’.
Many airlines, in order to save fuel, will follow the routes given to them.
Observe that I said, “The route given to them.” Pilots do not pick their routes although they are able to change them if they have operational reasons for doing so.
Is a war zone an operational reason? Well, in the first place, is it really a war zone? At the moment it is more of a supported insurgency the rights and wrongs of which are not ours to discuss since we have little background information with which to make a rational decision about it.
Suppose it is a war zone. Suppose it is demarcated as a ‘No Fly Zone’. The ‘rules’ put in place by the Ukrainian authorities say that aircraft should not fly within an altitude of 0’ (zero) to 32,000’.
We are told by sundry media outlets that the aircraft, and nobody appears to argue with this, was flying at 33,000’.

In summation, the aeroplane described as MH 17 was flying on an approved route from Schiphol (Amsterdam) to Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia) at an approved height.
The pilot was doing everything properly.

In this electronic age when we can track aircraft from the safety of our homes on our laptop computers and, even, iPads, how hard is it for someone with their finger on the firing button of a ground to air missile system to identify a civilian passenger aircraft?
Who is it that looked at this high-flying aircraft through the ranging system on the ground to air missile system and said to his colleagues, “Oh, look. That aircraft is flying at 33,000’. It is above the exclusion zone. Let’s shoot it down.”

There are reports that indicate that a conversation between separatist rebels and A.N.Other exists in which the separatist is saying something to the effect of, “Oh, shit! Guess what?”

Nobody is saying that these rebels have all got degrees—indeed many of them probably lack that extra brain cell that would match the other one in their heads. Even so...

And now we get into the politicising. Already there are politicians, who are not known for their fine intellect, blaming all sorts of other people for all sorts of other reasons.
The primary reason for the politicians to get into the act is hardly altruistic. Rather it is the possibility of enhancing their own image at the expense of others. Then, of course, it follows that their own policies will be endorsed by their reasoning.



Conspiracies? Oh, yes.
It was MOSSAD because it is widely known that Malaysia is anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian.
Of course it was. I can just see a crew of black hatted and plaited orthodox Jews smuggling a ground to air missile across Europe into the Ukraine...

“Someone is trying to bankrupt MAS.”
Really? They are doing a good enough job on that matter without anyone helping them along.

“It’s all to do with stocks and shares.”
Mind boggling rationale.

“Did you know that the pilot never made a distress call?”
Well, I never. He didn’t? His aircraft has just been hit, out of the blue, with a Buk ground to air missile.
First reaction? Oh, I’d better update ‘Facebook’!
Distress call? He would not have had time to wonder what had happened let alone make a distress call.



No. This was a criminal act. Very simply, somebody on the ground made a horrible mistake for which they must pay. The time for cover-ups and secrecy and comradeships is past.
Drag him out and hang him.

We have had enough of tragedy in the air this year, thank you very much. To have a man-made, deliberate one is too much right now.

In Support of Banks... or Not








I have been away for a while due to pressure of work from several directions.
Sorry about that.

While I was away this song came to mind. I have no idea why, but it did.

“Oh, Soldier, Soldier won’t you marry me
With your musket, fife and drum
Oh, no, sweet maid, I cannae marry you
For I have nae blouse tae put on.

So, off she went,
To her Grandfather’s chest
And she bought him a blouse of the very, very best
And the soldier put it on.”

Her ‘Grandfather’s chest’, eh?

Let’s have a look at that.

Old English cest "box, coffer, casket," from Proto-Germanic *kista (cf. Old Norse and Old High German kista, Old Frisian, Middle Dutch, German kiste, Dutch kist), an early borrowing from Latin cista "chest, box," from Greek kiste "a box, basket," from PIE (Proto-Indo-European) *kista "woven container." Meaning extended to "thorax" 1520s, replacing breast (n.), on the metaphor of the ribs as a box for the organs. Chest of drawers is from 1590s.

Now we know what a ‘chest’ is what is the relevance to her ‘Grandfather’s chest’?

Years ago, in the olden days when steam trains were still lighting their fires, the master of the house kept all the money.
The master was, in all probability, Grandad.
There were no banks to speak of for the middle class or poor people. When a domestic servant was paid sixpence a month for their labour the employer would hold the money in trust. This was because the poor person could not be trusted with large amounts all in one go.

Some time ago I read a book about the local master, a Laird, of a region in Scotland the centre of which is called Kirriemuir. There were notations of his accounts in places so that we could now see what he spent and on what he spent it.
Travelling, for instance.
He was inclined, at times, to go to Edinburgh. This is no great distance by our standards but, then, it was a considerable journey that required a lot of planning.
He would start the journey by walking nearly twenty miles on foot. There was no point in taking the horse because he would have to pay for its upkeep for several days while he was away.
Once in Dundee he would then take the ferry to the far side of the River Tay where he would obtain lodgings for the night.
The next day he would catch the post coach South to North Queensferry where he would take lodgings again for the night until, the next morning, he might get a ferry over to Queensferry and then another coach into the city.
The total cost of this trip would be in the order of £2=50d. Then, of course, he would have to pay the same to get home when he had finished his business.
Compare this with the servant getting 6d a month. He was quite lavish when it came to travelling.
He was, incidentally, caught up in the riots in Dundee at the end of the 1800’s but that, as they say, is another story.

With no banks available to ordinary people the only recourse was to keep the money in a lockable container – known as the ‘Chest’.
Even now we speak of ‘War Chest’ especially when it comes to elections!

If you hear the song now you will understand that she didn’t get the clothing from her ‘Grandfather’s Chest’ but she got the money from the chest and then went off and bought the clothes.

Sometimes I wonder if we should not still keep our money in a secure box!