St George and His Day

Here we are once again 'celebrating' St Georges Day! I say 'celebrating' but possibly I mean 'ignoring' for the most part. Wandering around the streets paved with gold I saw only a couple of vehicles flying his flag. Possibly the stories revealing just how such flags increase your petrol consumption made folks wary in these financially troubled times, possibly, like most folks, they just didn't know what the day was all about! Low down the 'Daily Mail' today there was an item about the Ugandan born Archbishop of York flying his St Georges Flag and enjoying the 'Englishness' of it all. This has brought out many who agree with him, and others who reckon this reflects on why Englishmen are afraid to fly their own flag! Read the following comments! 


St George himself possibly existed, and may well have been a Roman soldier executed during a time of persecution, but there again I am not sure how the story began, read here and consider the options. What ever the case may be he did become patron saint for several nations and cities. It is possible that the idea of a 'patron saint' grew during the years when Christians were free to tour the Roman Empire visiting places where the famous were reputed to be buried. It is very easy for some, badly taught, to imagine that they could pray to such dead people.this of course is not biblical. However in the areas where the bible was not adhered to some did expect dead 'Saints' to answer prayer. Since the reformation few have actually believed in this in the north of Europe. This means that only Roman Catholic nations tend to adhere to such 'Saints' and the UK lost all interest in them many years ago. Today's nationalism has restored them, although not for religious reasons.


The rise of Scottish nationalism in the sixties, and the success found since then has resulted in English jealousy. The poorly taught history has left England with little understanding of what the 'United Kingdom' actually is, and hence allowed them to treat Scotland and Wales with indifference and contempt. Sadly when the Scots and Welsh objected and nationalists began to appear at Westminster there grew an English demand for 'Their own parliament!" Incredible! The parliament at Westminster has been the English parliament for many years, and remained  the 'English parliament' even after 1707! Yet these people do not realise this? Incredible! The history taught in schools, the use of the 'Union Flag' as 'England's flag,' the parliament always referring to 'England' when they meant to say 'Britain,' and the  media  coverage considering the same has evaded such people. Since they discovered in 1996 that England's flag was in fact the cross of St George a movement to encourage its use has arisen, for the wrong reasons. 


There is of course no reason whatsoever for Englishmen in England not to fly their own flag. Mistaking the Union flag for their own has meant a great many have failed to fly their St Georges flags, however there have always been church buildings, public houses, councils and individuals who have correctly flown England's flag. It is to be regretted that some city councils have indeed objected on occasion to the Union or English flag being flown as this has been regarded as 'racist!' How this can be is beyond me, yet such has, occasionally, been the case. In such circumstances, with the BNP, UKIP and the Tory media exaggerating the 'immigrant threat,' it is no wonder some have come to regard the indigenous 'white' populace as hard done by. In spite of the thousand year of English oppression against the Scots it is clear England has forgotten, or in truth, never actually known what it is to be 'English!'


It is to be much regretted that in 1707 England did not appreciate the power of the union. Instead of attempting to rename Scotland 'North Britain,' she could have emphasised the benefits brought by peaceful co-existence. However she quickly forgot and by 1914 it was common to refer to Great Britain as 'England' almost constantly. Churchill, a man famous for his mythological approach to British history, never appears to talk about 'England,' but refers to 'Great Britain' constantly, although I have not checked this out. And it is in the act of standing together and 'standing alone' against the Nazi threat in 1940 under a perceived threat of invasion that many Scots came to accept gladly the notion of being 'British!'  Had a regard for Wales and Scotland been found in England after this Scots nationalism would never have taken off and the Englishman's concern to discover what he and his nation actually comprises would not arise. There are a lot of things the English ought to be proud of, and much they need to regret. Flying their flag is not one of them!
    

Imperialism

Folks are funny are they not? If they steal from you they can always justify this theft to convince themselves they are right. If however you steal from them, dearie me they react with horror! No justification is possible in that situation. The English react like this constantly. Edward ! (Longshanks to you) stole Wales. he also attempted, on spurious grounds, to steal France. Even worse he attempted to steal Scotland! He failed! However his arrogance allowed him to kill, unjustly, Sir William Wallace by hanging, drawing and quartering him. This as you know was the English punishment for treason. Only an Imperialist thug could use this excuse for murdering a citizen of another country, guilty only of defending his people!

The English have followed Ed the Brute ever since! Even today we see their imperialist attitudes, and some of the barbarian hordes were upset when the truth about the English parliament was made known to them. Just look at the comments on yesterdays post. Completely ignoring the point, as always they hurled abuse and contempt with abandon. The reason, they know I was right! Truth hurts! Of course they, like the rest of the English, never joined the 'Union,' this was just an excuse to capture Scotland by stealth. The only good to come out of this was Scotland no longer being forced to spend so much time defending herself from aggression. Instead she defends herself from having to be the engine behind England's rise and yet be regarded as a second class citizen even yet! Only the other day the TV announced trains run from 'Kings Cross to Scotland!' I asked where is the station called 'Scotland?' Are we not in a 'Union?' Or have you forgotten, again?' I await a reply.

Those who commented show the usual signs. Only one has a blog himself. The others were, as is usual with such people, blogless. They do not blog, they merely search the web hoping to be offended. We will not see them again until the next honest post tells the truth they are determined to hide. Why are they like this? Because they have no nation. There is nothing but imperialism and football hooliganism to boast about. While the world welcomes Scots, Welsh and Irish, they feel contempt for the English arrogance and imperialism. OK, I admit Adolf Hitler had some respect for them, but that's another story. Ignoring the 'Daily Star' readers I will however commend to you Terry. He has one or two web sites which reflect his nationalistic English views. While his viewpoint is skewed by false English history teachers, and, more importantly to the conservative English, money! I recommend a look at his sites. he appears to be a decent enough imperialist, but possibly spends too much time with the others. Did you notice how one calls on another to visit and object to sites they don't like. This is to give the impression there is a lot of them, or even to bully folks into submission. You would have thought several hundred years off failed, but constant, oppression would have taught them by now, wouldn't you?

Terry has one site here
And his Campaign for an English Parliament one is found there.
He of course does not need a campaign, the English parliament is found here, where it has been for a thousand years (approx).

English Democrats

You have to laugh! Each night this week and last, there has been a five minute 'Party Political Broadcast' on behalf of a political party. The main ones had their say last week, and may have another according to the system used here, Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrats, and the daft...sorry smaller party's with more limited viewpoints, The Green Party for instance. Tonight however it was the turn of the 'English Democrats!' Their main beef (roast beef perhaps?) is that Scotland and Wales have their own parliament so why does England not have one? Incredible! They naturally did not say this straight out, they questioned the amount of money paid to 'Johnny foreigners' railways in Europe and asked why EU money is not spent here on ours? The speaker ignored how much we actually get back from what we pay in. Probably he, like the rest of us, has no idea about that. Then he returned to his real problem, the Scots getting 'our' money, and he quoted the 'Barnett Formula' a system used for dividing money between Scotland and England. "They get more than us," he huffed, stamped his feet and threatened to hold his breath until he went blue in the face, ignoring again the fact that this is not quite true.More English area get handouts than Scotland, and all get more than the Scots do. In fact only Norfolk, Surrey and London get nothing, but all this money talk depends on using the figures that suit you. The real fact is English oppression forced Scotland by economic bullying into a union they did not want, took away the parliament powers, and made Scotland subject to their over lordship! Since then Scotland has been considered second class and ignored by the English racists! They even changed the name to 'North Britain,' and when that was turned down they took to referring to 'Great Britain' as 'England!' They ED did not object to this? This is their problem, the domineering imperialists hate it when their country is regarded as no more important than all the rest. They consider invading India and Africa and the rest but do not let their folk come over here! The BNP are of course in the forefront of this racist agenda! The English Democrats may not wish to repatriate any 'coloured gentleman' but their institutionalised anti-Scots racism is seen most clearly in the picture of their leader standing their demanding an 'English Parliament,' while in the background is seen the Houses of Parliament, a place that has been, and remains, England's parliament! Since 1707 the members of that house have worked on the basis of 'England's needs and England alone!'
Only the blind self obsessed imperialist English would be so blind as to never see this.

Euro 2008

Well it's nearly over! Soon I will be able to get to my bed without worrying about extra time and penalty kicks keeping me awake. Last night Spain reached the final of this tournament by beating the Russians by three goals to nil, and well deserved it in the end. Hopefully the somewhat boring, but effective, Germans will be trounced by the fast moving Spanish. Most folks appear to agree that Spain produces the best league in the world, the best players in the world and the best failures in the world! For far too long this country has failed to succeed in such tournaments, at times making Scotland's achievement look great! Now however they have an excellent opportunity to bring home a trophy that such a footballing nation deserves. Few will begrudge them their success.

Euro 2008 has so far been a rousing success. The attitudes have on the whole been very good. Most sides have attempted to play football and not just win at all costs. The refs have been far better than in previous tournaments, and there has been some exciting and dramatic results. Turkey winning by three goals to two after being two down must be one of those! Altogether there can be few complaints about the tournament as a whole.

It is a shame that the same cannot be said for the commentary inflicted on the UK populace. In any contest between ITV and BBC it is inevitable that the Beeb will come out on top. So much so that this Sunday ITV have decided not to show the game live! An admission that the vast majority of football fans will be watching BBC. The question here is will ITV therefore improve their football offerings? I doubt it. The same bland muppets in the studio, the same advert dominated coverage, the same appalling Clive Tyldesley. It would not take much to improve this but they seem happy with tabloid coverage and small audience following. After the last World Cup it was clear they were well behind the BBC and Tyldesley was one of the major reasons for this. He is still here, are they mad or on a suicide mission? Only John Diamond and David Pleat showed any understanding of either the game being watched or the folks tuning in. Well done to them.

The BBC are indeed much more professional. Fair to say they do not have the constant breaks for bad adverts, but they have now inserted trailers for their own 'upcoming' coverage of sporting events which are just as irritating and needless. However the stuffed dummies in the studio are far better than those provided, at great expense, by ITV. Hansen, in spite of being a 'Tomb Tabard' has covered the games reasonably well. Even Alan Shearer, a man with all the personality drained out of him, has almost made a joke on occasion, and the much derided Linekar has never seemed to fail in my eyes. 'The boy done good' as they say.

However there is one real cause for complaint throughout the tournament. England! From the first John Motson has attempted to bring 'England' into everything. The Turkish winger, brought u in Leytonstone, was mentioned so often because he had an English connection. Any excuse, the club an individual played for, any link to a Premiership club in the tabloids, the place he bought his shirts, anything was used constantly to bring England into the tournament the failed dismally to reach. The fact that Russia and Croatia had made it through to the next round showed that 'England had lost to quality sides.' No England were crap and got stuffed by quality sides John! And as for Clive and his hero worship of Ronaldo, well how many times were Man U mentioned during Portugal's games? More than Portugal were I imagine. Tyldseley only knows two sides, Man U and Engerland, no-one else counts. Now had this been broadcast in England it could be ignored, however this stuff was sent throughout the United Kingdom, so Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish were forced to suffer the insufferable English self praise.

I suppose I could write to the self obsessed 'Equalities' minister Harriet Harman and demand action and ask that in future Scotland, Wales, and Northern Irish connections should be shoved down folks throats also but she will probably be doing her hair or counting the number of women in her department. I wonder, if she finds there are more women than men, more whites than blacks or browns, will she replace them with men, black or otherwise? I suspect not.

The English, Arrogant or just Self Deluded?

From Dan Warren on the BBC site, 9th January 2003

January is a bleak, depressing month, brightened only by the occasional snowball fight and the fact there are no wasps.
But if you are an English football fan, there is at least some reason to continue living.
The recent steady flow of talented young stars has turned into an veritable torrent, with a new teenage hero seemingly unearthed every week.
A brace by 19-year-old Michael Tonge against Liverpool on Wednesday, while 20-year-old Neil Mellor was scoring at the other end, added two more names to this term's astounding production line of promise.
And future England manager Alan Shearer must be rubbing his sensible hands together in glee at the pot of gold maturing before his very eyes.

Goalkeepers

Chris Kirkland, 21 now, will be the world's finest goalkeeper by 2008, especially after another five years of shot-stopping practice at the back of Liverpool's attack-shy team.
Leeds' Paul Robinson, 23, is unlikely to be far behind his Liverpool rival and the two of them are likely to vie, Shilton-Clemence style, for the number one jersey for many years.

Defence

History has shown that every successful England international team has contained brothers, and Rio and Anton Ferdinand will form the bedrock of Shearer's defence.
Rio will be the team's veteran at 29, but Anton will possess the same assured approach and, let us hope, the same "funky" goalscoring celebrations.
Blackburn's Martin Taylor will be there to mop up when the siblings' rivalry causes them to lose concentration.
Ashley Cole and Shaun Wright-Phillips will be devastating wing-backs, whose surging runs will leave Italians crying into their capuccinos and Germans blubbing in their bratwursts.

Midfield

This is where England excel, with the maverick talents of Joe Cole and David Dunn backed by the steel and vision of Steven Gerrard.
With Dunn (28 in 2008) and Cole (26 in 2008) possessing maturity and talent, all England need is for Gerrard (27) to end his current run of form which is, unfortunately, rubbish.
All three will be at their peak, and the onlooking David Beckham, who will probably retire from football at 30 to pursue a rock career, will smile in the stands as his successors shine.

Forwards

Rooney is but part of England's talent avalanche
England will have so much talent up front it will be embarrassing, and other teams may concede games before kick-off to avoid the humiliation on the pitch.
The original odd couple will spearhead the attack - Wayne Rooney and Michael Owen.
Off the field, the pair will fight like dogs, but on the field they will combine to create flowing football poetry which will reduce even the most toughened defenders to mere shells of men.
And to keep them alert, the likes of Liverpool's Neil Mellor, Aston Villa's Darius Vassell, Leeds' James Milner and West Ham's Jermaine Defoe will all be in the prime of their careers.


This array of 'stars, who do they play in their first game then, hmmm?

The Archbishop of Canterbury

Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, has entered the Muslim debate in a big way. I wonder if he realised just how much antipathy would be engendered by his comments. Now I am sure he considered carefully what he had to say, he is after all an academic, but did he comprehend the emotions that would be stirred here? The very idea that Islamic Sharia law could be tolerated in some aspects in the UK in similar fashion to some Jewish or Hindu beliefs was possibly naive at best! It is only a few days ago the Bishop of Rochester was warning of 'No-Go' areas in Britain, and it leaves me wondering about the relationship between these two men. Surely the Bishop, born and raised in Pakistan, with Muslim relatives and a 'hands on' experience of the variety of Islamic teaching, would be a man Canterbury ought to learn from?

There is no doubt a radical Islam is at large in the world. Based not on one man but on a belief, with many variations, but which is looking for a showdown between what it recognises as 'two civilisations!' This will lead to much trouble in the days ahead, and some might be tempted to read into this an 'Armageddon' situation, especially Americans! While they might be right, and the end will certainly centre on the middle east, unless we have insight into this will cannot be sure.

The Archbishop, and Bishop remember just means 'overseer' or as some would put it, 'gaffer,' the Archbishop is truly attempting to find common ground and a happy result for all people. This is to be commended but does also appear to misunderstand the outcry from the tabloid media and of course plays into the hands of the 'Little Englander!.' Many will see this as allowing 'Johnny Foreigner' to dictate to the natives. To them this was fine in the nineteenth century when we told them what to do but it is not acceptable when they come over here and dictate to us! I mean it's just not right is it? Sharia Law would in my understanding be rejected by most Muslims in this country, and those who demand it will use this to push for more influence, not for Islam, but for themselves, and their cause. There are many elements of Islam that can happily continue in the UK, in fact the first Mosque was built in Woking in 1889 and has been so unobtrusive few know about it! It is therefore possible for Islam to survive in the UK with little difficulty. The problem is that amongst the two million Muslims a few radicals have influenced the younger generation, using the political ineptness of the West's handling of the middle east over the past hundred years, and engendered a possible terrorist force that, while inept, constitutes a very real danger to the nation.

We are in very real danger of polarising the UK into them and us. Unless common sense policies are introduced soon the fallout may be worse than an attack on an airport or a bomb here and there. For too long the left, in particular the Labour party, have indulged the immigrant causing a backlash from the indigenous white population who have been branded racist simply for objecting. Too often the home grown native is considered less than the incomer, and now we reap the reward, but possibly too late. Those from South Eastern Europe obtain homes before young married blacks and Asians and then who do we call racist? Problems aplenty in Luton alone through this.

It is time we considered people as 'people' and not 'colours,' 'races,' or' sex,' (sorry the left prefer to call it 'Gender' for some reason) or anything else. Better immigration controls, fairer housing policy as opposed 'Daily Mail' motivated ones, and a removal of all organisations concerned with 'equality,' as they encourage difference not 'equality.' Allowing Sharia Law would of course increase alienation and separation, allowing the radicals more opportunity, not less. Creating work for the young in Bradford and Oldham would lessen the appeal for many in those areas, and in my view removing non 'British' items such as veils would lead to a much more cohesive structure. Rochester may well be right, there are Muslim 'No - go areas, just as there are similar areas caused by gang warfare and religious divides, his Archbishop needs to listen to him, and possibly read his bible again as he appears to have forgotten what is written there, and take heed.

England and the English

The United Kingdom comprises four nations. Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and England. In the eyes of the world it comes all to often under the name 'England.' The sad thing is, it comes under that name also in the minds of far too many Englishmen! The Irish troubles are well known, and the separation of the six Ulster counties in the nineteen twenties was supposed to end the conflict there. It failed, only political means will do so. Wales was absorbed almost unnoticed a thousand years ago by the aggressive land grabbing English King Edward I. He tried this on Scotland also and was not just rebuffed but defeated by William Wallace. Robert the Bruce later confirmed Scotland as a free nation by defeating Edwards feeble descendant at Bannockburn. (At this point it is permissible to shout 'Hooray!')

Since then England wormed away at the neighbour to the north, with every intention of being the dominant partner. King James VI became the sovereign head of both nations in the 1600s, while the union of the parliaments was forced by economic and diplomatic strangulation in 1707.
The first prevented needless wars, the second was intended to destroy Scotland altogether. It failed! Scotland ignored the attempt to refer to her as 'North Britain' and remained proudly Scots, the people working with Calvinistic effort to build a new world. Scotland led the way in the 'Enlightenment' with Edinburgh becoming the 'Athens of the North' with her abundance of thinking men. The Scots worked throughout the now 'United Kingdom,' teaching in the churches and building what was to become the 'Empire.' They, along with the Welsh and Irish were found in every sphere, arts, business, sport, music and religion. Without them England would never have become the 'workshop of the world.'

Yet to listen to the TV or radio it appears we are all 'English!' 'We' they tell us, have suffered defeat in Russia at the football, against South Africa (where 'we' were cheated), and in the F1 race where Hamilton (a Scots name) failed. 'We?' Scotland lost to Argentine and it was hardly mentioned in the news of the UK media, Wales disappeared without trace or mention and the Irish were ignored. Why is this? Why do TV stations go 'live' at the airport to see the returning rugby losers? What is this self belief the English have? But wait a minute, is this self belief or emptiness? The English are seen as arrogant, over hyped, self worshipping folk, and not without reason. They really do believe their football team is one of the best in the world, and that they deserve to always be at the top table. They have a litany of complaints concerning the times they were 'cheated' these 'world cup winners' who were given goals when the ball never crossed the line. What is it that makes them so?

Since 1996 England has realised she is a nation, up till then she thought she was Britain, and regarded the little bits at the edges as parts of her. She is still stunned by the rejection she feels after the cry for freedom and equality that erupted there some years ago. How to respond? Why by feeling betrayed, resentful and by ignoring the wrongs the English as individuals and as a nation have done to the other members of the UK. She also emphasises even more her self importance in sport as a means of being a nation. But the English still do not really know what that is. Scots know what they are, as do the Welsh and Irish, but will the English ever understand? This is not to say there a re no good English, on the contrary. They share the 'Britishness' that close cooperation has brought, and many have never understood the true depth of feeling engendered by their racist attitude. An attitude most clearly seen in the impression given of Gordon brown the prime minister as 'another Scot!' Blair is seen as a Scot, a term he never used for himself, and one he obviously rejected, but to the Tories in particular, who are seen as the 'middle England party, that is what he is classed as. There are a great many shared 'British' attitudes, most are good, but until the four nations are recognised as such, and treated equally, there will always be discontent. A discontent that will result in great glee at the fall of the English supermen, whatever sport they play!

By the by, in the kingdom of Gods terms, is nationhood important? A collection of people under a geographic sphere, that is a nation, nothing more. Being proud of being a certain nation is neither right nor wrong. We ought to be proud we have a nation that does the right thing, and humbled by the many failings, and all nations have these. Stereotypes do exist, and always shall, but these are cultural and not part of the basic man. That never changes whatever the nation! Some nations have been badly led by poor leadership, and individuals have a responsibility before God to promote a decent society wherever they are, within their capabilities. So ensure you vote, complain, contact MPs or councillors or whatever is required to ensure a better nation. Respect for nations, like respect for individuals, and a true comprehension of where they are at appears to me to be a Godly approach.
I hope I am right?

Press Coverage

Never fails to amaze me how the press twist things to suit themselves. Football reporting is the clearest example of tabloid spin imaginable! If the team win by a lucky goal they may well be called 'all conquering' but if they lose that way it is 'shockingly poor!'
Last night England (always shockingly poor it has to be said) lost a second goal from a back pass that bobbled past the keeper. Today it is called 'His mistake' or 'blunder.' But it was neither a blunder or a mistake. Just one of those things that happen. The fact that England are rank rotten (amen) is ignored so long as one man can take the blame. Poor journalism!
Scotland meanwhile did Ok against the Ukraine. However the refs dodgy decisions undid us at the end. No way should Pressley have been sent off. No way was Shevchenkos dive a penalty! But the English press will concentrate on Scotland being beat, not Scotland losing!
Overall while the English struggle to accept they are not one of the worlds top sides, and never have been, Scotlands slow progress from the past few years continues. While there is a long way to go hope is there for the future. The young Scotland sides, Under 19s, 16s etc are doing well.
For us the way is up. Until England accept their failings and lose the needless unjustified arrogance they have only failure ahead. Failure and a long line of scapegoats no doubt.

Some journalists exist. Why is football lacking in them? Why is there so little good football writing? The fanzines of the recent past showed that some folks out there could write. How come the press ignore this and concentrate on 'loving' or 'hating' individuals or clubs?
We deserve better.
*********************************************************************************
Good also to see the two Irish sides ad Wales sorting themselves out. Northern Ireland in particular are doing well for such a small nation.

What is England?

During Euro 96 the English nation discovered they had a flag! After many years of regarding the Union Flag as 'English' the St George's Cross was rediscovered as their own. Devolution, far too long in coming, had at last woken the English up to the idea that Britain was not 'England' but a 'United Kingdom.' Since then of course the cry has been for separation of The Scots from the English, not by the Scots, but by resentful Englishmen who dislike the idea of paying for devolution. The fact of abusing Scotland for three hundred years can be ignored of course, the abuse of Scots oil to feed an English governments policy problems is never mentioned!
However, while the occasional 'English National Party' springs up full of umbrage, the English nation begins to recapture what it is to be English. The only problem they have is knowing what 'being English' actually is! What is England?
Scots have their own idea of Scotland. A mythical land of mist covered hills and bagpipes, with drunk, drug abusers in the cities and a football team that should be at the highest level in the game, but isn't. Well, maybe. The Welsh are standing at this moment on hillsides singing their hearts out, well the men are anyway, the women are in bingo halls or shopping centres.

But what is 'England?'
The English do not know. Vast numbers of flags have flown from cars and vans, buses and bicycles for weeks. Shops and houses are bedecked with a multitude of the things, but is this 'England?' Or just a herd to enlist in?

The nation is split into two halves. North and South, with the bit in between neither one nor the other. The South East cares nothing for the rest, is overcrowded and affluent. The North West is overcrowded, full of violent drugs gangs and surrounded by wonderful countryside. The South West speaks a language all of it's own, and has a greater rainfall than Yorkshire, the Anglian region, while wealthy, is flat and ignored. What is England? Can it be found in poetry, either of the past or present? Shakespeare maybe, though he wrote only what was acceptable to the king or queen of the day. Historic buildings? War hero's? Sporting achievement? Irony? Attitude? What is England?

Do the English know, or do they even care enough to find out? What if they search for 'England' and find there is nothing there? Then what? Nationalism is only skin deep after all.

SNOW!

Snow!
Big clumps of white stuff falling all over the place!
Why?
I don't want it!
I mean, it's all very nice and that, it makes the whole world a different place, it quietens the sounds and brings joy to the kids, but why? Why now?
it is just horrible stuff to walk through, it's horrible to work in and it's all over the place!
Add to that the simple fact that it is very, very cold, and that ends it for me.

This is the warmest, driest county of England, and while here I do not want to be remembering the snow that clogs Edinburgh at this time of year. Oh yes, Edinburgh in snow looks lovely.
Wonderful pictures can be made there, lovely photographs. But it is no fun watching the bus skittering down the cobbled hills towards Comely Bank is it?
There is no joy playing football on an open field with snow all around and more clambering past Burntisland with you in its sight. No sir. I have had enough of those days.
I want sunshine!

Oh Sunshine. Warmth, pleasure, T-shirts and cold drinks, scantily dressed women and long evenings with darkening deep blue skies. Oh joy!
And we have snow!

Excuse me while I rejoice...........