Bardimore

Facebook 1941

 

 

War records recently released by HM Gov indicate that an early form of Facebook chat existed in 1941.

 

Churchill and Hitler were fb "friends". They would continually press the "like" button after each communication.

 

This led to some confusion, and as Adolf didn't have any real friends he regarded his arch enemy Winston as his virtual friend.

 

I have endeavoured to translate Hitler’s strange Germanic glottal stops as best as possible:

 

Adolf: Got up early! Headache. Check this out -my favourite song:  www.nazitube/waltzinheil/uberalles

Winnie: "like"

Winnie: Great vid.

Adolf: Hi friend, that brings back memories for me

Winnie: What’s your plan today?

Adolf: Well, I had a dream about the great German ruler Barbarossa - so I'm going to invade the Soviet Union

Winnie: "like"

(very long pause)

Adolf: You still there?

Winnie: Yes. I'm just chatting to FDR in the States.

Adolf: Great! Check this out: [image of motivational poster]

"When they say you can't, say you can

When they say you are weak, say you are strong

When they doubt you, never doubt yourself

 When you doubt yourself, never be in doubt

 Only doubt those who doubt you

 Never be in any doubt that your doubt is only doubted by the doubters,

 Who only doubt you when you are in doubt, and only be in doubt

When you doubt yourself, for your doubt is your strength,

And your strength is never doubtful, unless you doubt it,

 In which case your doubt will become too doubtful,

And your strength will always doubt your doubt,

Because the doubter will doubt your strength, and the doubt

Will be very doubtful because everyone doubts you,

But you know you will never doubt yourself even though

Everyone else doubts you and...

Winnie: "like"

Winnie: Amazing! :)

Adolf: "like"

Adolf: Thanks :)

(long pause)

Winnie: I love this: www.uktube/kickthehunupthekhyberpass/1918

Adolf: "like"

Adolf: You wouldn't believe what happened today I was...

Winnie: I'm going to shove spaghetti up your arse

Adolf: ...in the office and...what?

Winnie: Sorry - I was just winding up Benito ;)

Adolf: That Italian bastard invaded Greece - he really pissed me off - silly sod: www.idiotitalytube/onecornetto/mussoliniprat1940

Winnie: Anyway, must go. See you soon if you don't freeze your balls off in Russia first.

Adolf: No fear of that ha ha. There's more chance of me blowing my brains out! LOL

**End**.

There is an extensive archive of further conversations, and they will be made available when the next packet is released by the National Archives at Kew, Richmond, Surrey, England.

 

Beware of Greeks Eating Cake....

The distressing news that Greek families are so poor that parents are giving up their children to charities because they can no longer afford to provide for them is the dichotomy of a failed Euro economic vision which promised much but was exposed to be a flawed experiment.

The cost of that exercise is the break up of families in countries which were traditionally strong in family unity and values.

Greece, Italy and Spain were all nations which prided themselves on the strength of the family and frowned upon their European neighbours who had lost that cohesion.

People from Britain or the USA would look enviously at the Spanish for example, whose families sat together around the olive groves on a balmy evening enjoying their healthy Mediterranean diet liberally washed down with sangria, whilst the kids ran around laughing gaily.

As the Guardian reported today, one Greek chap is unable to provide for his ten children even though he has a salary of £800 per month plus another £200 in welfare aid.

He's not alone. SOS Children in Greece  have experienced 1,200 families who are asking for help, and they expect the situation to get worse as the economic cuts bite harder.

It's hard to believe that such need is wanton in a highly developed European country. A country which embraced the Euro with open arms, and benefited with billions of Euros as a consequence.

If Mr Dimitris Gasparinatos, a man who has asked the authorities to take four of his children to alleviate his burden, had been a little more responsible and not behaved like a sperm cowboy he would be unlikely to be in such dire straits.

Are we to assume that membership of the EU should not come with certain conditions? Is it reasonable to accept countries into the great economic and political nirvana with all the attendant benefits, without imposing some basic responsibilities?

Why for instance should countries like Britain, Holland, Germany and France who have traditionally small families, be happy to allow the Mediterranean countries to continue having large families with impunity. I'm not advocating draconian birth control, but surely it was the duty of those countries to educate their citizens to be more restrained in their desire to have large families? I'm all for culture, but culture is not a byword or excuse to produce lots of children.

And that's the key - education. Every country which joined the EU over recent years had to meet certain criteria - namely economic and social stability, good governance, welfare for its citizens and access to education. Clearly the Club Med countries wanted their cake and eat it. They got it, they ate, and now there is no more cake.

If I sound unsympathetic to the Club Meds, it's because I have seen things outside of the euro bubble. I have seen people in the Philippines with lots of children, and my word there are lots of children.

But those children are encouraged by the Catholic Church, and a marriage exists between the church and state - a state which knows the problem of population control, but has difficulty changing the mindset. In the meantime families are working together on $2 a day, fighting through adversity, because they believe that their children are their future. That they will get good jobs and provide for their parents and siblings.

Indeed many children are begging on the streets of Manila. There is no welfare state. There is no safety net to catch them when they fall. There is no European Union that they are members of. But I know that not one decent parent would give up a child because they cannot afford to feed it. I know that as long as there was a breath of hope a child would survive in the family.

So no, I have no sympathy for the Greeks, the Spanish or Italians. They ate so much cake, that they didn't even leave any crumbs for their kids. And I'm particularly peeved as an Englishman that I paid for their cake in the first place.

"Missed" Universe.....

So why does the UK not get Miss Universe on the goggle box? Or should that be the "ogle" box?

Well, at risk of offending the female eunuchs and women's rights brigade, and all those others who regard it as a demeaning and exploitative display of tits and bums (oops - I mean womanhood) I'd like to see it!

Not because I'm a lecherous old beast (I'm not old), but because it is an infringement of my civil rights, (never thought I would use that term for this subject) and my viewing is censored.

This is an outrage, and I demand to see the most beautiful women in the world (with exception to my wife!).

Everyone else can, but because I didn't have a satellite honed on Brazil (this years venue), and because my national broadcaster sees fit to deprive me of my pleasures - digital or analogue (I pay for the BBC damn it), and no other commercial station sees fit to broadcast it (fearing a backlash), I can only read about it.

It's an outrage I say!

Now, I ask myself, when the crappy freeview channels show flesh in all its glory, with orange tanned tarts dressed in bling, farting around drunk on the streets of England's finest cities, revealing more blubber than a beached whale, and barely able to string a coherent sentence together (and that's when they are sober), why are we unable to see the finer side of beauty and intelligence?

Yes dear reader - beauty contests have moved on from the inane parade we used to get when it was the highlight of British viewing in the innocent non-pc days of television. These days they are on a different agenda.

Whilst we Brits must endure Big Brother and Snog, Marry and Avoid - both excuses for voyeurism and exhibitionism, and a host of other bottom feeding excuses for entertainment - beauty contests (proper ones) have been deemed inappropriate for our entertainment.

Meanwhile, those countries who are much less hypocritical, with less hang ups, can watch a bevy of beautiful women who are proud of their achievements, display national costumes which would put a Rio carnival to shame, and are expected to answer questions that confuse a Cambridge academic.

There have been suggestions in this year's contest that some questions were easier than others, and those contestants which had the use of an interpreter had an unfair advantage, because it gave them more time to think about the answer.

 A case in point is Miss Philippines (who came third), and stumbled on a question.

I'll come to that in a moment. The winner - Miss Angola - was asked by Filipino judge (the famous Lea Salonga) "If you could change any part of your physical attributes, what would it be and why? She replied that she wouldn't change anything, because she is "endowed with inner beauty".

Fair enough - simple and non controversial I hear you say. But compare that to poor Miss Philippines (below), a graduate in architecture who was asked "Would you change your religious belief to marry the man you love?"

Now come on - what's the correct answer for that? Is there one?

Whilst Miss Angola could have said something churlish in answer to her question e.g. - I would change my nose or my hair, or my big toe - Miss Philippines was asked something much more profound.

Her answer? On the hoof she said "I wouldn't marry someone who didn't share my faith, if the guy truly loved me, he would respect and share my love of God."

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. If she said otherwise then she would be castigated as a weak-minded floozy. But because she said she wouldn't it implies a fundemental religious stance.

The fact is she gave a straight answer under pressure, without the aid of a time lapse availed to others who had interpreters.

Lea Salonga (Miss Saigon etc) has been critisised for not asking a more gravitas question to Miss Angola. In her defence she said she didn't create the questions - she just asked them.

The general consensus is that Shamcey Supsup (yes - that's her name - Miss Philippines) should have won - but in any event she will be lauded when she returns home.

Now, forgetting about the obvious other elements of the show (if that's possible), it seems to me that Miss Universe is a pageant of high drama, exceptional visual entertainment, and a display of young educated women who have to act and think on their feet.

Contrast that with the garbage espoused on British television, and ask why have we soared so high with our airs of superiority and politically correct sensitivities, yet fallen so low with our standards.

Miss Universe has alot to teach us - and it will certainly teach those who think they know better. We may even enjoy it - heaven forbid!

 







  

The Night Train to Luxor. Murder on the Disorientating Express and Newton's Three Laws of Motion....

The Night Train to Luxor may sound like the title of a 1940's film noir, but it was actually the train my wife and I took from Cairo one night last August to board our boat to sail us down the Nile to Aswan. (I made a Hubpage about it).

I'm pleased to say it wasn't "Death on the Nile", but it certainly was "Constipation in the Compartment".

I know it doesn't have the same ring as Agatha Christie's famous novel, (more like Murder on the Disorientating Express) but travelling overnight on an Egyptian sleeper is akin to losing a loved one - the loved one in question being a laxative.

If a murder took place it would have been me strangling the porter whilst Hercule Poirot idled redundantly, because I would have proudly admitted my guilt.

Travel writers will romantically enthuse about journeys on vintage clapped out trains, turning their experiences into sentimental nostalgia of bygone ages. Well, that's their job and I don't mind them employing a poetic license laced with invective about the quaint rolling stock and Edwardian charm of the carriages.

The first impression one gets at Cairo Train Station is one of chaos. Chaos insofar that there appears to be no order. A guide would be useful in these circumstances, of which there are dozens all designed to ensure that maximum chaos ensues.

I have a theory - I call it the Egyptian Laws of Chaos - and consists of three rules: 1. Reason is a figment of unreasonable imagination. 2. Logic is an illogical expectation. 3. Order is disorder.

When Isaac Newton wrote his three laws of motion it wasn't an apple which sparked his wad - it was the thought of travelling on a train in Egypt.

Newton's First Law: An object at rest will remain at rest unless acted on by an unbalanced force. An object in motion continues in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force. This law is often called "The Law of Inertia".

It means that there is a natural tendency of objects to keep on doing what they're doing. All objects resist changes in their state of motion. In the absence of an unbalanced force, an object in motion will maintain this state of motion.

Whilst Newton never visited Egypt, it is clear he knew something millions of tourists have since learned to their cost. That an Egyptian train will not move until they have reached maximum capacity, therefore becoming extremely unbalanced at which point it will decide to move. It will then continue to move until inertia sets in - which generally means the train driver decides to stop the locomotion and goes for his own personal motion - ie a piss. 

Newton's Second Law: Acceleration is produced when a force acts on a mass. The greater the mass (of the object being accelerated) the greater the amount of force needed (to accelerate the object).

Everyone unconsciously knows the Second Law. We all know that heavier objects require more force to move the same distance as lighter objects.

This law was tailor-made for Egyptian trains - instead of decreasing the mass and thereby increasing acceleration, they ensure that maximum delay and effort is guaranteed by increasing the mass.

This ensures that timetables are redundant and that rail employees can look astounded by your question "what time will we reach our destination?" Which incidentally is in direct proportion to the question everyone asks on the platform "Where is my train?" and will result in similar guffaws of laughter.

Newton's Third Law: For every action there is an equal and opposite re-action.

This means for every force there is a reaction force that is equal in size, but opposite in direction. That is to say that whenever an object pushes another object it gets pushed back in the opposite direction equally hard.

This normally happens in Egypt when two trains are on the same line and stationary. Like two star-crossed lovers kissing in the dark - there is kinetic energy. Consequently one train will travel several feet forward, and then several feet back.

Fortunately this doesn't cause catastrophe - because the Egyptian Rail Network have embraced Newton's Laws of Motion down to a fine art and clearly are aware of my own Egyptian Laws of Chaos.

Since my last visit, Egypt has revolted and embarked on change. I suspect the main reason why the trial of ex-president Mubarak is such a mess of a dogs dinner is not because he is ill, but because he waited so long for a train to get him to the court that he has become exhausted.

So next time you see him lying prostrate on a bed - confronting his prosecutors - think of the journey he had and the porter which served him his excuse for a coffee in the carriage.

If he was as frustrated as me, I hope he strangled the miserable money-grabbing bugger - and lets face it - what did he have to lose?

Especially for the UK Chancellor - George Osborne....Da Di Da Di Dum Dum...

 

A previously undiscovered script has been found from the children's television show Rainbow involving Bungle, Zippy, George, Geoffrey and Rod, Jane & Freddie:

"I say chaps", said Bungle, "Lets all go on holiday and have a jolly!" 

 "What? At the same time? Spiffing!" Says George.

 "I'm in!" Says Zippy.

 "Me too!" says Geoffrey.

 "But what about the country?" says Rod, Jane and Freddie (singing in unison) "Who's going to be in charge?"

 "Don't be so silly" says Zippy "We'll leave the Teletubbies in charge!"

 "I'm going to Italy" says Bungle.

 "And I'm going to America" says George.

 "And I'm going to France" says Geoffrey.

 "And I'm going to Ballamory" says Zippy.

 Just a minute Bungle" says Rod. "You're the Prime Minister. You've got a country to run."

 "And George" says Jane, "you're the Chancellor and you've got to run the economy".

 "And Geoffrey" says Freddie "you are the Home Secretary. You're responsible for law and order. And as for you Zippy, you're the Mayor of London - surely you'll stay at least?"

 "OMG! You three are real killjoys" says Bungle. "You should stick to singing nursery rhymes. Besides, what could possibly happen? It's August. It's not as if there'll be riots in the streets while we're away! This is England!"

 Zippy, Geoffrey and George roll around laughing at Bungle's humorous joke.

 "Ooh, you're so funny Bungle" says Zippy.

 "Yes, you're so funny Bungle" says Geoffrey

 "I'm so excited" says George.

 "Dum Dums" sang Rod, Jane and Freddie.