Greatly under-exposed and seldom regarded as material for main headlines, there is a movement straining to protect the buildings that have for hundreds of years served to construct the identity of our small, but great country. Structures from ancient times right through to the last century continue to be violated and razed at the hands of unsympathetic developers.
This short series of posters were composed to highlight the demolition of historical buildings in Britain: Of late, an issue relentlessly pulling at strings of my heart. Conservation, compassionate restoration and thoughtful utilisation are collectively the most ethical answer when redeveloping urban and rural areas. Demolition has however, become barbarically the primary solution chosen.
The intention of the posters was simply to encourage the public to question the value of their heritage, and stir them to fight for what essentially are the stories of their individual legacy. The slogans were simple, leaving room for further research into the subject to be carried out by those who were simply curious or vastly moved by the message.
For more information, visit Save Britain’s Heritage and English Heritage.
Hannah Wallace
http://milkytreats.blogspot.com
]]>
It is never easy to predict the future, as any politician or stock broker will tell you, and when, domestically at least, the years events will be sculpted by an election outcome it becomes even more difficult.
By June a new government will have been formed but what colour they fly is still up in the air. May 6th is currently being touted as the fateful day by the Conservatives, who would no doubt benefit form it coming sooner rather than later. The longer it drags on, expect Gordon Brown and Labour to start making inroads into the poll deficit, and do not rule out the possibility of a hung parliament.
For the first time the leaders of the main parties will take part in televised debates. Liberal Democrat top-dog Nick Clegg has the most to gain and will carefully position himself in case of a tight race. Prime Minister in waiting, David Cameron, will be confident after regularly upstaging Brown at Prime Ministers Questions. How to reduce the deficit, MP’s expenses, the NHS and Afghanistan are going to be at the top of the agenda during what will be the longest general election campaign the UK has ever seen. MP’s expenses will likely be top story early on with current members having to declare their intensions to run again in the very near future which will certainly lead to some embarrassing headlines for some.
Of cause whoever does not get elected is likely to create as many headlines. If Labour lose, Brown will have no choice but to resign, if the Conservatives lose it could mean the end, for now at least, for Cameron and if the Lib Dem’s underperform Clegg may come under pressure.
With Brown the more likely to go who would take over? David Milliband (Foreign Secretary) was put forward as an alternative when Tony Blair stood down, Alan Johnston (Home Secretary) and Ed Balls (Schools Secretary) would be popular in some circles.
But what about Mandelson? The Prince of Darkness has been instrumental since his return, but a leadership run from the Lords is awkward to say the least and finding him a safe Labour seat as an MP creates its own problems.
So what for the new government?
Brown is to host an Afghanistan conference in London in January with the hope of formulating an exit strategy. However much like Copenhagen 2009 the public will take a lot of convincing it is more than posturing.
President Obama has already made it known he want to see the first stages of troop withdrawal from Afghanistan by 2011. This means serious progress must be made this year. Many high profile experts and military personnel have said the situation may get worse before it gets better and with over 100 British deaths last year the question is how much worse. A lot of this may boil down to President Hamid Karzai’s job performance in the coming months.
Iran clearly is also going to be a major issue this year. President Ahmadinejad is already under pressure while opposition leader Mir Hossein Musavi has already said he would be willing to die for the reform movement. With the death of the Grand Ayatollah this may be the window the reform movement needs.
Iraq too is to hold elections this year, most likely in March if security allows with the hope it can confine an unpopular chapter to the history books. North Korea will also be on the agenda with continued rumours of Kim Jong Ill’s health and of cause their feared nuclear capabilities.
In May the 189 signatories of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty congregate in New York to review the plan with some predicting the collapse of the deal leading to the possibility of the nations mentioned above developing Weapons of Mass Destruction.
Security is certainly going to be a watch word for this year, as it has for many years now.
With Brown in full conference mode following the G20, Copenhagen and the upcoming Afghanistan talks he also wants to add another to discuss terrorism in the Yemen following the alleged failed bomb plot on Christmas Day.
A major question for many is can the western world go another year without a successful attack on our shores?
President Obama’s self imposed deadline for closing Guantanamo Bay will not be met, by his own admission.
The plans are still active with the possibility of a maximum security prison in Illinois being the next host of allegedly the most dangerous terrorists on the planet. Globally the economic situation will dominate for another twelve months. The eyes of the world will focus on Dubai as the western world keeps its fingers crossed the blip seen there in November and December will no become a long term trend.
There are of cause several issues at home we need to attack.
Feelings are split over what will happen to unemployment figures this year while the election result will determine exactly how the deficit is to be addressed. Unemployment is currently at 2.5million with many claiming it could top 2.8million before it starts to get better. The £820billion deficit will be a more difficult problem to tackle especially when you consider it must be done while jeopardising the recovery both in terms of growth and unemployment.
When and how we go about this is another one of these issues which will only be known after the election.
Will the renewed British economy be based on finance as in the naughties or will a new industry brake forth and dominate the teenies?
Will French President Sarkozy’s railing against the ‘freewheeling Anglo Saxon model’ have its desired effect?
Will the New EU President Herman Van Rompuy bare any teeth at all? The problem with a new industry dominating is manufacturing in this country was devastated in the 1980s and will struggle to return while financial industries are unpopular and will be heavily regulated in the coming years.
A banking presence in London is inevitable but with a greater chance of international banks heading to Europe dumping us freewheeling Anglo Saxons. Although even as the New Year begins the London Stock Exchange is being boosted by improved performance in the manufacturing sector.
As for Mr Van Rompuy, it is unlikely the force of his particular role will be known until a few EU Presidents down the line.
There are other troubling international problems.
The results of Copenhagen will become more apparent this year and its critics and supporters will have something to either laugh or cry about sooner rather than later.
Environmental issues are a major part of all politicians’ manifestos and some action will no doubt be taken but whether it can have any serious effect is debatable and in even bigger doubt is the $100bn promised to help developing nations. The environmental lobby must get past the ‘climategate’ affair if their beliefs are to hold any legitimacy and its supporters need to learn the violence which dogged Copenhagen and London needs to stop if progress is to be made.
In the UK, after two years with major flooding, can we expect the same or will our particular brand of climate change now bring a major drought? Although it was only a few years ago meteorologists were talking of a monsoon style season in this country.
But as we all know there is only going to be one story any of us truly care about this year and it is taking place in South Africa this summer. Football fever will hit our shores once again with wall-to-wall international games on the television prompting complaints from those who care little for the beautiful game.
Once again Andy Murray will raise our hopes of a British champion at Wimbledon while our athletes head to India in November for the Commonwealth Games. There will be no doubt which team British F1 fans will be cheering for this year with the McLaren world champion dream team of Jenson Button and Lewis Hamilton set to battle the returning Michael Schumacher.
Whatever happens, 2010 will be a huge year both in the UK and across the world with many major issues coming to the fore.
Can progress be made in Afghanistan, will David Cameron be the next resident of number 10 and can Fabio Capello lead us to victory?
Only time will tell.
Colin Rowe
]]>
Twelve months ago there was a shop called Woolworths, Michael Jackson was planning 40 nights at the O2 Arena and taxpayers were unaware they had bought a duck house and adult movies.
Yes, 2009 has been a busy year. It has been dominated by MPs expenses and the credit crunch but the last year of the noughties was also the year of swine flu, Somali pirates, the end of the Tamil Tigers and 104 British deaths in Afghanistan.
The expenses scandal, unearthed by The Daily Telegraph in May, has cast a shadow over UK politics from which it seems it may not recover. Numerous current members have been forced to either resign or not seek re-election and Sir Thomas Legg has made no friends asking several of them to pay back expenses retrospectively.
The big name resignation was Speaker of the House Michael Martin, the first speaker to be forced out in 300 years. However, his successor was not without controversy. John Bercow began his career as a staunch right winger but won the election for speaker thanks to support from Labour who favour his maturing moderate tendencies.
However this years Lazareth Award goes to Peter Mandleson.
The EU Trade Commissioner rejoined UK politics after two resignations as a Lord and has been instrumental in keeping Labour in with a shot at next year’s election.As he said at the Labour party conference ‘Tony said our project would only be complete when the Labour Party learned to love Peter Mandelson.’
Although Mandleson has certainly stopped the free-fall in Labour’s polling numbers this year certainly belongs to Conservative leader David Cameron.The Prime Minister elect has been on great form both inside and out of the House of Commons, despite his communications director being implicated in tapping phone calls from members of the royal family while editor of The News of the World.
BNP leader Nick Griffin was a regular fixture this year winning a seat in the European Parliament and contentiously appearing on BBC flagship Question Time where he struggled against some tough interrogation.
Outside of Westminster it has also been a busy political year.
The EU appointed its first President and Foreign Minister in Belgian PM Herman Van Rompuy and Baroness Ashton respectively, a decision heavily criticised for lacking public involvement and ignoring diplomatic heavy weights like Tony Blair.
This was not the first time Europe had caused controversy in 2009.
In August Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi, otherwise known as the Lockerbie bomber, was released on companionate grounds from a Scottish prison cell and returned to a heroes welcome in Libya.
This caused a huge stir across the world but most notably in America, where most of the victims had come from. The Secretary of State and heads of the FBI and CIA objected to his transfer despite al-Magrahi suffering from terminal cancer.
Later in the year another trial halfway across the globe caused a stir in the United States when American student Amanda Knox was convicted in Italy of the brutal murder of British student Meredith Kercher. The effects of the American complaints, which are heavily critical of the Italian police and legal system, are not likely to be known soon and Miss Knox will spend a significant amount of time behind bars in Italy.
In America the infamous Washington sniper John Allen Muhammad, who shot and killed ten people over three weeks in 2002, was put to death in Virginia after failing in his appeal to the US Supreme Court.
There has however been some good across the pond. In January the first black President was inaugurated (Twice), but President Obama has since seen his approval ratings crumble. He did controversially win the Nobel Peace Prize for his ‘aspirations’ towards world peace beating Zimbabwean opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai. Recently Obama was forced to deal with substantial backlash from proposed health care reforms which, in a diluted form, now look set to take effect in 2010,
However, he did fail in his attempt to close Guantanamo Bay detention centre by the end of this year, although it may now move to Illinois.
2009 did see one detainee return to England. Binyam Mohammed had been held at the Cuban army base and is now searching to prosecute his captors for prolonged torture over his four year stay.
This his year it was an act of domestic terrorism which shook America to its core. In November at Fort Hood, Texas, 13 were left dead after an American Army psychiatrist went on the rampage. This was followed on Christmas Day with the attempted attack on a Delta Airlines flight from Amsterdam to Detroit where a British educated Nigerian man allegedly tried to blow up the plane. In 2006 the liquid bomb plot caused a similar security scare and the men responsible for the attempted attack were found guilty in the UK this year and were all given hefty prison sentences.
According to Bush, Blair, Brown and Obama a large reason for our presence in Afghanistan is to stop terrorists like this. However it has come at a terrible price this year. 310 Americans and 104 British troops have lots their lives battling the Taliban and al Qaeda this year alone. Their sacrifice was unable to provide a democratic election with widespread rumours of fraud in President Hamid Karzai’s win which eventually were declared after Dr Abdulla Abdulla withdrew. Apparently there is light at the end of the Afghan tunnel with President Obama hoping the latest troop surge from both sides of the Atlantic will see soldiers returning home as soon as 2011.
Iran also struggled to hold elections this year with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad apparent election victory triggering protests in Tehran in which several people were killed. In December Ayatollah Montazeri died casting doubt over the reform movement in this strictly Muslim country.
One conflict did end with the British handing over power in Basra in June and the Americans withdrawing from Iraq in September.
The world was however nearly brought to its knees by the H1N1 Swine Flu virus. Cases started in Mexico during March and spread rapidly across the world. Although the feared global pandemic has not yet come to fruition people still hold reservations it may make a return in 2010.
There were also attempts to curb larger global problems. The G20 in London, marred by violence from protesters and heavy handed conduct by police led the way to the Copenhagen Climate Conference, and also global solutions to the economic crisis. Unfortunately for environmental activists the infamous Climategate e-mails dominated the news in the run up to Copenhagen with revelations of results tampering and selective publishing.
The summit, marred by protesters, police and poor organisation, may not have led to the deal which many campaigners wanted, but may have set the ground work for legally binding deals including financing for developing nations to develop green energy.
Available funds have been an issue now for nearly two years with both businesses and governments alike struggling to find liquid capital. Brown, Cameron and Clegg, along with every other party leader across the world have clashed over the issue of public spending cuts to cure the £820bn deficit. The right argues for rapid deficit reduction while the left believes it should be a more gradual process. Both claim theirs will avoid the dreaded double dip.
Bankers dominated the news with repeated calls for government bailouts and with the full extent of their involvement in the global economic collapse becoming clear. Sir Fred Goodwin, the head of Royal Bank of Scotland at the start of the crisis, retired with a £16million pension pot while unemployment rates rocketed to nearly 2.5million. As Christmas approached the some banks announced they were going to pay bonuses this year despite their taxpayer owned status.
Other countries have made progress with their problems.
In May Tamil Tiger leader Velupillai Prabhakaran was found dead after bloody fighting in North Eastern Sri Lanka effectively ending 26 years of civil conflict.
Nigeria also saw tentative steps towards peace with the surrender of militant leaders in May. It is hoped this may release valuable oil in the Delta region and encourage tourism in what many see as a failed state.
In other parts of Africa the problems keep mounting. Somali pirates have been a constant challenge regularly hijacking ship off their cost and holding the vessel and crew ransom. They are still holding a British couple snatched from their yacht in October.
Globally the biggest story of the year was the sudden death of the King of Pop Michael Jackson. The often controversial icon passed away in June.
More recently Tiger Woods drove into the headlines after a car crash led to revelations about extra marital affairs which have left his personal and professional life in the rough.
It has been a year of surprises and disappointments, the end of the first decade of the new millennium.
So what will dominate 2010?
Read the New Years instalment to find out.
Colin Rowe
]]>
Massive proposals for increases in tuition fees at UK universities has sparked widespread furore, and cries of injustice are being heard not only amongst the protests of those most affected (the students), but also within the education industry, and parliament itself.
Still in the process of being reviewed, the increases in tuition fees – some suggesting a raise of up to four times the current amount – supposedly support claims that increased fees will ensure that UK universities continue to deliver world class education of the highest standard – Undoubtedly something that the government places great importance upon not only for Londoners, but also for the considerable number of foreign students attracted to studying in London too.
The quandary for students however, is perhaps more complex than it may seem – While lower income households are screaming blue murder (with support of the National Union of Students – the NUS), menaced by the thought of not being able to afford university at all, middle class students may be worse affected, missing out on bursaries provided to bridge the gap for the poorer attendees. Look at the situation from all sides, and it seems there wont be any winners in this situation – except the government.
Be that as it may, the UK poses some intriguing questions when it comes to university education – some that clearly expose the British government’s frequent short-sightedness, and particularly at a time when strong economic management and foresight are imperative.
At present levels, Britain spends just 0.9% of its GDP on universities – a vast difference compared to the rest of Europe, which also lags behind the United States’ figure of 2.7%. Asking students to incur a cost that the government is effectively saying they are no longer willing to fully commit to is a failure – not only to its people, but to the future of an economy that is still struggling to free itself from the grip of a crippling recession.
Amongst all the noise though, it is as hard as ever to recognise any real dialogue, let alone a positive and fair solution – especially when some are suggesting (with unnecessary malice, it seems) that policy-makers and university vice-chancellors are out to bleed dry for their own financial benefit students and parents alike.
In the public arena though, debate has so far been dodged. Wes Streeting of the NUS has warned against “the scale of public opposition” and “the level of student anger”, though very rarely choosing to offer dialogue, in favour of a more belligerent approach – with very little focus on solutions – something which the NUS has failed to achieve in the past.
Undoubtedly, transparent, public debate is essential for this topic to be amicably solved. Governments responsible for diversifying their population have a commitment to contribute to, support or subsidise a nation’s higher education system – for the benefit of its people, and its economy. The sting of a recession shouldn’t be an excuse to neglect something that will surely see repercussions in the future. Concisely reviewing departmental performance, and genuinely measuring efficiency, relevance and need across the board, will no doubt facilitate measures to eliminate unnecessary costs – without sacrificing jobs as well.
Government should surely be encouraging business to sponsor the nation’s important sectors, while fees for courses usually associated with lower income earners (as well as the opposite end of the spectrum) should be heavily graded. Some anger over this proposed increase is certainly justifiable, but without creating a dialogue for solutions, any opposition to these changes is simply barking into the wind.
Carlos Hurworth – http://theinsideoutside.wordpress.com
]]>
Over 900 climate change campaigners have been arrested during protests at the Copenhagen summit.
The violence broke out when tens of thousands of people marched with signs saying ‘Save the humans’ but a group of protesters began to throw bricks at the police.
Police have been accused of overreacting to ‘sporadic street violence’ by using ‘kettling’ methods to detain protesters, similar to those during the G20 protests in April.
Read more on the arrests here.
]]>
We live in a world where news flows 24 hours a day. A world where you can find out anything that your heart desires without even leaving the comfort of your own home. In such a world rather than having to trust that sources like the BBC, tabloids or textbooks supply and interpret news and information accurately, we can merely seek a second, third, fourth or in fact any number of other opinions and sources.
The irony is, that this can have a negative effect in portraying a clear message, especially for those groups trying to get the climate change message out there. Countless reports and statistics begin to confuse the scientific arguments about climate change. When differing sources tell us that temperatures may rise by anywhere between 1 degree Celsius and 6.4 degrees Celsius and with some reputable sources still predicting global cooling, trying to make a judgement becomes difficult. Indeed, sea level rise predictions from the IPCC alone spread anywhere between 90mm and almost a metre. This means people don’t know what they are really facing in the future. Our obsession as a society for statistics just confuses the whole thing further. While scientists may debate the effect thermal expansion has on sea levels and how much extra carbon dioxide can be absorbed by plant life, the wider issue is surely more important.
The Copenhagen Summit is seen by many as crucial to future policy on climate change
The real inconvenient truth is that we don’t know. We know so little about our complex world and the workings of our atmospheric systems. With Climate being one of the most complex areas of science it is obvious why we do not have a complete picture. Add to this the scale of what we are trying to predict in both space, the entire globe, and time, predictions running ahead a century, then it is no wonder that certainty is hard to come by. Unfortunately for the well intentioned Green lobby, this uncertainty plays perfectly into the hands of the groups with a huge interest in the outcome of the climate debate. Groups such as the energy sector, oil industry and car industry. Their ability and motive to spread counter-intelligence thanks to their considerable influence in the worlds of science, the media and politics means it is not surprising people start to doubt reputable sources like the IPCC when these groups stoop to any means to protect the ‘business as usual’ mantra. This leads to the defenceless individual, just looking for direction, to get lost in a sea of incomprehensible and conflicting statistics.
The 10:10 Campaign, backed by The Guardian newspaper, binds those who sign up to reduce emissions by 10% by the end of 2010
However, for those who decide to sit on the fence. Those who reason that the science is not sure, the science is not perfect. The inconvenient truth is we know enough to be sure that messing with a complex and finely balanced system will have global and irreversible consequences. The question is, will we act as individuals and as a society now, to save the world of tomorrow from the consequences of climate change? Whilst the default setting for many well educated people is just to ignore the science and the logic, to believe the whole thing a myth, whilst others hide behind statistical uncertainty, our climate will steadily change as we fail to act. Our uncertainty will no longer be whether climate change is real but whether it will destroy the security of the way we live.
Anthony Barron
For more info about the Copenhagen summit, click here
For more info on 10:10, click here
]]>
Another topsy-turvy week for the financial sector looks set to get worse with Chancellor of the Exchequer Alistair Darling announcing a windfall tax on Christmas bonuses and profits.
It started in the middle of last week with reports claiming RBS directors threatened to resign if they were not allowed to claim a bonus. This was coupled with stories of Barclays increasing wages for 22,000 investment bankers by 150% to get around the government clampdown.]
RBS directors stated they must act in the interests of stakeholders and offer competitive bonuses otherwise talent will leave them and go elsewhere. Although people in the street may argue RBS practically went bankrupt so clearly, they don’t employ any talented bankers. Some, including Liberal Democrat Treasury Spokesman Vincent Cable, said the government should call their bluff and not allow themselves to be pushed around.
RBS were universally criticised for acting like petulant children while Barclays remained unscathed, largely because they are not owned by the tax-payer.
This was only the end of Act 1.
French President Nicholas Sarkozy caused a stir in the city when he claimed the financial crisis was due to the “free-wheeling Anglo-Saxon” model of financial markets. This was met largely by righteous indignation in London and by Darling who argued London was New York’s only true rival in the financial sector. Sarkozy said: “I want the world to see the victory of the European model, which has nothing to do with the excesses of financial capitalism.” and the French Premier was supported by EU commissioner for economic affairs Jaquin Almunia.
Mr Almunia echoed Sarkosy’s remarks saying : “The ‘freewheeling Anglo-Saxons’ proved remarkably impervious to warnings of dire consequences if they persisted in their reckless activities, preferring, in the immortal words of former Citigroup CEO Chuck Prince, to continue dancing while the music kept playing.”
This was not the first time this week the UK had come under fire for its role in the financial crisis. Ben Bernanke, head of the American Federal Reserve who is currently seeking re-election to the role, launched into a scathing attack on Gordon Brown claiming Brown’s decisions as Chancellor had left the UK ill-prepared to deal with the looming crisis. After this he launched into financial regulation arguing the erosion of the Bank of England’s powers as a supervisory authority was also to blame.
These remarks seem to have had little effect across the Atlantic with most claiming he is trying to pass-the-buck and is purely interested in saving his own job as the most powerful banker in the world.
This Shakespearian tragedy then came to a head when Darling went into general election mode on the Sunday talk-shows talking of super-taxes on the uber-wealthy ahead of his pre-budget report. He said one-year windfall taxes on bank bonuses and profits were necessary to slash to budget deficit and those with the broadest shoulders should bear the most weight.
This policy will be unanimously popular outside the financial sector but has already suffered from condemnation by those inside it.
Angela Knight from the British Bankers’ Association has called the policy “populist, political and penal” and it has been argued it will not have much effect on the budget deficit. Knight went on to argue this may force even more companies to abandon London in search on greener pastures abroad where they can pay bonuses as they see fit.
It is true the financial sector has had many worse weeks than this over the past year but with elections looming the hard facts of the case are likely to come to the fore.
Policies similar to Darling’s are likely to be the norm from the major parties as they try to seal up the popular vote by condemning perpetually unpopular bankers. However with such announcements becoming more frequent so the unsympathetic voices from inside the sector are likely to get louder.
Colin Rowe
]]>
It’s remarkable how some people in power either ignore, or refuse to see things which are staring them straight in the face.
This was the prevailing theme today when myself and an audience met with Ivan Lewis, Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth affairs. The topic on the agenda was primarily the war in Afghanistan, the logistics, ethics and practicalities involved in such a war. Lewis spoke for around a quarter of an hour before opening it up to the floor for questions.
It’s here when I’m going to check myself slightly. I am constantly defending politicians against others’ insults. For every expenses abusing, sleaze ridden corrupt cabinet minister, there are constituency MPs who work hard for their electorate, and want (to use a cliché) “to make a difference”. But given the responses supplied by Lewis today, can you blame young people for feeling disenfranchised and apathetic about politics? Typical politicians answers were given, instead of answering the question directly, policy was trotted out with all the panache of a Michael Howard Newsnight interview. The audience looked on incredulously as good, constructive questions were left unanswered.
Lewis is currently on a roadshow (his own words) visiting every region in the UK to stir up support for the war in Afghanistan, to “assure forces that the British people support them”. I have no doubt that the British people support them, but their ringleaders…I’m not so sure. Lions led by Lambs indeed.
Furthermore, Lewis constantly emphasised that we were in Afghanistan to rid the world of the greatest threat to our way of life. It would be churlish to point out the not-insignificant problem of climate change as our greatest threat, but you can’t have everything. For a man so clearly preoccupied with the modern threat of terrorism (Lewis voted for the Iraq war, for ID cards and against an investigation into the Iraq war) he seemed stupendously blind to it’s root causes. Much of the argument seemed to take the view that we stamp out any insurgents in Iraq and by proxy safeguard our own country. What he fails to take into account is that much of the terrorist bombings in the UK (including July 7th in London) were propagated by British residents. How exterminating members of Al-Qaeda 3000 miles around the world is going to help us, I don’t know.
Moreover, he incessantly referred to the British people being in a state of fear as “the security of the people of this country lay in the hands of extremists”. Have I ruptured the space-time continuum into a Daily Mail alternate reality? I’ve yet to meet a single person who is genuinely worried about the threat of terrorism to this country. It’s happened before, but the chances of you being in the wrong place at the wrong time are so minute that it’s hardly worth thinking about. Did people stop using the Tube when London was under threat? No, because they had to get on with their lives and it was business as usual.
Towards the end of the talk we were bombarded with statistics showing “improving” living conditions in Afghanistan. Much has been made of the effort to rebuild and reinvigorate Afghanistan. While this may be true, it still doesn’t explain the fundamental point of the whole debate:
Why are we there in the first place?
Joseph Stashko-Adamaszek
]]>
An inquiry into Britain’s role in the Iraq war has been on-going since November 24th. The inquiry will involve looking into the time period from the summer of 2001 to the end of July this year which includes details on the run up to the Iraq conflict, the military action etc.
Read extensively on it here
Well, choosing the fashionista in this case, becomes a bit tricky…We’ve seen both first ladies smiling all over the place and wearing the RIGHT thing for the RIGHT occasion. But who deserves the fashionista award?
Michelle Obama is a mother of two who cooks shrimp linguini for her hubby (who happens to be the president of United States) and is next to him whenever he needs her. However, until recently she was earning a bigger salary than him and this great combination of a strong woman and a supportive wife is SO obvious in her dress code. Lawyer and power dressing looks and dresses inspired by princesses’ fairytales are probably her most remarkable fashion statements!
Carla Bruni Sarkozy is an Italian/French model-singer-actress-poet, who knows by heart the number of her pizza delivery man. Her wardrobe is a rainbow of ballet shoes with an exclusive range of gorgeous suits and evening dresses a-la Jacky Kennedy (well, almost..). She has the IT body and her own website! She hangs out with Karen Mulder, meets Sara Brown for some chat and stands proudly next to the Queen wearing a très chic coat to get some nice shoots. And guess what: Next to the REAL Queen.
Well, which one should get the FFL Award? (FiX’s First Lady Award).
You decide!
Donna Kaparti