The Capital Letter

It's all been getting a tad serious around here lately, what with all the political developments to blog about. I've decided that that has got to change, for one post at least. So, here are a few more light-hearted items for your amusement.

The first is the Personality Defect Test. Lots of people have been doing this and I've seen it around a few blogs, but it was Span, over at Spanblather from whom I picked it up in the end.

Anyway, it's pretty bad news:

Televangelist

You are 14% Rational, 85% Extroverted, 42% Brutal, and 57% Arrogant.

As the Lord is my witness, I swear upon the good book that you are indeed the TELEVANGELIST! Characterized by extreme arrogance, self-assurance, and extroversion, you would make a very charismatic leader (or a very despotic one). On top of that, you are also more intuitive than rational, predisposing you to a more spiritual or emotional outlook on life. Thus, you are thoroughly irrational. You also tend to be rather gentle and considerate of others' feelings. Clearly, you would make the perfect televangelist. Emotional, extroverted, arrogant, and gentle, you annoy the hell out of people who have to listen to the feel-good, intuitive shit spewing from your mouth. Not only that, but people may look down on you as a self-centered asshat. So while you are gentle and genuinely care about others, it is quite clear that you still care about yourself MORE. Why is your personality flawed? Because you are too damned extroverted, emotional, and arrogant. So preach your irrational message, brotha-man! I assure you, no one will be listening!

To put it less negatively:

1. You are more INTUITIVE than rational.

2. You are more EXTROVERTED than introverted.

3. You are more GENTLE than brutal.

4. You are more ARROGANT than humble.

Yikes! I like the less negative version a little more, but it's still not great. Ah well, you live and learn, eh?. Take the test yourself and find out what personality defect you have. Go on, I dare you!

To recover from the shock of that, I took the Star Wars test that everyone but everyone has been doing and passing on. The result of that was slightly more encouraging:



On the subject of Star Wars, if you haven't already seen the clip from the Conan O'Brien Show with Triumph the Insult Comic Dog going to town on the geeks waiting in line for the Star Wars Premiere, go and check it out now. [Streaming video, largely work-safe but requires sound].

And finally, to round off this post, I have two cool links for you. First, head on over to Verlaine's blog and read his list of 25 Don'ts for restaurant/bar goers. Then, if you're game, go here and help me to decide if these Forget-me-Not panties are for real. It's a joke, right? Please come back and tell me it's a joke.

All the papers this morning are covering the confirmation of Angela Merkel as the Christian Democrats' candidate for chancellor in the upcoming general elections here in Germany.

Until yesterday, the two sister centre-right parties, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU - which runs everywhere except Bavaria) and the Christian Social Union (CSU - which only runs in Bavaria) were, officially at least, without a candidate. This came about as a result of the surprise move by Schröder's SPD to call early elections this coming autumn. All that is now behind the CDU/CSU grouping, however, as the two parties yesterday offically confirmed what everyone already knew anyway: that CDU leader Angela Merkel would be the Chancellor candidate.

The only realistic opponent, Edmund Stoiber (leader of the CSU) stepped aside and offered Merkel his unqualified support. He had no option really, having already run against Schröder in 2002 and lost convincingly. In return for his support, he will receive a top post in a CDU/CSU/FDP coalition government after the election, if the result is as expected and as the polls currently indicate.

At 50, Merkel is young for a candidate for Chancellor. She's also an Ossi (she grew up in East Germany). She also came to politics late, having previously been a physicist. She's also a divorced Protestant, in a two party grouping that is traditionally dominated by Catholics. She's also, shock horror, a woman. The fact that she has risen to the top of the CDU despite all these things, indicates to me that she is tough and that she has perseverance. She will need it, if she's going to be Germany's first woman chancellor and be the one to steer Germany out of the mire it finds itself in currently.

Deutsche Welle and BBC News both cover this story in English. For those who can read German, Die Süddeutsche Zeitung has an interesting article and Der Tagesspiegel has a handy timeline of her rise up the ranks. And for those after more background information (in English), try the BBC's Profile of Angela Merkel.

I've been reading around various news sources about the French rejection of the draft European Union constitution treaty in yesterday's referendum. There was, to be sure, .

Amongst the myriad sources and speculations of European commentators and pundits around the world, here are three of the most informative articles I've found:
Politicus: After France's no vote, all bets are off on EU [International Herald Tribune].
Charter 'not dead.' EU insists [International Herald Tribune].
French no an 'unmistakable message' [BBC News].

The most interesting issue, to my mind, is what happens now? No one, it would seem, really knows. For the moment, the referenda on the draft constitution in other EU member states roll on. The next out of the blocks is the Netherlands, which looks destined similarly to reject the constitution in a (non-binding) referendum on Wednesday. A Dutch 'no' would mean that two founding members would have rejected the constitution. If that comes to pass, what happens then? Do the other member states press on with their own referenda? If so, why? What is the point of bothering, now that not all of the 25 member states will be ratifying it? Isn't that just a waste of time and money?

Then there is also the question of what will happen to this draft constitution now that it cannot be implemented? Will the member states throw this draft out completely and commence new negotiations for a new, better, draft constitution that is more likely to be accepted? Or will they simply try to tweak the existing draft and put it to the electorate anew? If the latter, how will they know which parts to tweak? One only has to look at the make-up of the 'non' camp in France (ranging from the Communists on the left to the xenophobic ultra-nationalists on the right) to know that those rejecting the constitution do not all have the same flaws in mind. Or do the 25 members states just try to get by without a constitution? Or will they try to sneak what they consider to be the most important features of the constitution in through the back door, simply by approving them at parliamentary level in Brussels without ever putting the name Constitution on them?

And then I also wonder what will happen to the French and their role in the EU now? Will they be left behind as the rest of the EU moves on ahead? (I consider this unlikely.) Have they dented their influence within the EU, which until now has been considerable indeed? What would happen if, and it is a big if, all the other member states ratified the constitution apart from France? And will Chirac have to resign as French President?

But most of all I wonder what on earth possessed various leaders of EU member states to think that binding referenda were the best way to seek to ratify this draft constitution? Do they really think that the general voting public is better placed to decide on the effectiveness and appropriateness of a technical document which runs to over 400 pages in length than professional politicians and policy-makers? If so, I do not share their conviction. I feel very strongly that we elect our political representatives to make these sorts of technical and intricate political decisions for us. I think that by calling referenda on this issue, the leaders of various European countries were courting disaster. Unfortunately, that appears to have been exactly what they have encountered. As they say, you reap what you sow.

It is clear to me that the draft EU constitution has weaknesses and is by no means perfect. What is less clear to me is that the alternative, i.e. no EU constitution, or going back to square one and attempting to negotiate a new proposal is the better option.

As you can see, I have many more questions at this stage than answers. It is nonetheless a fascinating time for Europe, politically speaking. I shall be watching with interest to see which way things develop from here.


[Update: I've found two more sources which are definitely worth a read if you're interested in this issue. First, Der Spiegel's English language round-up of what the German papers are saying about the French 'non', and then, from the website of the same magazine, Europe is moving ahead, but where is it going?]

Regular readers may recall that about three weeks ago, I wrote about a chicken in California that had got its owners into strife by crossing the road.

Well, today the BBC News website covers the result of the court case: US chicken ducks jaywalking fine. (Cheesy headline, I know, but I am not responsible for that, sorry.)

Anyhow, it seems the chicken and its owners got off. Not because the chicken didn't cross the road - it did - but rather because the owners' lawyer successfully argued that the chicken was domesticated.

A chicken fined $54 for illegally crossing a road in California has had the charge thrown out by a court.

The fine was dismissed after a lawyer for the bird's owners argued that the fowl was domesticated and could not be classified as livestock. California law bans livestock from highways, but not domestic animals.

OK, so let's just take a closer look at that. The couple didn't have to pay the fine, because the chicken is domesticated and is not livestock? In other words, their chicken is a pet? Yeah, right. And I bet the chicken has never laid them an egg, and that the chicken is never going to be slaughtered for meat, or sold. Sure!

Look, don't get me wrong, I'm pleased the couple got off. It sounded to me like a ridiculous, trumped up charge in the first place. But that they got off by arguing that their chicken was a pet? That's just silly. These people are farmers. Farmers don't keep chickens as pets. It just goes to show that, from time to time, the law can be an ass.

And just in case you had forgotten just what a remarkably litigious place the US can be, you should know that the Moore's, the owners of the chicken, intend to file harrassment charges against the Sheriff Department.

~~~

In more important news, the final result of the French referendum on the EU constitution has been confirmed. The Xinhua Daily News reports nice and succinctly:

PARIS, May 30 (Xinhuanet) -- French voters rejected the European Union constitution in a referendum held on Sunday, with 54.87 percent saying "No" and 45.13 percent saying "Yes" to the charter, final results released by the Interior Ministry said on Monday.

A total of 15,422,659 people voted against the charter, while 12,686,732 people voted "yes", with an abstention rate of 30.26 percent, the ministry said in a statement.

Generally, "we observe important variation from one department to another, with a more expressed preference for the 'no' in the countryside, compared with the urban areas," said French Interior Minister Dominique de Villepin.

There's plenty more to be said on this issue, not least what happens next. I will endeavour to post in more detail about it this evening.

I'm watching BBC News and the first exit poll from the French EU constitution referendum has just this moment been release. It looks like the 'Non' has 55% and the 'Oui' only 45%. The BBC pundits are describing it as a "political earthquake". I am inclined to agree. Even though this is only an exit poll, it is such a resounding victory for the no vote, there seems to be no doubt about the result whatsoever.

It will be interesting to see what happens in the wake of this. Why do the French always have to be so contrary? It's beyond me.

Watch this space.

[Update: Here's the breaking news link which has just gone up on the BBC News website: France 'rejects EU constitution'.]

[Update two: Reuters is reporting that the participation in the French referendum was very high, estimated at 70.5% of the electorate. Hohe Beteiligung bei Frankreichs EU-Referendum (German link).]

[Update three: Reuters has now picked up the referendum result story as well. France rejects EU treaty, Europe faces crisis.]

Today's the day the French electorate has its say in a binding referendum on whether or not to ratify the new EU Constitution Treaty. The last opinion polls in the days before the referendum indicate that the 'Non' camp has the upper hand, just. But the outcome of today's referendum appears still to be on a knife-edge.

Deutsche Welle sums it up as follows:

Voting is underway in France in a referendum on the European Union's first-ever constitution. Final opinion polls suggested that the majority of French were against the new EU treaty. Observers say the French may use the "non" vote to voice dissatisfaction with their present government. A French rejection of the constitution could mean the end of the treaty since it has to be ratified by all member states in order to take effect. Nine countries including Germany have ratified the constitution so far, but France is the first to put the issue to a binding referendum of its citizens.

It is not entirely clear what will happen if France votes 'Non' to the Constitution treaty. Predictions range from "total EU meltdown" on the one hand to "carry on as you were" on the other. I suspect that the reality would be somewhere in between.

That said, I hope that this will not be an issue and that a majority of the French electorate will vote 'Oui' today. All the indications from France are that a no vote would, at least in part, be a reflection of dissatisfaction with the current French government and a desire to send the government a strong message. If that is true, and the consequence is a no vote in today's referendum I would find that disappointing and sad. In my opinion, domestic elections are the time to send the government a message about your dissatisfaction, not a referendum, the result of which directly affects the citizens and residents of 24 other countries besides your own.

Of course, there are other factors which have added momentum to the 'non' campaign in France, such as concerns that the constitution moves the EU in an "Anglo-Saxon" direction economically, more general concerns regarding the direction that the EU is headed, especially a perceived reduction of France's influence in the enlarged Union, and also concerns at possible future membership of Turkey in the EU. Nontheless, I can't help strongly feeling that rejecting the Constitution treaty in today's referendum is definitely not the best way to go about addressing those concerns. Accordingly, I've got my fingers crossed for the 'Oui' camp to sneak home today.

BBC News has great coverage of the EU constitution treaty in general and today's referendum in particular. Here are a couple of good links:
=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/eu..."French begin key EU charter vote
Q & A: French referendum
Consequences of a French 'Non'.

The results are expected either late today or early tomorrow. I shall blog about the results as soon as practicable.

In the same vein as my post earlier this week about a naughty bear in California, I found an old but amusing article in the BBC News archives today.

The headline of the article is Berlin bear's break-out bid fails. It dates from August 2004, long before this BerlinBear started blogging, and it details how a bear at the Berlin zoo broke out of his enclosure, but was cornered by zoo staff and recaptured.

Juan the Andean spectacled bear first paddled across a moat using a log for a raft, then scaled a wall. Finally he appeared to commandeer a bicycle, before zookeepers with brooms cornered him, and a colleague picked him off with a tranquiliser gun.

"Just think what could have happened," said a mother who saw the bear escape and head for the children's carousel.

...

Parents grabbed their children and fled as they realised what was happening. But the zoo's deputy director Heiner Kloes was not so concerned.

"Spectacled bears eat both vegetables and meat but children tend not to be on their menu," he said. "I'd have been a lot more worried if one of our polar bears had escaped," he added.

And people assume that wild animals lack intelligence! This one used a log as a raft, crossed a moat, scaled a wall and attempted to make of with a bicycle. I'm impressed. That said, I'd like to stress once again that, though I am also a Berlin Bear, I am not that Berlin Bear.

Time for this week's instalment of Good news Saturday. This week I have two items. First up is this short piece from Deutsche Welle earlier in the week.

Romanian hostages freed in Iraq

Three Romanian journalists who were kidnapped in Iraq almost two months ago have arrived home. The three were greeted by their families and Romanian President Traian Basescu at a military air base in Bucharest. The militant group that kidnapped them had been demanding that Romania withdraw its 800 troops from Iraq. Muslim clerics in Romania have been credited with helping gain their release.

Unfortunately, I've mislaid the source URL and I can't find it in the DW archives, so no live link I'm afraid.

It is heartening to see that every once in a while hostages taken by militants in Iraq make it home safely. I wish that this were the outcome in all the hostage-taking incidents, rather than just a few. Furthermore, I hope fervently that, eventually, the hostage-taking will cease. I do not have the answers for clearing up the mess in Iraq. I wish that I did. For now, I just watch, dismayed, from a distance, hope that things will improve as soon as possible and celebrate every piece of good news like this story.

My second good news story comes from New Zealand, where China's second ranked politician, Wu Bangguo has been visiting this week. Stuff.co.nz has the story of how Green MP and co-leader Rod Donald waged a successful one man protest outside the Parliament buildings in Wellington.

A borrowed Tibetan flag forced the second most powerful man in the world's biggest country to scuttle through a side door at the start of a state visit to New Zealand.

Foreign Affairs officials diverted China's Wu Bangguo from a red carpet Maori welcome at the top of Parliament's steps to the much less salubrious Beehive entrance – at present a construction zone – because of a one-man protest by Green MP Rod Donald.

Mr Donald was waiting at the foot of the steps with a Tibetan flag borrowed from colleague Sue Kedgley.

Four Chinese security officers shouted, "Police, police" as he unfurled the flag and asked for him to be moved, but police there said he had the right to stay.

Police also ordered the Chinese to move when they stood in front of Mr Donald to shield the flag from Mr Wu, the second-ranked politician in China and chair of the National People's Congress.

The protest meant a powhiri by a school kapa haka group waiting at the top of the stairs was cancelled and Mr Wu was driven down a small alley to the main entrance of the Beehive, where he was met by Prime Minister Helen Clark. Scaffolding in the Beehive foyer, which is being refurbished, was moved, but the area still resembled a building site.

A spokesman for Miss Clark said staff from the Foreign Affairs and Trade Ministry decided to bring Mr Wu through the Beehive so he would not have to walk past Mr Donald.

"They knew the presence of a Tibetan flag would cause gross offence to Mr Wu, so to save any embarrassment to the guest, they made a snap decision to forgo the powhiri and put him through that side door."

Read the rest of the article here.

To this I can only say good on Rod Donald. I approve, both of the cause and of the peaceful but effective way that he went about his protest. I also think it is good news that New Zealand Police did not bow to the Chinese security guards' requests to have Mr Donald removed or allow them to obscure his protest. New Zealand is not China. Free speech and the right to dissent and to protest are respected and upheld. That is the way it must stay.

For more information on what Rod Donald was protesting about, check out this Green party press release, or the China section of the Amnesty International 2004 report released this week.

And now, armed with that good news, go out and enjoy your Saturday.

Were you, like me, stunned and dismayed back in 2003 by the small-minded childishness of the United States Congress voting to change the name of French fries and French toast to Freedom fries and Freedom toast in all restaurants and cafeterias on Capitol Hill to protest at France's recalcitrance in refusing to co-operate in the "War on Terror"? Were you astonished to find that restaurants all around the country followed suit in what their owners and managers considered to be reasonable demonstrations of patriotism? Well if so, like me, you'll be amused and perhaps even heartened by this piece published in Wednesday's Guardian.

It tells the story of the sponsor of that ridiculous campaign and recounts how he has had something of a change of heart. It's a short piece so I have reproduced it here in full:

It was a culinary rebuke that echoed around the world, heightening the sense of tension between Washington and Paris in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. But now the US politician who led the campaign to change the name of french fries to "freedom fries" has turned against the war.

Walter Jones, the Republican congressman for North Carolina who was also the brains behind french toast becoming freedom toast in Capitol Hill restaurants, told a local newspaper the US went to war "with no justification".

Mr Jones, who in March 2003 circulated a letter demanding that the three cafeterias in the House of Representatives' office buildings ban the word french from menus, said it was meant as a "light-hearted gesture".

But the name change, still in force, made headlines around the world, both for what it said about US-French relations and its pettiness.

Now Mr Jones appears to agree. Asked by a reporter for the North Carolina News and Observer about the name-change campaign - an idea Mr Jones said at the time came to him by a combination of God's hand and a constituent's request - he replied: "I wish it had never happened."

Although he voted for the war, he has since become one of its most vociferous opponents on Capitol Hill, where the hallway outside his office is lined with photographs of the "faces of the fallen".

"If we were given misinformation intentionally by people in this administration, to commit the authority to send boys, and in some instances girls, to go into Iraq, that is wrong," he told the newspaper. "Congress must be told the truth."

If Homer Simpson were the author of this blog, he'd have entitled this entry D'oh!, and that would sum it up quite nicely. I'm going to try for a comment of a little more substance though: I am pleased that Walter Jones seems to have come to his senses and realised that he and all Americans (not to mention the British and other coalition partners) were misled in the lead-up to the Iraq War. I'm also pleased that he has come to regret his "light-hearted gesture" and to wish it had never happened. I remain baffled as to how he or any other Congressman (let alone a majority of Congressmen!) could ever have thought switching French for Freedom a worthwhile move, or failed to realise the scorn and derision that such a move would (rightly) be met with abroad. However, I suppose at least progress is progress. As they say: baby steps, baby steps.

[Hat-tip to gesn for the Guardian link.]

If you've been having trouble accessing my blog today, please accept my apologies. tBlog has been playing silly buggers all day. In the first couple of months here I kept reading complaints and laments on Blogspot blogs about interruptions to service and so forth and was continually congratulating myself on the choice of tBlog as my blog provider. But now, after two major tBlog SNAFUs in the last couple of weeks I'm beginning to realise that I was a bit hasty in my smugness. It's frustrating, but I will stick it out for the meantime in the hope that smoothness and continuity of service will soon resume. So, for now, please accept my apologies for the inconvenience and Bear (hehehe) with me.

Now to the service announcements. Alert readers may have noticed that I've added a handy little TinyURL tool in the left sidebar. Thanks to Badaunt for the tip. That tool is as much for me as it is for you. You can use it to convert stupidly long URLs, such as those for the staticlinks on tBlog blogs, to nice, manageably short tinyURLs. It's quick, simple, and excellent if you want to cut and paste long URLs, especially if you want to email them. So, should you feel the urge, please feel free to avail yourself of the TinyURL box down to the left.

Secondly, I have today joined my first webring. It's called Kiwiblogs. The name says it all: it's a webring blogs by Kiwis (New Zealanders), both in New Zealand and overseas. My site
hasn't actually been approved yet, but I've taken the liberty of adding the relevant code to the right sidebar already. If it's New Zealand blogs you're after, go ahead and use the links there to view other blogs written by New Zealanders at home and abroad.

And finally, a couple of cool blogs I've come across recently and thought I'd share.

For anyone who's familiar with the famed 17th century London diarist Samuel Pepys, this blog called Pepysdiary will be a real treat. It's an ongoing project which began in 2003, to publish an entry from Pepys' actual diary online each day. It makes for marvellous reading.

And here's a new Berlin-based political blog I came across. I like the look of it so far. Check it out and decide for yourself: djn berlinbybus.

Both of those newly discovered blogs are now in my Blogroll. Enjoy.

Blogging about weird news and goings-on here in Germany is a doddle. I don't even have to go looking for weird news. It just seems to come to me. The blog entries practically write themselves.

Thus, for example, yesterday I found this odd story about a German woman who rang up to find out why her pension payments had been cut off, only to be told that it was because she had died. But that's not all, when she assured her pension fund that she was still very much alive and kicking, they insisted that she prove it, by obtaining and sending them a "life certificate" from her town hall. Nice. You've got to love German bureaucracy! It turned out, of course, that the pension fund had confused the hapless pensioner with someone else who atually had died (and was presumably still receiving her pension).

Or this story of a 21 year-old who returned to where he'd parked his recently acquired first car, only to find that the Fire Department had thought it was a traning vehicle and had cut it to pieces to practise motor accident rescues.

It might not have been much, but for a 21-year-old driver from Hennef, near Bonn, his first car was his pride and joy. But now, the car his father bought for 900 euros ($1,130) only a few days ago, is lying in pieces in the local fire station parking lot.

Overzealous fire fighters spotted the car parked alongside a row of scrap-yard vehicles rounded up to help them practice rescuing accident victims and promptly set to work with a pair of hydraulic scissors and axes.

But the car had only been parked -- not dumped -- next to the junkyard. Its driver hadn't yet registered the vehicle, so it didn't have license plates.

Fire department chief Heinz Peter Krämer said the situation was regrettable, but defended his colleagues. "They're not really to blame, as the car was already 10 years old and didn't look any different from our practice cars," Krämer said.

The poor kid's Dad was so shocked when they came back to what was left of the car he'd bought for his son that he collapsed and had to be taken to hospital. He's apparently fine now though. In something of a departure for German bureaucracy, the city of Hennef has agreed to have its insurance pay for the damage, even though strictly speaking, the car was illegally parked. In Germany it's illegal to park an unlicensed car on the road. Ah well, you live and learn, eh?

And finally, it seems that a research team in Mannheim has come up with a research result that most women probably didn't want to hear. Apparently, alcohol damages women's brains much faster than it damages men's brains.

The lasting physical harm caused by alcohol abuse is well documented, but according to a new study, the effects are felt more intensively by women than men and much faster. Potential problems include heart and liver damage, as well as long-term brain shrinkage.

Research carried out by the Mannheim Central Institute for Mental Health has revealed that heavy drinking takes its toll on women far more than it does on men. Alcohol wears away cells and reduces brain volume -- moreover, at an alarming rate. With men, the process tends to take much longer.

In short, a woman who's been hitting the bottle regularly for just five years will have a brain that's shrunk to the same size of a man who's been drinking for 10 years.

There's more to the report than just that though. It also includes alarming findings regarding increasing numbers of alcoholic women in Germany. On the plus side, though, the report also finds that kicking the booze leads to brain recovery. So, lads, next time there's only one beer left in the fridge or one glass of wine left in the bottle and you and she are trying to decide who gets it, don't forget to remind her that that bottle of beer or glass of wine will shrink her brain twice as fast is it will yours. Offer selflessly to sacrifice your brain to save hers: "Love, just think of the brain shrinkage! Don't do it" or something to that effect. That should secure you the drink. If that doesn't work, don't forget to remind her that alcohol is very, very calorific indeed.

You may recall that, in the immediate aftermath of Sunday's announcement by the leadership of the SPD that they would be seeking an early general election, I noted that such a move was very rare here in Germany and that it was initially unclear how exactly an early election could be brought about.

Well, it is now clear how this is going to work. Here's the plan: Unlike, say, the UK or NZ, where the government of the day has considerable flexibility as to when it calls the general election, here in Germany the rules regarding timing are much tighter and less forgiving. In order to call an election, the Chancellor, Gerhard Schröder must first submit to a vote of no-confidence. If, and only if, that vote is lost, then the German President, Horst Köhler, can step in and dissolve Parliament, thus triggering an early general election.

According to Der Tagesspiegel [German link], that vote of no-confidence will take place on July 1st. If that vote of no-confidence is lost, then elections must be held within 81 days. As German elections are always held on a Sunday, this means that the probable date for the election is 18th September - this being the last Sunday within the 81 day time limit.

These rules lead to what to me is a curious situation: Schröder, or someone in his party, must move a vote of no-confidence which he fully expects to, and indeed wants to lose. How odd! In fact, since the SPD/Greens coalition has a considerable majority in parliament, presumably this will in fact entail Schröder instructing members of his own party to vote against him in the vote of no-confidence. Unless, that is, I have completely misunderstood how that particular vote is supposed to work. But I've been reading around various sources and that certainly seems to be the way it goes. Strange.

Two other interesting German election developments: whereas the opposition Christian Democrats (CDU/CSU) and Free Democrats (FDP) have already announced that they will be campaigning on the basis that they would form a coalition government together if elected, the ruling Social Democrats (SPD) and Greens have refused to make a similar commitment to each other as coalition partners. This appears to be based on the SPD's desire to conduct what they are calling a "personalised campaign", rather than a desire by the Greens to distance themselves from the SPD.

And finally, there has still not been any offical confirmation that Angela Merkel will be the CDU/CSU candidate for Chancellor. That said, it appears now to be a mere formality which is likely to be confirmed at a joint party meeting next Monday. Certainly everyone is currently working on the assumption that Merkel will be the Chancellor candidate for the centre-right parties. Were those parties to win a majority come election time, that would make Angela Merkel Germany's first ever woman Chancellor. Deutsche Welle has an interesting profile on Merkel and her chances.

Believe it or not, in a past life BerlinBear was a rower. I rowed in the 1st VIII of New College Boat Club for several years. Admittedly, as regular commenter Twiglets (who was there) will no doubt ruthlessly point out, without much success. That, however, was not for want of trying.

Anyway, my rowing past is not really the point of this post. The point is to highlight the fact that tomorrow is the first day of Summer Eights in Oxford. Summer Eights is a marvellously insane tradition involving different divisions of 13 rowing crews at a time, each in a 60 foot long, very expensive, carbon fibre boat/missile, rowing at full pace in single file down a narrow stretch of river - too narrow in parts for two boats to row side by side - with the express intention of bumping into the boat in front, whilst avoiding being bumped into by the boat behind. Sounds mad, huh? It is. But it is fun. And it is the biggest adrenaline rush I have ever experienced.

The Lady Margaret Hall Boat Club website explains it slightly less flippantly than I have:

Bumps racing is run between Colleges of Oxford University on the Thames twice every year. Races are held over four days in March ('Torpids') and in May ('Summer Eights'). College crews are organised into divisions, which are exactly the finishing order of the year before. All crews in a division race at the same time. Thirteen bung lines are laid at the start at intervals of one-and-a-half boat lenghts, and each crew's cox must hold the rope at the start, which is sounded with a cannon being fired.
The Aim of the Races

The aim of each race is to ‘bump’ the boat in front. To achieve a Bump, the chasing crew must make contact with any part of the crew ahead of it - or overtake it. Naturally, the chasing crew must achieve the Bump before it is itself Bumped by the crew behind it. Once a crew has Bumped, it leaves the race, but all other crews continue chasing eachother. The start order on the next day is then amended so that crews which achieve a Bump start just ahead of the crew they Bumped. If a crew neither Bumps nor is Bumped, then its position is unchanged. Thus, successful crews rise up the divisions over the four days of racing.

When a crew finshes at the top of a division, it may race later in that day at the bottom of the division above. If the crew does not catch the College ahead, then it remains at the top of the lower division and must 'row over' (not be Bumped) the following day to again have the opportunity to Bump into the higher division.

Got that? Good. These two photos may give you an idea of what it looks like in practice.




[Source for photos: JET Photographic.]

And yes, I do appear in both of those photos. So, for the record, does Twiglets. We're not especially visible in the top one, but we're there nonetheless.

Tomorrow, Wednesday 25th May, Summer Eights 2005 begins. New College Boat Club's Men's 1st VIII will be starting at fifth in the men's 1st division, while the women's 1st VIII start at Head of the River in the women's 1st division and will be looking to retain that honour. I will be watching for the results with interest. My best wishes to all the NCBC crews involved. I hope it goes well.

GDBM!

Not BerlinBear. Looks nice though, doesn't she? [Source: BBC News]

This interesting article from BBC News, tells the story of a black bear who went swimming in a California pool. Accordingly, I just wanted to be the first to say that it wasn't me!

A bear has been caught cooling off in a suburban swimming pool in California, one of a growing number of wild creatures exploring the urban heartland.

The way her paw gently rests on the side of the pool, her claws, like human fingers, just sitting on the terracotta edging tiles, her gaze distracted by something in the distance... For an uninvited guest, this 10-stone wild black bear looks remarkably at ease as she takes a dip in a backyard on the outskirts of Los Angeles.

She had ambled into the garden shortly after 6pm, bumping into doors and windows before eyeing the shimmering expanse of cool water and jumping in.

But while the bear appeared to take things in her stride, mother Maryam Salahael sprang into action, fishing her children out of the water before calling the authorities for help. The furry intruder was swiftly tranquilised and carted off, to be released in nearby mountains.

Well, at least they didn't kill the poor thing. Actually, the article is more about the way in which it is becoming ever more common for wild animals, from bears to racoons to foxes, to turn up in urban areas. It discusses a couple of theories, ranging from a predeliction on the part of the animals for the simplicity and tastiness of fast-food leftovers that are readily available in town centres, to the creeping encroachment of urban development into the natural habitats of various wild animal species. It's an interesting read.

Our situation here in Berlin is somewhat similar. We see the odd fox slinking around the streets at night, and we have a weasel or something similar living in our roof. But that is nothing compared with the wild boars. We live close to several large forests, where the boars are supposed to live. However, come the winter, their food soon runs out and they are forced to make forays into residents' gardens in search of something to eat. You can't blame the poor starving things, but obviously this is a) something of an inconvenience (they can destroy a garden in one visit as they root around for bulbs and tubers to eat), and b) pretty frightening when you're walking along the street of a Winter's evening and you're confronted with a family of wild boar trotting along the footpath. This has happened to us on several occasions. There haven't been any incidents around here yet, as far as we know, but it is certainly a little disconcerting.

[Hat-tip to Miss Behaviour who pointed me to the story]

I hope you’re not expecting anything intellectual, insightful, or especially clever from this particular post. If you are after that sort of thing, you’d better move along to the next blog, because this instalment consists of nothing but two inanities. The are, however, two strangely amusing inanities, which I why I thought I’d share them.

The first one I came across while I was searching for something else entirely. I can't even remember what the search was, but somehow I landed directly at this site. I can't even tell you why I find this amusing and fascinating, but I do. I do quite like the fact that it's about bears, though.

I found the second one via a heads-up from Miss Behaviour [politely doffs cap]. I don't even want to ask how she found it. Anyway, for better or worse, here it is.

As I said, nothing but inanity. However, if you're anything like me, they should keep you amused for a while at least. A post of substance should issue forth this evening at some stage.

This story comes straight from the "every cloud has a silver lining" file. BBC News reports today on a barbeque restaurant in Seoul, which is cashing in on an earlier misfortune.

A South Korean barbeque restaurant that was trampled by elephants last month has reopened after repairs and is now capitalising on its mishap.

The eatery in the capital, Seoul, has been renamed Restaurant Where Elephants Have Been and is offering a special elephant-inspired menu.

Three elephants smashed windows and overturned tables on 20 April after escaping from an amusement park. Customers fled in terror. One woman was knocked down, suffering broken ribs.

But now the owner of the restaurant, Keum Taek-hoon, has used the insurance money she received after the break-in to remodel her restaurant. It now has a sign featuring three elephants and offers an "elephant set" - seven vegetable dishes and a hot soup, "since elephants like to eat vegetables", she said

Read the full story here.

Well, you can't argue with the logic, can you? Elephants do indeed like to eat vegetables. And at least she's not serving her dishes with ivory cutlery and seating her clientele on stools made from elephants' feet.

Seriously though, good luck to her. And let's hope that the truism that lightning never strikes in the same place twice also applies to elephants.

Way back when, before I started blogging (ok, ok, it's not that long ago) I started reading around other people's blogs first to get a feel for what was out there, what people were writing about and what forms blogs could take. I was learning all I could before I finally took the plunge.

Naturally, given my background and current situation, the very first thing I searched for was "New Zealand + Berlin + blog." Well, that gave me only one relevant hit. There I discovered that I had just missed the author, a journalist who goes by the name of Shona, who had just that week upped sticks and moved back to New Zealand. Thankfully, Shona set up a new blog, excellently named Restless Kiwi, as soon as she got back to New Zealand. And I've been reading it (and leaving her pesky and inane comments) ever since. Shona doesn't know it, but she was a factor in my decision to bite the bullet and start this blog.

All that by way of introduction to the actual story. Today, in a moment reminiscent of my having your cake and eating it too experience last week, I was browsing expatica.com and I came across a review of the one and only New Zealand restaurant here in Berlin, called Aotearoa.

The review was entitled Giving Germans a Taste of Kiwi. Like most expats, my eye is always caught by references to New Zealand in my chosen country of abode, so I started reading this review. It was good. It made me want to go out tomorrow and visit Aotearoa right away. I've known about this restaurant for a while, but Ms. Bear and I have yet to make it there, as it is way across the other side of town. In any case, once I had finished reading, I scrolled back up and was about to click away to the next article when the name of the author of the review caught my eye. It was someone called Shona. Someone called Shona who had clearly been in Berlin, visited the restaurant, knew that Aotearoa was the Maori name for New Zealand, knew all sorts of other insider things that only New Zealanders know, etc. etc. etc. What were the chances? There couldn't be two such Shona's could there? So I swung by her blog and asked the question. And sure enough, she confirmed within an hour that this was indeed her piece. Accordingly, I thought I'd share.

So, if you're in or near Berlin, stop by Aotearoa in Friedrichshain for a good Kiwi feed. Shona reckons it is well worth a visit.

More breaking news:

Well, well, well. It seems I underestimated the importance of the election in North-Rhine Westphalia in the context of national politics. Here's why:

Less than an hour after the polling booths in North-Rhine Westphalia closed, and as soon as it became clear that the ruling SPD was not going to win the state election, the national leader of the SPD, Franz Müntefering, has announced that he and the German Chancellor will be bringing the national general election forward. As a result, the general election in Germany will be held in Autumn this year, rather than next year as previously expected. This is a big deal. Instead of giving the CDU time to consolidate after today's election victory and plenty of time to take stock and prepare for the general election campaign, the SPD has rather ripped the rug out from under their feet and ensured that the general election campaign begins this evening. The SPD obviously knew that this was coming and, accordingly, will be prepared to go into full nation-wide campaigning swing. The CDU, on the other hand, though they are claiming not to be surprised by this decision, will now have to hustle to catch up. Interesting, and a cunning political move, I think.

In one fell swoop, Müntefering has written the headlines for tomorrow's German newspapers. It will be very interesting how this is viewed in the German media. And in the longer term, it will also be interesting to see whether the SPD is able to turn things around in time for the general election in autumn. My own feeling is that they will not be able to do so, but I've been wrong before.

These stories are not yet available online as they have only just been announced. My source is the German TV news channel n-tv. I will endeavour to provide links to stories covering this when they become available.

UPDATE: All of the major news outlets have picked this story up now. Here is a sample for those who are interested:
International Herald Tribune: Schröder sets early vote after defeat
BBC News: Germany set for early election
Reuters: Schroeder calls for early election after state loss
Deutsche Welle: SPD proposes early federal elections
ABC News: Schroeder proposes early election after state defeat

One interesting thing coming out of these articles: it is highly unusual for early elections to be called in Germany. This has not happened since 1983. Moreover, it is at this stage not even clear exactly what process is required to bring the elections forward.

Something that the articles do not really make clear, but which is important, is that the opposition Christian Democrats (CDU) and their sister party the CSU (which only runs in Bavaria) do not at this stage have a candidate for Chancellor for the general election. Angela Merkel is the leader of the CDU, while Edmund Stoiber leads the CSU. No decision has yet been made on which of those two will head up the joint CDU/CSU bill for the general election later this year. This leaves the CDU/CSU somewhat on the back foot, unless they can come to an agreement very quickly. There were hints in interviews this evening that an announcement on who will be the CDU/CSU candidate for Chancellor as early as tomorrow. That said, everyone was being exceptionally careful this evening not to confirm or deny anything, which seems to me to be a clear indication that it is not yet a done deal.

Either way, from this evening Germany is now firmly in the grip of what will be a very hard-fought election campaign. All the early signs are that the ruling SPD are not going to lie down and go away, but rather that they are prepared to fight to the last and have a strategy for doing so. Here in Germany we are in for interesting political times in the coming months.

Breaking News....

There will been a change of government in the German state of Northrhine Westphalia. The conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU) has claimed victory in the state election, even before all the results are in. Similarly, the governing Social Democrats (SPD) have just conceded.

German news channel n-tv is projecting the following percentages:

CDU: 44.1%
SPD: 37.1%
Free Democrats (FDP): 6.2%
Greens: 5.8%

This represents a swing from SPD to CDU of more than 12% over the last state election in Northrhine Westphalia. As a result, the CDU and FDP will in all probability form a centre-right coalition to govern in Northrhine Westphalia.

More later when the final results are in.

UPDATE: The initial projections I listed above at around 18:15 were close, but not entriely accurate. Here is a graphic from Der Tagesspiegel which has the current projections. Note that these are not yet officially confirmed results but they are unlikely to change:

The first row is % percentage of total vote.
The second row is % change as compared with the last election in 2000
The third row the number of seats in the State parliament that this result translates into.

As you can see, everyone lost out except the CDU. Interesting stuff. The new State government will be a so-called Black-Yellow coalition of CDU and FDP. The state premiership will fall to Jürgen Rüttgers of the CDU.

It would seem that 2005 is not the best time to be the leader of a Central Asian post-Soviet Republic. In March of this year we saw the overthrow of the Kyrgyz president. Then, last week, protests and political unrest in Uzbekistan resulted in a violent government crackdown. And things have not stopped there.



Map of Central Asia. [Source: alabamamaps.ua.edu]

Both Deutsche Welle and BBC News reported yesterday that the situation in Uzbekistan remains tense amid continued protests.

A week after protests in Uzbekistan left hundreds dead, tensions in the east of the Central Asian country remain high. Police have broken up a demonstration in the border town of Karasuv, where hundreds of people rallied against the detention of opposition leaders. Authorities accuse opposition figures of having organised last week's bloody uprising in the city of Andijan. It is still unclear how many people died in the uprising. The government puts the number killed at nearly 170, while the opposition says that up to 1000 people were indiscriminately killed by security forces. [Deutsche Welle]

Meanwhile, it now appears that political unrest has spread to Azerbaijan as well. Both the Washington Post and BBC News report that Azerbaijani police have violently broken up an opposition demonstration in the country's capital, Baku. The protesters, who were defying a ban on public demonstration, were calling for free elections in Azerbaijan. In what seems to be the Central Asian norm, the government and opposition accounts of what occurred, how many were arrested and how many were injured differ wildly.

Staying in the Central Asian region, Mongolians are today going to the polls in rather more peaceful circumstances to elect a new President. BBC News covers the story here, and Deutsche Welle sums it up nice and succinctly:

Mongolians are voting for a new president. Former Prime Minister Nambariin Enkhbayar from the ex-communist Mongolian People's Revolutionary Party is expected to beat the other three candidates. The winner needs to more than 50 percent of the vote. Otherwise, the two top vote-getters will compete in a run-off in on June 5. The winner will replace Natsagiin Bagabandi, whose second term ends this month. It is Mongolia's fourth elections since the central Asian country reverted to democracy in 1989 after nearly 70 years of communist dictatorship.

Regardless of the DW prediction (shared by the BBC correspondent), my attention was drawn by this slightly ominous line in the BBC article: "But Mongolian elections are known for their unpredictability." Hmmm, well, I guess we will just have to wait and see.

And finally, in more election news, there's an important state election going on in Germany today. North-Rhine Westphalia (Nordrheinwestfalen), Germany's most populous state, is today electing its state parliament (Landtag). This election is seen as something of an indicator for what might happen in the general election next year. The reason for that is that Chancellor Schröder's Social Democrats (SPD), who form the national government in a coalition with the Greens, have held power in Nordrheinwestfalen for the past 39 years. However, polls suggest that the SPD might be heading for defeat in today's election. That said, some 40% of the electorate in Nordrheinwestfalen is said to have been undecided as to how they would vote until the last moment, meaning that today's outcome is very hard to predict.

An SPD defeat today, of course, would be interpreted as a clear sign that the country is unhappy with its current government and will be looking for a change when the general election rolls around. BBC News and Deutsche Welle both have informative pieces on today's election.

I will endeavour to post on the results this evening, or as soon as they become available.

If you are anywhere in Europe and you know what is good for you, you should be watching the Eurovision Song Contest, a.k.a. the Grand Prix D'Eurovision, right now. Turn on your telly and tune in!

If you're anywhere else (you poor buggers), go and check out the official website, where for the next three hours you can get a live stream of some of the worst and most hilarious music that Europe has to offer.

At this moment, I am enjoying a pretty spectacular number by a Moldovan act. Can't work out whether he's singing in Moldovan, English or both, but hey, that's kind of the point really.

I love the Eurovision song contest. You know you will too.

PS: If you're eligible to vote, vote for Norway. They had a great heavy rock act. Trust me on this one.

This week's piece of good news comes from the Middle East, a region whence there has come a decided lack of good news in recent times. For exactly that reason, the news that came out of Kuwait this week - that women there have been awarded the vote for the first time - is especially sweet.

On Monday this week, women in Kuwait were granted full political rights. This means not only that they are finally able to vote in elections, but that they can also stand for office and hold political positions. Kuwait is only the fourth country in the Persian Gulf region to grant suffrage to women. Kuwaiti women join their counterparts in Qatar, Bahrain and Oman in being allowed to vote.

BBC News reports:

There were celebrations around the Gulf state on Monday after parliament agreed to let women vote and stand for office.

The result, announced by the speaker of parliament, was greeted with thunderous applause from the public gallery where backers of the amendment were gathered.Outside, drivers hooted their horns, people danced and cheered and lit fireworks.

"We made it. This is history," said suffrage activist Roula Dashti. "Our target is the parliamentary polls in 2007. I'm starting my campaign from today."

The Melbourne Herald Sun also covers this story:

The amendment, finalised after several years of debate and struggle by Kuwaiti women, passed by a vote of 35-23 and one abstention.

...

Islamist and tribal legislators had fiercely campaigned against women's suffrage on the grounds that Islamic teachings bar women from participating in political life.

Article One of electoral law, dating to 1962, limited the right to vote to men. It was deemed out of step with the emirate's constitution, which stipulates equality of the sexes.

This is a very pleasing development. It appears to be the result of a years long campaign by a group of courageous Kuwaiti women on the one hand, and subtle but firm pressure from the United States, Kuwait's ally, over a long period of time. The BBC News article puts it thus:

The Bush administration has been pressing its oil-rich and strategic Middle East allies to bring in reforms since the 11 September 2001 attacks on the US - arguing that political stagnation fuels terrorism.

"We think this is an important step forward for Kuwait, for the women of Kuwait and for the nation as a whole," said US state department spokesman Richard Boucher after Monday's vote.

It would be naive to think that this were the end and that the battle for the equal treatment of women in Kuwait specifically, and in the Middle East more generally, were won. There remains a lot to be done. Nevertheless, the granting of women's suffrage in Kuwait seems to me to be an important step forwards. I congratulate the women involved in the Kuwaiti suffrage movement, and the Kuwaiti legislators, a majority of whom have seen the progressive light. I hope that this is just the beginning.

And finally, since it's relevant, a pop quiz:
Q: Which country was the first to grant women the vote, on 19th September 1893?


A: Believe it or not, it was New Zealand. Details here.

I found this little gem over at Blogthings and thought I'd share.

You Know You're From New Zealand When...

You know what to do in an Earthquake: get into the nearest doorway before any other bugger and say, "Nah, i don't reckon it's the big one this time. We'll be right" You can hum the theme song to Coronation street. You know what apples really taste like (and that there are more than four different kinds) You know rugby league is not, and never will be, an international sport. You're not sure about cricket, either. Or hockey. Or netball. Or swimming. Or the women's 400m. Or any other sport in which Australia are world champions. Yes, you're even having doubts about real rugby. You know what happened to the lead singer of Push Push You're seen split Enz, or former members thereof, performing live at least once You reckon anyone who carries on about how great they are is an up-themselves wanker. Or an Australian. You wouldn't dream of wearing thongs on your feet. Thats what jandals are for. The name "Chappell" still makes you queasy You know someone who worked on The Lore of the Rings or Xena You wish Fitzy, Zinzan and Josh were still playing for the ABs. The dairy sells more than just stuff from cows You rolled Snifters, rather then Jaffas, down the aisle at the movies You know something's horribly wrong if you've been driving for more then 2 hours without the scenery changing. The words "NZ cricket victory" just don't sound right, somehow. You actually get these jokes and pass them on to other friends from New Zealand.

Get Your Own "You Know You're From" Meme Here



More cool things for your blog at
Blogthings

I do indeed get all those jokes, and almost all of those things apply to me. I confess though, that I'm not certain what happened to the lead singer of Push Push. Was that Mikey Havoc? (In which case I do know what happened to him) Or someone else? Either way, I think it's now official that I am a New Zealander. Unfortunately, there isn't yet a You know you're from Germany when... meme. A shame, because there's plenty of scope for hilarity there.

Today, as yesterday, time is at a premium, so you'll have to forgive the brevity of this entry. Still, I wanted to get at least something out there for your viewing pleasure and to aid your weekend-induced good mood.

Two pieces of good news this Saturday. I realise that on both these topics, whether or not you consider them to be good news is a subjective thing, but hey, I think they are great news and this is my blog after all.

First up, the EU Constitution. Though it was signed by all 25 EU member states in October last year, the proposed constitution needs to be ratified by every member country before it can come into force. This week was a good week for the constitution, as the parliaments of three member countries voted to ratify it.

The Austrian, Slovakian and German houses of parliament all voted to ratify the constitution this week. In the case of Germany, final approval still awaits confirmation from the upper house, the Bundesrat, but this is a mere formality. The lower house, the Bundestag, this week voted with 569 votes in favour, 23 votes against and 2 abstention. As you can see, an overwhelming victory, much more than the required two thirds majority.

Deutsche Welle has the full story, and BBC News has an excellent run-down on whether all the EU member states stand on the constitution.

We stay in Europe, specifically the Low Countries, for the second piece of good news. It was reported this week that both the Netherlands and Belgium have begun the process of legislating to make it legal for homosexual couples to adopt children. In both countries, it is already legal for same-sex couples to marry, but as yet they are not allowed to adopt children. This move is a ood thing in my opinion, and I sincerely hope it is successful. As I see it, the only factors which should matter in deciding who can adopt a child and who cannot are the welfare of the child and the ability of the prospective parents to provide a loving, caring and stable home and family to the child. The sexuality of the parents should not be a factor, and I am glad that Belgium and the Netherlands are making moves to change this discriminatory state of affairs. You can read about the Belgian situation here, and the Dutch situation here.

Right, that's it for today. Have a great Saturday, wherever you are and whatever you're up to.

Busy day today, so I'm afraid you'll pretty much have to amuse yourselves. Perhaps in my absence you could rent yourself a German to fill the void?


From the info page of the rentagerman.de website:

rentagerman.de offers a wide range of Germans for your personal and social needs. You can select the German of your choice for an exclusive lifetime experience: imagine to appear with your German at parties, family events, or just hang out with them at the local shopping center. No matter which occasion you choose, you will surely impress your environment by presenting an original German.

See, you can't go wrong. And it's not even that expensive.

And if, like me, you are wondering if that is for real, check out this Deutsche Welle news story for more details.

[Hat-tip to RM, who first brought this to my attention several weeks ago.]

Well, the poll has been up for almost two weeks now. Due to the overwhelming response, I have had to take it down for fear of overloading the PollHost server. Or not. Actually, there were only 19 responses in total. Here, in case you're interested (which, it seems from the very limited vote casting, you are not) are the results:

---

Do you bother clicking on the links provided in my blog posts?



Of course! All of them 2 votes 11%


Sometimes. Depends on the story and the link 13 votes 68%


Never. I'm prepared to take you at your word 1 vote 5%


Are there links in your posts? Where? 3 votes 16%

---

As far as I can decipher, there are two morals of this story. The first is that my linking policy is just fine and I should carry on as before. The second would appear to be either that polls in the sidebars are a waste of time, or that this particular poll was too boring to warrant a proper response.

I am tempted to test that second moral of the story with another poll. Nah, forget it. I'll give you a break for now.

Posting will be somewhere between limited and none from now until Monday, as Ms. Bear and I are hosting guests for a few days and will be busy doing all the touristy things you never get around to when you live somewhere. On the plus side, I should have plenty to report when posting resumes with the normal alacrity early next week.

You may recall that in the lead-up to and aftermath of Anzac Day (25th April), I blogged first here and then here about the Prime Minister of Australia, John Howard's, decision not to bother to attend the New Zealand commemoration service at Chunuk Bair on the Gallipoli peninsula. At the time, I said I thought Howard was "an odious little man with an attitude problem," and an embarrassment to his country. And then when I read that he was 'dismayed' by talk of a snub and claimed that he was unaware that he could have attended the New Zealand ceremony, I added "liar" for good measure. I stand by those slurs and have not changed my opinion.

I have, however, found an interesting analysis of the incident. It is written by Selwyn Manning, the co-editor of the New Zealand news website Scoop, who travelled to Gallipoli this year for Anzac Day and was therefore "in the thick of it" as events unfolded.

Manning's opinion piece, here, argues that, despite Mr Howard's protestations to the contrary, his no-show at the New Zealand memorial service should definitely be regarded as a boycott and a snub.

Howard’s decision to abandon plans to attend the New Zealand ceremony at Chunuk Bair was a boycott. Context justifies the assertion.

For over one month prior to Anzac Day New Zealand and Australian foreign affairs officials exchanged emails and calls seeking to resolve John Howard’s insistence that he would not be attending the Chunuk Bair service.

Interesting isn't it? Because Teflon John, we are told, assured Helen Clark afterwards that it was not a snub and that he did not realise he could attend both services until it was too late. It couldn't be that he wan't quite being 100% truthful, could it? Surely not!

Manning goes on to speculate about possible reasons for John Howard's snub. He comes to the conclusion that the snub was not a personal one, directed at New Zealand leader Helen Clark. Rather, he argues, it was born of a "deeply held contemporary Australian belief that Anzac Day is for Australians." He sees it as an example of Australian nationalism and an attempt by Howard to abandon 90 years of Anzac spirit and strike out in a new, more Australia-centric direction.

The Australian PM’s boycott of Chunuk Bair was another demonstration of Australian nationalism – born of the ANZAC spirit but focussed on contemporary Australian values that disregard the sacrifice that New Zealand (then an infant nation) suffered 2721 deaths, 4852 casualties out of 8556 young men during that doomed battle at Gallipoli. Australia’s contemporary view of New Zealand, especially when considering things military, is that New Zealand sponges off Australia, does not pull its weight, is a combat liability, and at best, relegated to a logistics role.

That view was not accurate during World War I or World War II.

...

Australia’s ANZAC Day 2005 set a heading that displayed an altered course. This event of national identity was clearly but cleverly engineered to present to Australians (as opposed to New Zealanders) a flag-waving extravaganza of national pride. John Howard’s mood captured as much as presented a feeling within Australia that it ought to naturally assume its place on the podium of ANZAC history, a solitary place of choice, where New Zealand can make up the NZ in ANZAC but exalts a contemporary belief that New Zealand had never paid its way in battles throughout the 20th Century.

...

Howard’s decision to attend a barbeque rather than lay a wreath of respect for the fallen New Zealanders at Chunuk Bair was a boycott and a snub. It rendered New Zealand as secondary, subservient, and in some aspects irrelevant. In his speech at ANZAC Cove, John Howard referred to New Zealand once – while dotting the word Australia at least 20 times in the course of his commemoration.

As I cannot read John Howard's mind and do not have access to foreign office and diplomatic sources to ask the right questions, I cannot judge whether Manning's assessment of this diplomatic incident is accurate, paranoid, or somewhere in between. Either way, it's an interesting take on something which I found inexplicable and mildly insulting at the time. If I thought that John Howard really spoke for Australians, I would be more concerned. As it is, I've yet to meet an Australian who has admitted to voting for John Howard, and most of my Australian friends are almost as critical of him as I am. Makes you wonder how he keeps getting re-elected, really.

While I was in the park today,
Having a bite to eat,
Several dogs appeared at once,
And began to meet and greet.

There was yapping and tail-wagging,
Panting galore, a gentle tiff,
And, of course, there had to be,
Cocking of legs and a mutual sniff.

And that is when it struck me,
How different, we from canines,
We don't meet by sniffing piss,
But instead with chat-up lines.

And I'm glad, I have to say,
Evolution took this turn,
For with a bashful bladder such as mine,
I'd always crash and burn.

I couldn't meet and greet like that,
Or bark, or chase a bone,
I'd have to hang my head in shame,
And always play alone.

For a dog with a bashful bladder,
Would never find a mate,
And so I'm glad I'm not a dog,
Yes, being me's just great.

More information on the foot and mouth disease scare in New Zealand is available this morning. It appears that the New Zealand authorities are almost certain that this is a hoax and that the immediate response I described in my last post was principally designed to appease our trading partners and let them know that everything was in hand.

The theory now