text:
Pictures Of Andrew Johnson, Andrew, Andrew Johnson Pictures, Images And Stock Photos
Browse 44 andrew johnson stock photos and images available, or search for andrew johnson president or andrew johnson impeachment to find more great stock photos and pictures.
You are watching: Pictures of andrew johnson
Andrew Johnson from 1890 Engraving of the American President Andrew Johnson from 1890. andrew johnson stock pictures, royalty-free photos & images
THE IMPEACHMENT OF ANDREW JOHNSON (XXXL) The impeachment of Andrew Johnson was initiated on February 24, 1868.Vintage etching circa 19th century. andrew johnson stock illustrations
The impeachment of Andrew Johnson was initiated on February 24, 1868.Vintage etching circa 19th century.
Andrew Johnson Engraving From 1881 Featuring The American President, Andrew Johnson. Johnson Lived From 1808 Until 1875. andrew johnson stock illustrations
Engraving From 1881 Featuring The American President, Andrew Johnson. Johnson Lived From 1808 Until 1875.
Speech on Impeachment of Andrew Johnson Vintage engraving features a final speech given by Thaddeus Stevens before the vote to impeach President Andrew Johnson in 1868. andrew johnson stock illustrations
Vintage engraving features a final speech given by Thaddeus Stevens before the vote to impeach President Andrew Johnson in 1868.
Portrait of President Andrew Johnson "This vintage engraving depicts the portrait of U.S. President Andrew Johnson (1808 – 1875), the 17th President of the United States. Engraved after a photograph by Mathew Brady (1822 – 1896). It was published in an 1865 collection of American portraits and is now in the public domain. Digital restoration by Steven Wynn Photography." andrew johnson stock illustrations
"This vintage engraving depicts the portrait of U.S. President Andrew Johnson (1808 – 1875), the 17th President of the United States. Engraved after a photograph by Mathew Brady (1822 – 1896). It was published in an 1865 collection of American portraits and is now in the public domain. Digital restoration by Steven Wynn Photography."
Andrew Johnson (1808-1875), 17th President of the United States Andrew Johnson (1808 – 1875), 17th President of the United States. Wood engraving, published in 1865. andrew johnson stock pictures, royalty-free photos & images
Andrew Johnson (1808 – 1875), 17th President of the United States. Wood engraving, published in 1865.
President Andrew Johnson engraving 1895 Map from "A History of the United States for America for Schools" 1895 andrew johnson stock illustrations
Portrait of 17th USA President Andrew Johnson Vintage portrait of Andrew Johnson (December 29, 1808 – July 31, 1875), the 17th president of the United States, serving from 1865 to 1869. He assumed the presidency as he was vice president at the time of the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. During the U.S. Civil War (1861-1865), Johnson was the only Southern senator to remain loyal to the Union. Johnson is the first president to be impeached, charged by the House of Representatives for violating the Tenure of Office Act. andrew johnson stock illustrations
Vintage portrait of Andrew Johnson (December 29, 1808 – July 31, 1875), the 17th president of the United States, serving from 1865 to 1869. He assumed the presidency as he was vice president at the time of the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. During the U.S. Civil War (1861-1865), Johnson was the only Southern senator to remain loyal to the Union. Johnson is the first president to be impeached, charged by the House of Representatives for violating the Tenure of Office Act.
See more: Straight Up Now Tell Me Do You Really Want To Love Me Forever Oh, Oh, Oh
Andrew Johnson – Antique Engraved Portrait Antique engraved portrait of Andrew Johnson (1808-1875), the 17th President of the United States, (1865-1869). Johnson became president as Abraham Lincoln's vice president after his assassination. andrew johnson stock illustrations
Antique engraved portrait of Andrew Johnson (1808-1875), the 17th President of the United States, (1865-1869). Johnson became president as Abraham Lincoln's vice president after his assassination.
Portraits of American Presidents Composition of portraits of 17 American presidents, from George Washington to Andrew Johnson ( 1789-1869 ) .Composition of 17 portraits of American presidents in circles and stars with caption by an anonymous artist, published between 1865 -1869. It is now in the public domain. andrew johnson stock pictures, royalty-free photos & images
Composition of portraits of 17 American presidents, from George Washington to Andrew Johnson ( 1789-1869 ) .Composition of 17 portraits of American presidents in circles and stars with caption by an anonymous artist, published between 1865 -1869. It is now in the public domain.
President Johnson Impeachment President Johnson Impeachment andrew johnson stock illustrations
Andrew Johnson (1808-1875), 17th U.S. president, wood engraving, published 1886 Andrew Johnson (1808 – 1875) – 17th president of the United States, serving from 1865 to 1869. Wood engraving after a photograph, published in 1886. andrew johnson stock illustrations
Andrew Johnson (1808 – 1875) – 17th president of the United States, serving from 1865 to 1869. Wood engraving after a photograph, published in 1886.
Andrew Johnson 17th USA President Andrew Johnson (1808 – 1875) was the 17th President of the United States, serving from 1865 to 1869. An image of an original engraving from the "National Portrait Gallery of Eminent Americans" published in 1862. andrew johnson stock illustrations
Andrew Johnson (1808 – 1875) was the 17th President of the United States, serving from 1865 to 1869. An image of an original engraving from the "National Portrait Gallery of Eminent Americans" published in 1862.
See more: What Book Analyzed The 1950S As A Culture Of Conformity? ? The Lonely Crowd
Portrait of William Henry Seward Vintage portrait of William H. Seaward (1801-1872), United States Secretary of State from 1861 to 1869. Prior to this, he served as governor of New York and United States Senator. Seward became one of America's leading advocates in the fight to end slavery. He also organized the purchase of Alaska in 1867. andrew johnson stock illustrations
Vintage portrait of William H. Seaward (1801-1872), United States Secretary of State from 1861 to 1869. Prior to this, he served as governor of New York and United States Senator. Seward became one of America's leading advocates in the fight to end slavery. He also organized the purchase of Alaska in 1867.
Andrew Johnson Andrew Johnson andrew johnson stock illustrations
Impeachment of President Andrew Johnson Vintage engraving features Thaddeus Stevens and John A. Bingham before the Senate addressing the vote on President Andrew Johnson's impeachment by the House of Representatives. andrew johnson stock illustrations
Antique photograph: Presidents of the USA Antique photograph: Presidents of the USA andrew johnson stock pictures, royalty-free photos & images
Find Cheap Flights Lax To Tampa (Lax, Flights From Los Angeles (Lax) To Tampa
Homestead Post Office Homestead Fl Post Offices, Us Post Office


ORLANDO, Fla.—To shamelessly paraphrase and warp a famous quote about revolutions and television: The cancer revolution will be digitized. At the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) 102nd Annual Meeting 2011 in Orlando from April 2-6 at the Orange County Convention Center, not only will cutting-edge research and theories in understanding and treating cancer be presented, but they will be webcast as well.
It's not the first time the AACR has used the web as a tool for the annual meeting. In previous years, the organization has made the opening ceremony, major plenary sessions and award lectures available free online as streaming video—and that tradition will continue. But in addition this year, meeting registrants who select the premium package can access exclusive online streaming access to the audio and slides for virtually all of the scientific sessions presented at the meeting. AACR does note, however, that participation in the AACR Annual Meeting Webcast is left to the discretion of each speaker, and as a result, some presentations may not be available for webcast, and some webcast presentations may not include all slides.
But for the many presentations that will be available, the speakers' slides will be synchronized with recorded audio presentations; speakers' mouse movements will be captured and included in playback; and the webcasts will be compatible with mobile devices and smart phones, such as the iPad, iPod Touch and iPhone. Once they become available in late April, presentations will searchable by session title, presentation title and speaker name, and the access to online content will continue for 15 months after the 2011 annual meeting concludes.
None of which would be possible, of course, without scientific sessions to begin with, and there too the AACR is making a few tweaks this year—as well as keeping momentum with previous alterations.
"We're preserving some of the key changes made by last year's organizers," says Dr. Joan S. Brugge, the program chair for the 2011 meeting and chair of the Department of Cell Biology at Harvard Medical School. "One that was endorsed overwhelmingly by the AACR members was opening each morning with an unopposed plenary session that covers major developments in cancer research that are of interest to the whole AACR community. These sessions created a strong sense of community."
In terms of some of the new tweaks, Brugge says the program committee wanted to make efforts to feature young scientists more prominently, and to do so they changed the scheduling of the mini-symposia.
"In past years, the mini-symposia were concurrent with major symposia and the current topics in organ site research," she notes. "This year, the mini-symposia will not compete with these sessions in order to provide more exposure to trainees and junior faculty in the AACR community."
In addition, she says, she and the rest of the committee also made efforts to cut down on double and triple talks by same presenters to provide "more exposure to more people and more science at the meeting."
The scientific session will cover a wide swath of the cancer research community in terms of both content and presenters, notes 2009 Nobel Laureate Dr. Elizabeth H. Blackburn, who is the current AACR president and also Morris Herzstein Professor in the departments of Biochemistry and Biophysics at the University of California, San Francisco. The 2011 program will reflect the AACR's strengths in basic, translational and clinical research, she says, as well as emphasizing the ways in which these once-distinct and very separate disciplines are now working together productively—and ways they can continue to do so even better.
The program will capture the advances in all these disciplines, with topics covering cancer mechanisms, systems approaches to cancer biology, diagnostics and therapeutics, translation of advances to the clinic and cutting-edge science in the prevention and early interception of cancer.
"I'm most excited about the scientific sessions that we've organized for this meeting," Brugge says. "The program committee and I were literally overwhelmed by suggestions for session topics by member subcommittees. It was very difficult to prioritize the topics for the final selections. There are many areas of cancer research that are literally blossoming and bringing new concepts to our understanding of cancer development."
Among those areas, she notes in particular studies of the tumor microenvironment, tumor heterogeneity, tumor self-stress adaptation and tumor immunity—"even exosomes, which is a newer concept that will be discussed at several talks in the meeting."
"The science of cancer research is just surging ahead, and there are so many interesting areas that are breaking and have built upon decades of tremendously good basic and translational and clinical research, and we're seeing some of this come to fruition and this will be very well represented at the annual meeting," Blackburn adds.
But in the end, Brugge notes, the patients are the ultimate endpoint for the efforts of AACR members and other cancer researchers, and that's one of the things that makes the organization's annual meetings so important.
"Most importantly for cancer patients, the labors of the whole cancer community to understand this beastly disease are bearing fruit," Brugge says, "both with respect to the development of drugs that target the alterations that drive tumor proliferation and survival, as well as therapies to mount an immune response to the tumor cells."
Dr. Yosef Shiloh, a David and Inez Myers professor in cancer research in the Department of Human Molecular Genetics and Biochemistry in the Sackler School of Medicine at Tel Aviv University in Israel, will receive the 51st annual AACR G.H.A. Clowes Memorial Award for his studies of the cellular DNA damage response and the rare genomic instability syndrome ataxia-telangiectasia (A-T), whose victims exhibit progressive neurodegeneration, immunodeficiency, striking cancer predisposition and chromosomal fragility.
"Dr. Shiloh is an international leader in the study of A-T, and his identification and cloning of the A-T gene provided for the first time a definitive diagnosis for so many who had gone without one," says Dr. Margaret Foti, CEO of the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR). "This discovery, along with his subsequent work, has played a critical role in increasing our understanding of DNA damage response and repair, which has important implications for cancer and other diseases."
Dr. Susan Band Horwitz will receive the eighth AACR Award for Lifetime Achievement in Cancer Research, in part for conducting pioneering research to discover the mechanism of action of the chemotherapeutic drug paclitaxel (Taxol), which prompted the development of this drug as an important therapy for many common solid tumors, including ovarian, breast and lung carcinomas. Her work has also contributed to the understanding of how microtubules function in normal and malignant cells and why stabilization of microtubules is a promising target for drug discovery.
"Dr. Horwitz has had a direct impact on millions of cancer patients around the world through her work in understanding the mechanisms of action of paclitaxel and other cytotoxic drugs," says AACR CEO Margaret Foti. "Her remarkable career and pivotal scientific contributions have influenced our understanding of how cancer drugs work and how to translate that knowledge into improved strategic treatments."
Horwitz, who has shown a continuing interest in natural products as a source of new drugs for the treatment of cancer, is the Rose C. Falkenstein Professor of Cancer Research and co-chair of the Department of Molecular Pharmacology at Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University.
ORLANDO, Fla.—The fifth annual AACR Team Science Award will be given to a group of molecular biologists, epidemiologists, biostatisticians and clinicians from Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and University of Washington who have worked together on human papillomavirus (HPV) for more than 20 years.
"This team's work exemplifies how cancer research can dramatically impact public health," says AACR CEO Margaret Foti. "The researchers' long-term collaborations in basic science, epidemiology and clinical research played a vital role in increasing our understanding of HPV and developing the HPV vaccine, which has the potential to prevent more than half a million HPV-associated cancers each year, worldwide."
By combining molecular assays to detect and characterize HPV infections with epidemiologic approaches, the 12-member team showed that HPVs are associated with nearly all genital-tract cancers and with a significant proportion of head and neck cancers. The team also played a pivotal role in making virus-like particle-based vaccines a reality, from the early basic science work to the epidemiology, to the proof-of-principle clinical trial that showed that a monovalent HPV 16 vaccine protected against HPV 16 infection and disease.
For some ideas of activities to keep you busy when you're not in scientific sessions or other AACR activities, click here.


It took some persistence and several phone calls. I spoke to our residents' association, called Toronto 311, the city of Toronto arborists, and the local city councillor's office. Today it paid off. The arborists from Davey Tree, contracted by the city, arrived and reassessed our tree. A sober second look, this time by guys really committed to saving trees. "Looks healthy to us," they said. Rob went up, Marlon stayed grounded, and they got to work pruning.
A few dead limbs were removed and the stub of the fallen limb was trimmed back. As the stub was sliced they could see the remains of an abandoned carpenter ant nest, which explains why the limb broke. Carpenter ants are apparently a common problem in maples like this one. The ants here did not penetrate the main trunk of the tree, so it is still healthy and growing.
So, one old Norway maple has survived the orange dot "kiss of death" and is still shading the street and our house, still a graceful inhabitant of Glenholme Ave.
And some arborists are our new heroes.
Read the original story of the windstorm-damaged tree here.
Read the final instalment of this saga here.


Power 2KW. The traditional version of HATHOR, the most powerful range of heating lamps, confirms itself suitable for rooms with high ceilings, such as hangars, churches and places open to the public. The excellent performance makes it compatible for use in mechanical workshops or to speed up the drying process of painted items. Available in 2000 / 4000 / 6000W versions. Certified for outdoor use, with IP55 rain protection.
IP55, performing and directional, is easy to install. Perfect for heating people from a distance. With GOLD lamp.


Wisdom teeth – the third molars are the last to erupt amongst the 32 set of teeth. They emerge between the age of 17 to 22. Because they are last to erupt, therefore, are known as 'Wisdom Teeth'.
Earlier people did not have any problem with the eruption of wisdom teeth as the jaw sizes were larger. But now due to different eating habits the jaw size has reduced which makes it difficult for wisdom teeth to erupt. Not that they will never erupt but can cause pain while erupting and then might take a time or can experience hindrances.
If you have impacted wisdom tooth then it will surely hurt. Though it causes the problems as discussed above and can be treated at times sometimes the wisdom teeth get embed in your gums which becomes hard to erupt. This will cause a lot of pain in your jawbone which will become unbearable after a certain time.
It will cause a lot of discomfort and pain while chewing, brushing or can even cause difficulty while talking since the pain will be intoxicating. In such cases, the dentist waits for some time and even then if they do not see any progress, then extracting wisdom tooth is the only option.
Since they are last to erupt therefore, the teeth which have already been erupted takes most of the space leaving no other space for them to develop. This creates crowding amongst the teeth and leads to pain in the jawbone. The chances of decay also increase due to crowding since the food we eat get stuck between the teeth. This makes brushing difficult and is the reason for poor oral health.
Having crowded teeth pushes them on each other causing pressure to the other teeth and are a reason of wear and tear of the tooth enamel. This might be the reason for sensitivity. Not only are your teeth troubled but this also affects your tongue. This happens because your tongue gets in when you speak or eat which will lead to a swollen tongue.
When wisdom teeth are hard to erupt, they get embedded into the gums making it difficult to appear. This can result in red and swollen gums and also lead to tender gums. Swollen gums cause infection which might lead to severe pain in the gums.
Having infected gums is the first sign of developing gum disease known as gingivitis. If not cured on time gingivitis which is the primary disease can take the severe form of periodontal disease. In this, your gums are badly infected and gum pockets are created at the base of teeth. these pockets are the breeding ground of infection which might lead to serious oral and other diseases. Sometimes the infection can cause the cyst to develop.
Since the wisdom teeth find it difficult to adjust they can push the second molar and make them be out of alignment. They push the adjacent healthy teeth which lead to wear down of the enamel. And once that happens, they cause high sensitivity.
Because they are out of alignment, therefore, they can trigger the pain and can be the reason for decay. This is because the food you eat get stuck between the crowded teeth and then it makes difficult to get rid of the stuck particles with the help of your brush. Due to crowding, it becomes difficult for even the floss to reach those areas.
If you are facing any of the above issues, then please do visit a dentist. Your dentist will first examine your teeth taking an X-Ray. After a thorough examination, if they found that it is causing severe trouble then he/she will advise you to get it extracted. One should not delay in the process as the longer you delay the chances of it causing more damage increases day by day.


text:
Write me: bulldogash@hotmail.com
The If Man
Kruger, Kommandos & Kak
Matabele
Kruger's War
Entertaining Fan Mail
Berg Times Balderdash
November 27, 2018 Bulldog 7 Comments
One of the most entertaining things in life is watching the mental gymnastics which Defenders of the Myth™ put themselves through in order to maintain their preferred version of the Boer War. These people will shamelessly twist themselves in knots to justify (or explain away) the simple, undeniable reality that the Boer War started when the two Boer republics invaded British territory. Not only that, but their aim was openly stated as being to form an 'Afrikaans Empire from the Zambesi to the Cape' – which explains why they annexed the land they seized, and re-named the towns they grabbed.
To True Believers, however, none of this features in their bizarre version of the war. I was recently sent this newsletter by a friend:
You'll notice I have underlined the most blatant pieces of balderdash. I love the way that this version claims that British 'greed' led them to want to grab goldfields in the two republics. The reality is, of course, that the goldfields were in the Transvaal, not the Orange Free State. What is more, the goldfields were owned by foreign (mainly British) investors already, so this fellow would have us believe the British were greedy to grab goldfields which British business men already owned? Remarkable. And, as the final nail in the coffin of nonsense, upon annexing the Transvaal, the British Government didn't seize any goldfields from any of the owners – and they then granted self-rule to the Transvaal just 4 years later.
As Sir Arthur Conan-Doyle put it in 1902:
'The gold mines are private companies, with shares held by private shareholders, German and French, as well as British. Whether the British or the Boer flag flew over the country would not alienate a single share from any holder, nor would the wealth of Britain be any way greater … how is Britain the richer because her flag flies over the Rand? The Transvaal will be a self-governing colony, like all other British colonies, with its own finance minister, its own budget, its own taxes, even its own power of imposing duties upon British merchandise … We know all this because it is part of our British system, but it is not familiar to those nations who look upon their colonies as sources of direct revenue to the mother country.'
And if his dose of inconvenient facts don't go down well, how about this from the prize-winning French economist, Yves Guyot, writing in 1900:
'[Britain's critics are] perfectly well aware that England will derive no benefit from the gold mines, nor will she take possession of them any more than she has done of the gold mines of Australia. They are private property.'
Still, things like historical reality and facts do not seem to bother Defenders of the Myth™.
So let's move onto the second ridiculous claim… that the poor old Boers 'made the decision to besiege, certain key towns in the Cape Colony and Natal, in an effort to prevent a British invasion of their homelands'.
If I understand this outburst correctly, we are being asked to believe that the Boers' master plan to 'prevent an invasion' was to start a war with the Greatest of the Great Powers of the Age? Perhaps a rather more sensible way to 'prevent an invasion' was not to pick a fight with Great Britain? I wonder if the writer would also sum up the causes of the Second World War by saying: 'Germany made the decision to besiege certain key towns in France and Poland in an effort to prevent an invasion of their homeland'? That is every bit as nonsensical a contention, especially given that the Imperial garrison in southern Africa was, at the time, a mere fraction the size of the republican forces.
Forgetting the invasion of Natal for a moment, quite how this fellow thinks annexing vast tracts of semi-desert in northern Cape Colony and Bechuanaland, and laying siege to the dusty, one horse town of Kuruman, was going to 'prevent an invasion' is anyone's guess. Indeed, what really makes these frantic attempts at post-factual justifications so entertaining is that they don't actually fit with any of the facts: the Boers did not invade Natal with the aim of laying siege to Ladysmith: they invaded Natal to annex Natal. The simple fact is that Boer invasion forces rampaged well past Ladysmith, looting their merry way almost as far at Nottingham Road… before they retreated back in the face of Imperial reinforcements. No less a man than General Louis Botha later moaned that only Joubert's timidity prevented him 'coming to Durban to eat bananas in 1899'. Things were no different over on the western front, where a boastful General Cronjé had assured his men they would 'drive the Rooinek into the sea' and be in Cape Town within a month.
As entertaining as Defenders of the Myth™ always are, it is nonetheless disappointing that their endless codswallop should be spewn forth in a newsletter aimed at tourists. Who knows – someone might even be naïve enough to believe their nonsense.
About Bulldog
James Seymour Posted November 28, 2018 11:47 am
Dear Chris, I have read your blog and have to vehemently disagree. The South African War or second Anglo Boer War was largely fought over a desire of the British Empire to control the Boer Republics. As is often the case war of this nature revolved around a desire to control a precious resource. In this case, it was gold. The Boers had the opportunity in the early stages of the war to capture Durban. However, they choose not to and rather to entrench along the Thukela not the anglicized word Tugela…River to prevent a British invasion. It is such a pity that some many brave British and Boer soldiers had to perish as a result of imperialism.
Bulldog Posted November 28, 2018 4:52 pm
Good afternoon James,
You are welcome to be as vehement as you like, but alas you are not welcome to make up your own facts. Simply stating something vehemently does not make it true.
I note you have not troubled yourself to dispute / disprove the quotes I provided in terms of the ownership of the gold, or why – if, as you would have us believe, the British were so desperate to steal gold mines (from British investors, presumably?), then why did they grant Home Rule to the Transvaal just 4 years later?
I also add the following, which further shatter your (un-referenced) version of events:
The explanation of the war as a capitalists' conspiracy must be discarded; it is too smooth and rounded to fit easily into the jagged background of events and personalities, although it appealed at the time to some who were sophisticated and some who were simple minded.
– Professor Le May
The evidence so far produced does not support the view that the British Government went to war in 1899 to bring the gold supply or the gold fields under British control or to protect British trade or the profits of cosmopolitan capitalists in the Transvaal. None of these was under serious threat, even if it was acknowledged that the capitalists did suffer from unnecessary impositions at the hands of a corrupt and inefficient government. The Transvaal was not the only part of the world where this occurred; despite their justifiable complaints, the capitalists on the Rand not only made sizable profits, under Kruger's government, but were also successful in attracting the large-scale private investment which was so essential to their operations. While some of their leading members, by 1899, certainly looked to a British takeover in the Transvaal as likely to benefit their interests, there is as yet no evidence that their views formed a significant part of the British Government's considerations in its mounting conflict with the Transvaal government of President Kruger. Transvaal gold formed only a small proportion of the low level of British gold reserves, which was a deliberate feature of Bank of England policy before, during and after the South African War.
– Professor Iain Smith
The last thing the capitalists wanted, or needed, in 1899 was a war—especially one instigated and won by Britain… Britain based the defence of her monetary stability, in the event of international gold rushes, on her position as a creditor nation, but did not build up a massive gold reserve beyond what was required for the issue of currency … France, too, defended the stability of her currency based on a status as a creditor nation, but in addition, she built up a massive gold reserve as a second line of defence. France, not Britain, was the greatest European purchaser of new gold for strategic purposes … there were no compelling reasons at that particular moment for Britain to wish to control the government of the Transvaal in order to have control over its gold mines. Whatever gold was mined in the Transvaal would in any event find its way to the international gold market and the European Monetary System, to which Britain had as much access as anybody else. Moreover, whoever bought the gold had to pay the companies that mined it. The mining companies made profits from selling gold, not those who controlled the governments of the producing countries. For Britain, there would thus be enormous disadvantages in taking over the Transvaal, but no conceivable economic advantage to governing a gold-producing colony—it was a much better proposition to hold prime trading rights with a gold-producing colony. There was thus no economic imperative driving Britain to covet the Transvaal for its gold.
– John Stephens, Fuelling the Empire
And as for your claim that the Boers had the opportunity to capture Durban but 'chose not to' and instead entrenched along the Tugela… well, that is simply untrue. The invading Boers rampaged all the way to Mooi River, before (laden down with masses of loot) retreating back to the Tugela after the Battle of Willow Grange, and in the face of Imperial reinforcements. Didn't you see the quote by General Louis Botha which I provided?
You are no doubt equally unaware that another wing of the Boer invasion force looted and burned Pomeroy before being stopped by the Umvoti Mounted Rifles. Also note that other elements of the Boer armies invaded and annexed chunks of Zululand – can you explain how that fits with your assertion that they were the innocent victims of the piece?
I still await your explanation as to how annexing vast swathes of Bechuanaland and the modern-day Northern Cape, and laying siege to the duty outpost of Kuruman, was done to 'defend the Boer homelands'. While you're at it, and if you really believe that all the poor old innocent Boers wanted to do was 'defend their homelands', perhaps you can explain why they re-named Newcastle and Dundee (and even street names therein) after grabbing them in their invasion of Natal? They also re-named Barkly West – maybe you can explain that too.
I shall leave you with a few more quotes which further shatter the Apartheid-era version of the war:
The South African Flag shall yet wave from Table Bay to the Zambezi, be that end accomplished by blood or by ink. If blood it is to be, we shall not lack men to spill it.
– Rev S. Du Toit, speaking in Amsterdam in 1884
The Boer ideal was 'Anti-British Federation in South Africa'. Mr Secretary Leyds has been appointed a kind of a Boer Minister in Europe, where he will no doubt do his utmost to encourage the idea that the federated Dutch Republics can be relied upon by anyone who wishes to destroy British supremacy in South Africa.
– Writing in 1897, pro-Boer journalist William T. Stead lets slip that the republican plan was to challenge British hegemony in southern Africa
The Bond was intended to be Pan-Afrikaner and in spirit bitterly anti-British.
– Professor Eric Walker describes the reality of the Afrikaner Bond
Freedom will rise in Africa like the sun from the morning clouds, inasmuch freedom rose in the United States…Then it will be from the Zambesi to Simon's Bay: Africa for the Africander.
– President Paul Kruger gives a lie to modern claims that there was no plan to build an Afrikaans empire in southern Africa
Paul Naish Posted November 30, 2018 1:57 pm
I look forward to hearing your response to this very erudite reply Ash is course correct and cuts a knife through your statement with respect!
Bulldog Posted December 2, 2018 5:50 pm
Hello Paul,
I wouldn't hold your breath. I have met dozens of people like Mr Seymour over the years, and not one has ever been able to back up his 'vehemently' held opinions with facts, references or even a coherent, logical argument.
Malcolm andrew bryer Posted December 8, 2018 9:40 am
A Good read and and a necessary balance to received opinion. What is missing is Milner and his equaL determination to create a new dominion of South Africa and creat a federal British Empire.
Bulldog Posted December 29, 2018 9:12 am
As I thought, no sign of Mr Seymour returning to defend his 'vehemently' held opinions… funny how those who hold such extreme, anti-British views can never actually defend them with inconvenient things like 'facts' or 'references'.
Bulldog Posted December 8, 2018 10:12 am
Hello Mr Bryer,
I am glad you enjoyed the read.
There is no doubt that Milner, and many others, thought that a federated South Africa made sense (just as some today think a federated Europe makes sense), but I think Milner's part in the run up to the war has been greatly overblown by many. One should remember that he only arrived in South Africa a couple of months after the Transvaal and the OFS had signed an offensive alliance… the same offensive alliance that Kruger and his gaggle had been pushing for since 1887 – fully 10 years prior to Milner's arrival.
In May 1899, Milner sent a lengthy telegram to London to sum up the situation on the ground:
'The true remedy is to strike at the root of all these injuries—the political impotence of the injured. What diplomatic protests will never accomplish, a fair measure of uitlander representation would gradually but surely bring about. It seems a paradox, but it is true, that the only effective way of protecting our subjects is to help them to cease to be our subjects. The admission of the uitlanders to a fair share of political power would no doubt give stability to the Republic. But it would, at the same time, remove most of our causes of difference with it, and modify and, in the long run, entirely remove that intense suspicion and bitter hostility to Great Britain which at present dominates its internal and external policy … A certain section of the Press, not in the Transvaal only, preaches openly and constantly the doctrine of a republic embracing all South Africa, and supports it by menacing references to the armaments of the Transvaal, its alliance with the Orange Free State, and the active sympathy which, in case of war, it would receive from a section of Her Majesty's subjects. I regret to say that this doctrine, supported as it is by a ceaseless stream of malignant lies about the intentions of the British Government, is producing a great effect upon a large number of our Dutch fellow-colonists. Language is frequently used which seems to imply that that the Dutch have some superior right, even in this Colony, to their fellow-citizens of British birth. Thousands of men peacefully disposed, and, if left alone, perfectly satisfied with their position as British subjects, are being drawn into disaffection, and there is a corresponding exasperation on the side of the British.
I can see nothing which will put a stop to this mischievous propaganda but some striking proof of the intention of Her Majesty's government not to be ousted from its position in South Africa. And the best proof alike of its power and its justice would be to obtain for the uitlanders in the Transvaal a fair share in the government of the country which owes everything to their exertions. It could be made perfectly clear that our action was not directed against the existence of the Republic. We should only be demanding the re-establishment of rights which now exist in the Orange Free State, and which existed in the Transvaal itself at the time of, and long after, the withdrawal of British sovereignty. It would be no selfish demand, as other uitlanders besides those of British birth would benefit by it. It is asking for nothing from others which we do not give ourselves. And it would certainly go to the root of the political unrest in South Africa, and, though temporarily it might aggravate, it would ultimately extinguish the race feud, which is the great bane of this country.'
These words certainly do not leave one with the impression that Milner had a burning desire to invade the Transvaal and add it to the British Empire, or that his intentions were anything other than simply to gain a fair franchise for the uitlanders. Alas, the notion that Milner 'caused the war' or that he 'had always been desperate for war' has been repeated so often that many no longer even think to query it. Those who do bother to delve a little deeper and read the man's own correspondence on the subject will see a rather different picture. Far from the claim that he arrived in the Cape resolutely determined to provoke a war, shortly after his appointment in South Africa, for example, he noted:
'I have a strong hope and conviction that, with moderation and good sense, and a policy of firmness, patience, and good temper, these difficulties may yet be satisfactorily, if not immediately settled.'
As an example of this 'moderation and good sense', Milner intervened in a dispute within the British uitlander community in Johannesburg, insisting that courtesy demanded they must toast President Kruger as the head of state before HM the Queen at a banquet held to celebrate her diamond jubilee:
'…on the present occasion and all others, British subjects in the Transvaal should be most careful to avoid anything which might be regarded as a slight to the S.A.R. or its Chief Magistrate.'
This would have been a strange thing to insist upon if he was determined to provoke a war. Indeed, far from the modern day re-invention of him as a foaming-mouthed war-monger desperate for any excuse to pick a fight with poor old Kruger, Milner, in a confidential letter to Chamberlain written on 2 August 1897, declared:
'That country [the Transvaal] is in a terrible mess, social, political, and financial. I think great allowance must be made for the men who have to govern a country in that state, even if their methods often seem to us very unwise. We should be very patient with them, very conciliatory, remembering how much excuse they have for regarding us with suspicion. But we cannot afford to appear, or to be, weak. It is no use being conciliatory if people think you are only being conciliatory because you are afraid.'
Firmness and patience—not aggression—were the order of the day, as he had previously made clear in a letter to Lord Selborne concerning the despatch of an extra battalion of infantry and a brigade division (3 batteries) of artillery which were sent to bolster the meagre imperial garrison in South Africa:
'…we have not the slightest intention of attacking anybody. The force we are sending is too small for any aggressive purpose. But in view of the armaments of the Transvaal, there is a widespread and natural feeling of alarm among our own colonists. We are bound to reassure them by making our own territory safe, and we mean to do it.'
Also in 1897, he had explained in a note to the Colonial Office that his object was:
'…to make things as easy as possible for President Kruger. Reform there must be, but the Boers should not be unduly harassed or hurried. They must be given time and every opportunity to reform themselves.'
Again, it is difficult to identify anything other than a policy of 'wait and see', and to let things sort themselves out—which was, of course, the last thing the tens of thousands of disenfranchised uitlanders would have wanted to hear.
The reformers would have been even less happy to read Milner's letter to Earl Grey, written in June of 1897, in which he explained:
'…the Transvaal will remain a centre of disturbance in South Africa and the final untying of the general knot is adjourned. I don't think this a disadvantage from our point of view. I think we can afford to wait, that time fights on our side and that all our disasters of recent days have been due to precipitation. The difficulty is that the oppressed majority in the Transvaal cannot be expected to, and certainly do not, take quite such a philosophical view of the situation. The great question is whether their material condition can be so far ameliorated and sufficient hope given them of an improvement in their position, to keep them from doing anything foolish, until either (1) the Reform party in the Transvaal gains the upper hand or (2) the stick-in-the-muds do something so outrageous as to compel Great Britain to interfere and finally settle the business. My belief is that the way out is on lines No.1. I think as the extreme bitterness and suspicion engendered by recent events subsides, there will be a beginning of enfranchisement, small at first perhaps, which will in the long run lead to a complete change in the policy of the Transvaal Government and bring it into line with the more progressive South African communities. Meanwhile, we have plenty to do in organizing our own vast possessions…'
None of this in anyway suggests that Milner plotted, or even hoped, for war. He was perfectly happy to play the waiting game, and for the uitlanders to gain the franchise gradually… indeed, despite the old chestnut that he wanted to use their plight as 'an excuse' to intervene, his main concern seemed to be that the uitlanders would not display similar patience, and do 'something outrageous'.
Quite how this equates to a man who, as we are so often assured, 'arrived in South Africa, desperate to start a war' is anyone's guess. If he was determined to grasp at any reason to start a war with Kruger, his response to the crisis over the Transvaal's expansion into Swaziland suggests otherwise. Chamberlain telegrammed Milner on 28 May 1897 to stress that, though he thought the partial independence the Swazis still enjoyed was important, he did not want war with the Transvaal over it. Milner replied on the 30th, agreeing with this pacific stance:
'I never at this stage, contemplated any suggestion to the Transvaal Government which would, if rejected, involve forcible intervention… the semi-independence of the Swazis is not worth a war but worth an effort.'
In July of the following year, Milner received word of a conversation in which the state secretary of the Transvaal, F.W. Reitz, had agreed that the uitlanders:
'…ought to be admitted gradually to the franchise, though it would be difficult to persuade the old Boer oligarchy to grant it. On being once more assured that Great Britain had no design against the independence of the Republic, Reitz frankly confessed that he would like to see England guard the coasts of South Africa while the inhabitants shaped their own destiny. When reminded that there were 80,000 Englishmen in the Transvaal who had only asked for a fair share in the development of the resources in the country, he replied, 'there are many things in this administration at which no honest man can look with approval.'
Reitz's confession prompted Milner to write a private letter to Mr Edmund Fraser, the Acting British Agent in Pretoria in the absence of Conyngham Greene. Dated 19 August 1898, the letter read:
'Reitz's attitude is very remarkable, especially as I believe it to be entirely honest. I need not tell you that it is our policy to meet him half-way. There is just one chance in a hundred that their attitude both towards us and the uitlanders may undergo a change—a permanent change, I mean—in the Reitz Direction. In that case, the ultimate fight might yet be averted, as we don't want the Transvaal, any more than the Orange Free State, but only fair treatment for British industry and capital and an abstention on the part of their government from intrigues with foreign powers.'
Despite his own stated aim to meet the Boers half-way and the numerous confidential letters showing that he didn't 'want the Transvaal', that the British could 'afford to wait', and that 'the Boers should not be unduly harassed or hurried', Milner has long been presented as the Bogey-Man—the fellow who would have stopped at nothing to force a war against Kruger. Yet here was a man who did not latch onto any of the numerous casus belli presented to him by Kruger's rather volatile foreign policy, and who consistently advocated patience, even at the risk of upsetting the uitlanders—the very people we are constantly assured he wanted to use as an excuse for war.
The character assassination of Milner is largely based on two misquotes. The first is used / misused seemingly to try and present him as a vile racist bigot and therefore the baddie of the piece: 'you have only to sacrifice 'the nigger' and the game is easy'.
The full quote is rather different, however, and has precisely the opposite meaning. Written in a letter to a friend, Milner actually explained:
'[If I did not have] some conscience about the treatment of blacks I personally could win over the Dutch in the Colony and indeed in all the South African dominion without offending the English. You have only to sacrifice 'the nigger' and the game is easy. Any attempt to secure fair play for them makes the Dutch fractious and almost unmanageable.'
Any intelligent and fair minded reader will agree that, allowing for his use of language that has since become unacceptable, Milner's rather colourful phrase was meant in completely the opposite way than his modern-day critics insinuate.
And this really was a thorny problem facing relations between the Empire and the republicans in South Africa. If, by granting a fair franchise to the uitlanders, the Transvaal was to enter the British sphere, the mere suggestion of introducing a system similar to the Cape Qualified franchise therein would have had the Boers reaching for their Mausers. In November of 1897, Milner wrote to future Liberal Prime Minister, Herbert Asquith in confidence on the subject of a speech the latter had made about race issues in Southern Africa:
'With your great two principles that (1) we should seek 'to restore the good relations between the Dutch and English' and (2) we should 'secure for the Natives, particularly in that part of Africa called Rhodesia, adequate and sufficient protection against oppression and wrong', I most cordially agree, with this reservation, that I don't quite see the ground for your 'particularly'… What I am so anxious that you and other English Statesmen, especially Liberal Statesmen, should understand is that object No.2 is the principle obstacle to the attainment of object No.1, is, and always has been… I should feel quite confident of being able to get over the Dutch-English difficulty if it were not so horribly complicated by the Native question.'
A little later, Rudyard Kipling also noted that completely different attitudes to 'natives' and democracy were major sticking points in pre-war negotiations:
'They want to sweep the English into the sea, to lick their own nigger, and to govern South Africa with a gun instead of a ballot box.'
Milner, whatever his latter day detractors prefer to believe, was in a distinctly unenviable position, faced, as he was, not just with a minor clash of cultures, but with a clash between a modern, relatively liberal Empire and—as we have seen—an aggressively defiant fundamentalist state, almost medieval in its racism, intolerance, and extremism; a state which—together with its increasingly rebellious supporters in the Cape Colony—showed no interest in adapting to the modern world.
Penny Fights and Aldershot it January 15, 2022
Chris Ash © 2017 All Rights Reserved

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


"The Father's imperial rule is like a person who wanted to kill someone powerful. While still at home he drew his sword and thrust it into the wall to find out whether his hand would go in.
Then he killed the powerful one.
The parable of the vineyard is found in four gospels, Mark, Matthew, Luke, and Thomas. This parable is a good illustration of how a parable of Jesus is shaped and modified by the gospel writers. After killing the son, the different gospel writers respond.
When the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those farmers then?
They say to him, He'll get rid of these wicked villains and lease the vineyard out to other farmers who will deliver their produce to him at the proper time.
And when the ranking priests and Pharisees heard his parable, they realized that he was talking about them. They wanted to seize him, but were afraid of the crowds, because everyone regarded him as a prophet.
But (Jesus) looked them straight in the eye and said, "What can this scripture possibly mean: A stone that the builders rejected has ended up as the keystone? Everyone who falls over that stone will be smashed to bits, and anyone on whom it falls will be crushed.
In all three gospels, this exchange is followed by the religious leaders wanting to arrest Jesus then and there.
Because of the way the gospel writers interpreted this parable, it became an allegory in which God is owner, the vineyard is Israel, the farmers are the temple authorities or religious leaders, the slaves are the prophets, and the son is Jesus.
There is another version of this parable in the Gospel of Thomas. It is for the most part the Thomas version that I printed in the bulletin. The Fellows of the Jesus Seminar determined that Thomas preserved the original parable. There is no allegory attached to the Thomas reading.
My rule of thumb with Jesus' parables is that any character with authority and power such as a king, a judge, or a wealthy landowner should warrant suspicion of any attempt to equate that character with God. The gospel writers may do that and the later tradition does that, but when we get back to the figure of Jesus we find that the parables are more subversive.
My interpretation of this parable is indebted to William Herzog, Parables as Subversive Speech: Jesus as Pedagogue of the Oppressed.
Jesus is telling a parable to people who know all about vineyards and wealthy absentee landowners. From the people's perspective the landowners aren't the good guys. If Jesus' audience is largely made up of the peasant class or 80 percent of the population, they would identify with the farmers.
Where did the landowner get the land to build his luxury vineyard? Land stayed in the family for generations. The only way you get land is to take it. Herod funded his huge building projects including the Temple by forcing peasants off their land to work for large landowners for the purpose of making cash crops. This parable of Jesus reflects this reality as a conflict between a member of the ruling class and the peasant class.
My beloved had a vineyard on a very fertile hill. He dug it and cleared it of stones, and planted it with choice vines; he built a watch-tower in the midst of it, and hewed out a wine vat in it; he expected it to yield grapes, but it yielded wild grapes.
The consolidating of land is the injustice. Jesus speaks in the tradition of the prophets of social justice. The dream of these prophets was that one day everyone would sit under his or her own fig tree. The land would be returned.
In our parable, whose land is it? Does it belong to the guy who planted the vineyard or does it belong to the peasant farmer who has been displaced? We can have an opinion, but we can imagine that there would be debate. Who owns Libya? Who owns Egypt or Syria or the Gulf of Mexico? These are the conflicts of distribution of power and resources.
During times of quiet there is a tenuous balance whatever the arrangement. But in times of stress, when resources are not as easily available, the balance leads to open conflict, and even violent conflict.
Herzog suggest that this parable describes a peasant revolt. The parable codifies the "spiral of violence." Elites expand their land at the expense of the peasants and they are kept at subsistence levels. This element of injustice, "wild grapes", to use the metaphor from Isaiah, is embedded within the system itself. That is the first level of violence.
"The spiral begins in the everyday oppression and exploitation of the poor by the ruling elites. This violence is often covert and sanctioned by law, such as the hostile takeover of peasant land. More often than not, peasants simply adjust and adapt to these incursions by the elites in order to maintain their subsistence standard; but…even peasants have their breaking point." Pp. 108-109.
The second level of the spiral of violence is seen in the peasants' response to the servant. We can imagine that disputes would arise when the servants or retainers for the landowner come to collect the rent. Perhaps the rent is too much and they are pushed to the point of frustration. In the parable, the farmers beat the servant and send him away empty-handed.
The spiral of violence escalates. The landowner sends another, same thing, but the violence increases. A third they kill. Now it is getting serious. Finally, the landowner sends the son, the heir. The landowner is confident that by sending his son, the peasants will stop this revolt.
Respect is respect for superior firepower. The landowner means business now.
But the peasants are feeling their oats. Their revolt is getting heady. They say to themselves that if they kill the son, they will take the land back. The landowner will give up. So they do. They kill the son. The parable ends.
The first level of the spiral of violence is the violence that is embedded in the injustice, the "wild grapes" of oppression and exploitation.
The second level of the spiral of violence is the peasant revolt that leads to a climax of no return in which the son is killed.
There is a third level in the spiral of violence. That is how Jesus likely ended the parable.
Will he give up and let the peasants take back the land and leave his son un-avenged? Not likely.
Will he respond with crushing violence? More likely.
That is the third level of the spiral of violence. A crushing response. Herzog makes this chilling observation that in ancient societies there were many peasant revolts but there were no peasant revolutions. The powers were simply too overwhelming.
Before answering that, I want to talk about another parable I included in today's reading, the Parable of the Assassin. Found only in the Gospel of Thomas, this was one of the few that while not in the canonical gospels, the seminar determined did reflect Jesus.
"The Father's imperial rule is like a person who wanted to kill someone powerful. While still at home he drew his sword and thrust it into the wall to find out whether his hand would go in. Then he killed the powerful one.
I think that Jesus told these parables to an audience of exploited and oppressed people to communicate a couple of things.
One: I am with you. I am on your side. So is God. The realm of God is when we have our daily bread, and the land is returned, and there is restorative justice. Blessed are you poor who are hungry now, who are oppressed now. You will be satisfied. It is clear that Jesus was an advocate for those who were oppressed by the elites whether the elites were fellow Jews, Romans, or religious leaders. He has sympathy and compassion. He is one of them.
Second: Jesus wanted to tell them to be smart and to be cool. Before you decide to take on these guys, count the cost, have a plan, and don't underestimate your enemy. Even an assassin makes sure he can get the job done before he tries it. Even a king with an army makes sure he has enough troops first, and if not makes terms for peace. It is great and I am all for you leading a revolt against wealthy landowners and brutal dictators. But remember why they call them "brutal dictators" in the first place. Taking on the powerful head on doesn't end well. If you act violently, what will the owner of the vineyard do?
Third: Jesus communicated something else. It isn't in the parable itself except in the question Jesus leaves with the hearers. If not with violence, then how do we take on the "powerful one"? How do we effectively respond to injustice? How do we transform it? I think Jesus wanted to channel their righteous anger toward a third way, the way of resistance, but in a way that did not escalate the spiral of violence.
The story of Jesus that is preserved is that he did enact this third way by example. He never allowed anyone to take away his dignity even though they could harm his body. He didn't take on violence directly. He didn't respond to violence with violence. He was non-violent and yet was executed. But his death came to mean far more than it would have had he been a violent bandit.
Because of his non-violence, his execution exposed the injustice and raised the level of consciousness of his early followers. It has been a model for non-violent resistance ever since. This is what Ghandi and King taught and lived through their efforts to change social injustices through non-violent resistance.
This model of non-violent resistance is still in its infancy. As an infant it must be cradled, nurtured, fed, blessed, and given every opportunity to grow. This is the via tranformativa, the spiritual path of compassion and justice-making.
"I have often been threatened with death. I have to say, as a Christian, that I don't believe in death without resurrection: if they kill me, I will rise again in the Salvadoran people. I tell you this without any boasting, with the greatest humility. As pastor, I am obliged, by divine command, to give my life for those I love, who are all Salvadorans, even for those who are going to assassinate me. If the threats are carried out, even now I offer my blood to God for the redemption and resurrection of El Salvador. Martyrdom is a grace of God I don't think I deserve. But if God accepts the sacrifice of my life, may my blood be the seed of liberty and the sign that hope will soon become reality. May my death, if accepted by God, be for the freedom of my people and as a witness to hope in the future. You can say, if they come to kill me, that I forgive and bless those who do it. Hopefully they may realise that they will be wasting their time. A bishop will die, but the Church of God, which is the people, will never perish."
Bishop Romero embodied the third way. We have seen the third way work. Democracy is the third way. It is the process of changing power through voting. A global emphasis on human rights and dignity is an example of the third way. The recent peaceful revolution in Egypt is an example of a non-violent third way.
The situation in Libya is a step backward. There are still third way possibilities there if there is the political will to choose peace. Non-violence is not passivity. It is resistance. It requires creativity. It requires negotiation. It requires sacrifice. What if 5,000 or 10,000 people of conscience from around the world went to Libya without weapons and simply stood arm in arm in front of Gaddafi's tanks? It will require more of the American people than sitting at home watching the bombing on television disconnected from the reality of the U.S. military fighting battles for us and in our name.
Peaceful alternatives to war are not flashy or terribly exciting, but war will not lead the world to the security we seek.
Jesus told his parables to show his friends that violence does not bring about a lasting and just peace. It only escalates it. The via transformativa, or the way of compassion, peace and justice-making is hard work, but the way of peace is the narrow road that leads to life.
Stanley Hauerwas on a Christian Response to War.
John -- thanks for taking this on. No one is asking the right questions here, including especially the U.S. media -- and unfortunately NPR's reporters are also not asking the right question. The right question is, how do we collectively (United Nations) respond non-violently to Quadaffi?
I personally agree with Obama's decision to join the UN coalition, not to lead it.
Until we educate ourselves religiously and politically to the extent necessary, no one is going to be willing to give up their lives for a non-violent cause.
I agree in principle with the Quaker letters that followed your sermon, but I agree more with Hillary Clinton that we can't stand by and watch another genocide.
I don't think Oil is the motivator for the U.S. We have no "strategic national interest" in Libya. We do have a humanitarian one, and to my mind, we need to take Quaddifi at his word, that he would indeed murder his own people.
There is an old song: "Step by step the longest march can be won" -- participating in the collective "no fly zone" strategy is a step. Hopefully the next step will not be boots on the ground; but if it is, those boots cannot be U.S. boots. They will have to be Arab boots.
This is turning into an essay. . . .
I appreciate your comments and your encouragement to talk about these things.
I wasn't really preaching about Libya even though it was on my mind and I used it as an illustration. I was really preaching about the attraction and excitement of violence, its deceptive quality, and its futility.
There is a lot I want to say, but given the narrative that "violence is the only solution to stop human suffering" there is nothing I can say that doesn't sound cold or naive.


text:
Lilliput, The Blitz and Mickey the Midget
Mickey Davies aka Mickey the Midget and a family friend (Author's collection)
Regular readers will remember that this article first appeared in March 2016 and was one of those stories that immediately caught people's imaginations. Therefore, last week I was delighted to receive feedback and a subsequent e-mail from Mickey's daughter, Simone Davies, in which she pointed out one or two inaccuracies which had crept into my original story and also kindly gave some more insights to her late father's life.
The main error was in the spelling of Mickey's surname - I had used three main sources for the article - two pieces by the journalist Ritchie Calder and a further article that appeared in Optical Connections magazine. Two out of the three spelled his name 'Davis' whilst the original Ritchie Calder chapter from his book 'Carry on London!' had what turned out to be the correct spelling of 'Davies.' Unfortunately, I took the majority view and decided upon the wrong version but am happy to correct the spelling. The other main problem was the identity of the lady in the above photo, which again in two out of the three source pieces, identified her as being Mickey's wife, whilst in 'Carry on London!' she was not identified in any way. Simone pointed out that the lady in question was a family friend who just happened to be in the shelter when Calder was visiting. Apparently, at some point she was wrongly identified as being Mickey's wife and the story gained legs. Once again, I am happy to put the record straight. The other inaccuracy that I perpetuated was the question of Mickey's height - the story of him being only 3 feet 6 inches tall is another urban myth that has been repeated over the years, when in fact he was a foot taller than this, so as with the other issues, I've set the record straight below.
With Simone's permission, I'm happy to repeat her email below - it clearly (and rightly) shows the pride in her Dad's achievements and offers some fascinating insights into what sort of man he was:
"Anyway, the lady in the picture was a family friend who happened to be in the shelter at the time when the journalist did the story - when and how she got mistaken for my mother I don't know. Also, my father was about four feet four, not three foot four, which is another error that has followed the story for years. I do have my parents wedding photos but most photos, i.e. the Boys' Club etc., and other bits have been given to my nephew who is now the keeper of all the family photos/papers/history etc.
I was very young when my father died but have loads of really nice and also some funny stories told by my mother to me and my sister of my father, the shelter and both of my parents parts in the war (she was in the Local Control, so sending out Ambulances and Rescue Teams to local bombings.) Also the Boys' Club (which wasn't basic but as you can imagine with anything organised by my father, well equipped and very nice.) His political and social work following the war. His Optician 'Shop' was relocated to his study at our home. He was a very much loved and respected man. His shelter visited by people from American ex-Presidents to Clementine Churchill (all signed his visitors' book) and counted amongst his friends following the war were people from Peter Rowntree to the leader of the Labour Party.
By the way, my father was only 43, not 46 when he died.
I hope these give you a tiny bit more insight into my father's life."
The original article, duly corrected and updated, is repeated below. I'm hoping to receive some more stories about Mickey and his life from Simone and if so, I will make a further update so as to share this information.
One of the many pleasures of my job (if you can call it a job) is that friends and acquaintences often become part of an extended detective network, alerting me to finds they have made that are of interest to my Second World War hobby that has now become a substantial part of my living. Such a find came to light recently, when a friend presented me with a delightful little book called Lilliput Goes to War, an anthology of articles, photographs and drawings that appeared in the pocket magazine Lilliput during the wartime years of 1939-45.
I have to confess to previously being only vaguely aware of Lilliput, as it had gone out of print in August 1960, before I was two years of age!
For those completely unaware, Lilliput was one of the many magazines and pictorials published in the pre television and internet age, when the printed media, along with radio and cinema, were the only forms of mass media available to the public. Lilliput was founded in 1937 by the photo journalist Stefan Lorant as a small format, pocket sized monthly journal of the arts, humour, photography and short stories. Apart from Lorant's own work, it was soon able to attract contributors of the calibre of Ernest Hemingway, Osbert Sitwell, HE Bates, John Pudney, Arthur Koestler, Robert Graves and Walter Trier, who illustrated many of the early covers. The magazine soon gained a reputation for its lively articles, illustrations and photographic jokes, which often took the form of juxtaposed or double photographs with humourous captions. It was also known for occasionally publishing what were for the time, quite daring photographs of female nudes.
In some ways, Lilliput became a victim of its own success, for by early 1939, the print runs had become so substantial that paying for them presented a serious cash flow problem for Lorant and he was simply unable to afford to continue printing the magazine. Fortunately, Sir Edward Hulton, publisher of another of the great pictorial magazines, Picture Post, stepped in and purchased Lilliput, which was able to continue publication with the existing editorial staff.
It was whilst thumbing through this charming anthology of wartime journalism that I happened across an article by the journalist Ritchie Calder about a wartime character called Mickey the Midget. This sparked something in my memory as I remembered reading about Mickey in another work by Calder, a 1941 book called Carry on London! which carried a longer piece about Mickey and his work in organising a shelter in London's Spitalfields Market.
The London Fruit & Wool Exchange Building (author's photo)
Mickey Davies, for that was his real name, was an optician in his late twenties, whose shop was reputedly located somewhere close to Spitalfields, in what we now know as the Borough of Tower Hamlets but which in 1940, formed part of the Metropolitan Borough of Stepney. Strangely perhaps, there are no records in local trade directories as to where this business was actually located but according to Mickey himself, it was destroyed by a German bomb on 13th September 1940. Mickey was only 4 feet 6 inches tall and with a mis-shapen back, hence his somewhat politically incorrect nickname but the destruction of his shop enabled him to devote time to helping those in the Spitalfields Shelter. In addition to his optician business, Mickey was also a local social activist and indeed was later to become a Stepney borough councillor and briefly, Deputy Mayor before his death in the 1950s. His activism was very much geared towards helping people in his local community and in wartime, ensuring that their shelter facilities were safe, sanitary and the equal of anything for those provided to the wealthier citizens of London in the West End.
The shelter in question was located beneath the London Fruit and Wool Exchange in Brushfield Street, Spitalfields. The interior of this building has now sadly been demolished to make way for a new development as part of the area's gentrification but the facade still remains. The original market building comprised a cavernous basement, which was capable of holding some 2,500 people in relative safety, although in practice, over twice that number frequently crammed into the space.
To begin with, conditions were appalling, with almost non-existent sanitation, no proper bedding (people initially slept upon bags of rubbish) and minimal lighting. The floors soon became awash with urine, faeces and other filth. Mickey Davies was appalled by what he found and by the apparent lack of interest, or at best, will from the authorities to get things better organised. Davies was highly intelligent and more importantly, a superb organiser and he quickly became invaluable to the shelterers and a thorn in the side of the local authority in his efforts to improve the conditions for those using the shelter.
Firstly, he set about improving the sanitary conditions in the shelter as well as providing education about hygiene and establishing disease prevention practices in the shelter. He then began to get shelter users themselves to provide First Aid and Medical supplies by organising collections to purchase what was needed. Trained in First Aid himself, he then persuaded local Stretcher Parties to give up their off duty time to tend to the sick and injured in the shelter. He also built up a card index system recording the medical history of each person using the shelter and created what he called a "Passport to Health" amongst the shelterers. Using his many contacts in the profession, he also procured the services of a GP to visit the shelter every night. Proper steel bunk beds were also installed, which ensured that shelterers could get a decent night's sleep.
Lilliput Goes to War (author's image)
He also negotiated with a local Marks & Spencer branch to donate food in order to run a canteen in the basement, the proceeds of which were used to provide free milk for the children using the shelter. Under Mickey's stewardship, the Spitalfields Shelter was transformed and became a coherent community in it's own right, with his medical innovations pre-dating the introduction of the NHS by some eight years.
According to Calder, Mickey's form of common sense community socialism was seen by some, including some of the 'casual' (i.e. non regular) shelterers themselves as "Communism" and these concerns were raised to Calder, himself a sometime user of the shelter. When told that there were "Communists" amongst the Shelter Committee, he replied that "There may be bigamists amongst them for all I care!"
Calder's point being that the accusations of "Communism" were not only absurd but also irrelevant. Provided the shelter was being run correctly and was an improvement on what went before, which it certainly was, then any such accusations could rightly be seen as being largely based on petty jealousies touted by some in local government who should have known better. To be fair, others in government and local government never really regarded Communism as being a realistic menace at this time and saw these innovations by local people as being healthy manifestations of a community spirit.
Perhaps shamed by the actions of Mickey Davies and many other people like him elsewhere, the government instructed local authorities across the country to appoint official Shelter Marshals to control air raid shelters and to ensure that conditions were improved. On the face of it, this instruction made Mickey redundant but the Shelter Committee were having none of this and unanimously elected Davies as their Chief Shelter Marshal. To his eternal credit, the Civil Defence Controller of Stepney, a Mr Eric Adams, acquiesed to the Shelter Committee's wishes and confirmed Mickey in his 'new' official position, which importantly for Davies, without the income from his now destroyed business, was a salaried position.
Under Mickey's direction, a second canteen was established in the shelter, with all profits being re-invested in improving facilities such as the installation of a better lighting system. The shelter became largely self-policing, with shelterers becoming responsible for keeping their own parts of the shelter clean and tidy and for ensuring correct standards of behaviour amongst the shelter community.
Not for nothing did Ritchie Calder describe Mickey Davies as being "Three feet six inches (sic) of reckless unconcern and tireless energy."
After the war, Davies continued to live in the area and was elected as a councillor of Stepney Borough Council in 1949. In 1956, he was elected Deputy Mayor but sadly died later that same year, at the very young age of 43 before he was able to take up the post of Mayor, which would normally have become his the following year.
Lilliput magazine continued, latterly under the editorship of Jack Hargreaves, later of TV's "Out of Town" and "How" fame, until August 1960, when it was purchased and amalgamated into Men Only magazine, before that particular publication became better known for it's soft porn content.
Carry on London! - Ritchie Calder, English Universities Press, 1941
Lilliput Goes to War - editor Kaye Webb, Hutchinson, 1985
Posted by Steve at 14:00 6 comments:
Labels: Blitz, Lilliput Magazine, London, Mickey Davies, Mickey the Midget, shelters, Spitalfields Market, Stepney, Tower Hamlets, WW2


text: Q: Paypal SDK REST API - Can I trust from paypal response the invoice_number and total? Is safe to trust invoice_number and total from $payment = \PayPal\Api\Payment::get($paymentId, $apiContext); or it could be manipulated by user? Obviously when the state is approved, which I assume is when the payment was successfully concluded.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


After almost 27 years in parliament, Defence Minister and Leader of the House Christopher Pyne is calling time on politics.
Christopher Pyne may not have a "log cabin" story, but he once had to get his own lemon for a gin and tonic.
The veteran South Australian MP and Liberal minister gave his final speech in parliament on Thursday, ahead of stepping down at the next election after almost 27 years in federal politics.
He admitted to having a "fortunate life", after quoting former US president Franklin D Roosevelt's famous line about the "test of our progress" being "whether we provide enough for those who have little".
"I do not have a log cabin story like so many people in this place - but I once did have to get my own lemon for a gin and tonic," he said.
"That may or may not qualify."
Minister for Defence Christopher Pyne hugs Shadow Minister for Defence Richard Marles after making his valedictory speech in the House of Representatives at Parliament House, in Canberra, Thursday, April 4, 2019. Photo: AAP.
With nine election wins under his belt, Pyne said he was going to "miss the stage" and his fellow MPs.
"This place brings out the best of us and the worst in us," he said.
"I've seen some truly dreadful people come through here over the last quarter of a century, Mr Speaker. It is true."
Since 1993, he was a backbencher for 10 years and a frontbencher for 16, including six years in cabinet.
The defence minister paid a special tribute to Australia's military personnel.
"To be a minister for defence is to see Australians at their best."
Australian Defence Minister Christopher Pyne reacts after delivering his valedictory speech in the House of Representatives at Parliament House in Canberra, Thursday, April 4, 2019. Photo: AAP.
He expressed confidence that Prime Minister Scott Morrison would win the election and his replacement in Sturt, staffer James Stevens, would retain the seat.
"I've relished the opportunity - thank you, goodbye and good luck," he said, fighting back tears.
His Labor counterpart, Tony Burke, paid tribute to him.
"The Leader of the House is someone who has always loved the parliament," he said.
New polling shows voters are concerned about health and immigration but not so worried about defence and national security.


First Aid Kits are great fundraisers. If your organization is looking for a great promotional item to raise money, you have found it! Our First Aid Kits (you may also want to consider some of our other products as well) are not only affordable and useful, but they do a great job at making a profit for your organization while still being a great value to your customer. We help your organization make more money by giving you better pricing than our retail customers. We want to help you make your fundraising goals a reality.
Please download the pdf below for your costs today and start making money for your organization right away by editing the flyer with your pricing. If you need help customizing the form, we would be happy to edit it for you at no additional cost and e-mail or fax the document back to you and all you have to do is copy the form and get it out to everyone as a flyer in person, or you can e-mail your flyer as an attachment to everyone.
You only order what you have sold. No over buying is necessary. You take the orders, total them up, call or e-mail your order to us with payment, and we will start processing your order right away. You can use a credit card or we can also take checks payable to "By Dezign Products". We use the same process as the "check by phone" that other companies offer, but we prefer to protect you and ourselves by asking that you fax the check made out and payable to "By Dezign Products" to us at: (847) 273-0547.


Ocean 17 on the boardwalk unit 7 IMMACULATE BEACHFRONT Condo at 17th & Boardwalk, our one bedroom, one bath condo features outstanding ocean/beach views inside and out. You will also find a roomy, well equipped kitchen w/granite countertop/glass tile back splash, a living/dining room and a queen size sleeper. The bedroom has a queen bed and there is a washer/dryer combo in the unit. New travertine tiled bathroom with rainfall shower/hand held spa like sprayer with 4 jet settings. The decor is "beach casual" and very comfy. Modern condo with travertine/hardwood floors, area rugs, newly remodeled bathroom with shower, fresh paint and completely furnished this condo is perfect for carefree beach days. A picture window in the living room offers an alluring view of the ocean. You`ll find yourself spending your days swimming in our heated pool, from Memorial Day through Oct. 1, or lounging on the oversized sun deck. There are also plenty of tables overlooking the ocean to enjoy your meals or a snack. If you enjoy sunning on the beach it`s just steps away. This location also makes biking or jogging on the boards easy or enjoy a short walk down the boards and you can enjoy all the fun, shopping, and eats that makes our boardwalk famous. There is also ample off street parking for 3 cars. FOR YOUR COMFORT 1 Bedroom 1 Bath Queen size bed Sleeper sofa, Wi-Fi Internet , New central AC and heat Ceiling fans (1)43" Smart HDTV Wall Mounted color TV w/DVD +(1)28" Smart HDTV w/DVD in bedroom. Kitchen with frig, microwave, electric range & water heater, dishwasher, Kuerig coffee maker , toaster, blender and dish ware and utensils Washer/dryer Heated Pool 30` x 40` open Memorial Day - Oct. 1 Reserved Parking Outdoor, shower, Bike rack, 2 Beach/Pool Tags provided - No Smoking- No Pets.
RESERVATIONS/DEPOSIT: A 50% deposit is required to reserve your week. This deposit is due within 7-10 days after receipt of your lease agreement in order to firm up your reservations. The balance is due 30 days prior to your occupancy. There is a $400.00 refundable security deposit due with the first payment.
WINTER RENTAL: October to mid May ....$845/month + electric; 1.5month Security. Don`t miss this opportunity to enjoy beach front rental!


text:
History of the Foundation
News from the Notch Archive
Judge Edith Jones
Judge Edith Jones has been a federal judge since May 1985, when she was appointed to the bench by President Ronald Reagan. She assumed the chief judgeship of the Fifth Circuit in January, 2006 and served until October, 2012.
Born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, in 1949, she grew up in San Antonio, Texas, graduating from Alamo Heights High School, where she was a National Merit Scholar. In 1971, she received her B.A. in Economics from Cornell University, graduating with honors. In 1974, she was awarded her J.D. at the University of Texas Law School, where she was a law review editor and received the Order of the Coif. She is a recipient of the Leon Green Award from UT Law Review, and in 2004 was honored with the Distinguished Alumnus Award. Active in the Boy Scouts of America organization for many years, Judge Jones is on the board of the Sam Houston Area Council, and received Scouting's Silver Beaver Award in 2003. She has been a member of the Garland Walker Inn of Court in Houston since 1998 and is its current President.
From 2002 to 2008, Judge Jones served as a White House Fellows Commissioner, by appointment of President George W. Bush. She is a former member of the National Bankruptcy Review Commission (1994-97).


text:
Windows 10 all set for early enterprise struggle
By Jamie Hinks
Almost three quarters planning to wait
Windows 10 Enterprise faces a long wait for companies to start adopting the new OS due to a variety of reasons ranging from the time it will take to roll out to having to train employees on how to use it.
First reported by Beta News, a survey carried out by Adaptiva at Ignite 2015 found that 71% of IT leaders plan on waiting six months or more before rolling out the new OS version with as many as 49% planning to wait for longer than a year.
There are plenty of barriers that are holding enterprises back from adopting Windows 10 Enterprise. Reasons range from application compatibility and time investment (98%), user training (35%), and product maturity (23%). A little more than half (54%) admit the cloud has no impact on their ability to migrate to the OS, however, 40% said that the cloud is making it harder for them to perform these tasks - a number that sat at just 7% in 2014.
Windows 7 remains popular
Right now, 89% of the firms surveyed are using Windows 7 and/or another 57% are using Windows 8 with just 11% continuing to persist with the outdated Windows XP OS.
Microsoft confirmed the name of every single Windows 10 version last month with Windows 10 Enterprise and Mobile Enterprise providing businesses an extra layer on top of the standard Windows 10 Pro edition.
Windows 10 release date, price, news and features
Jamie Hinks
See more Operating systems news


Southpest specialise in Bird Control and have experience and access to a wide range of methods and product ranging from traditional "exclude and block" and Bird Spike Installations through to the more complex Avishock and Bird Net Installations. Whilst we do carry out domestic Bird Control, we are also experienced in larger commercial bird control, including large "total exclusion" jobs using Network Bird Net.
High quality stainless steel spikes insert-moulded into UV stabilised polycarbonate base. Perfect for pigeon control on ledges and downpipes.
Bird netting is suitable for all levels of bird infestation. Manufactured from knotted polythene. Network Bird Net does not absorb water or stretch and is chemically inert. UV stabilized. Denies access to protected areas giving "total exclusion". Perfect for overhangs, underground carparks and rooftops.
Brand new design – Ideal for mainstream bird proofing projects.
Conditions birds to stay away.
To watch a video on how to install Avishock , please click here.


The linear solenoids and connectors changed in 2006. The solenoids are smaller in diameter and the retaining brackets are no longer permanently attached to the solenoids. The shape of the connectors changed as well. Please see pictures to verify solenoids/connectors and Central Lube Feed.


text:
Home > Research Centers > Ecology Center > Publications > 90
Ecology Center Publications
Genetic Structure of Mycoplasma Ovipneumoniae Informs Pathogen Spillover Dynamics Between Domestic and Wild Caprinae in the Western United States
Pauline L. Kamath, University of Maine
Kezia Manlove, Utah State UniversityFollow
E. Frances Cassirer, Idaho Department of Fish and Game
Paul C. Cross, U.S. Geological Survey
Thomas E. Besser, Washington State University
Spillover diseases have significant consequences for human and animal health, as well as wildlife conservation. We examined spillover and transmission of the pneumonia-associated bacterium Mycoplasma ovipneumoniae in domestic sheep, domestic goats, bighorn sheep, and mountain goats across the western United States using 594 isolates, collected from 1984 to 2017. Our results indicate high genetic diversity of M. ovipneumoniae strains within domestic sheep, whereas only one or a few strains tend to circulate in most populations of bighorn sheep or mountain goats. These data suggest domestic sheep are a reservoir, while the few spillovers to bighorn sheep and mountain goats can persist for extended periods. Domestic goat strains form a distinct clade from those in domestic sheep, and strains from both clades are found in bighorn sheep. The genetic structure of domestic sheep strains could not be explained by geography, whereas some strains are spatially clustered and shared among proximate bighorn sheep populations, supporting pathogen establishment and spread following spillover. These data suggest that the ability to predict M. ovipneumoniae spillover into wildlife populations may remain a challenge given the high strain diversity in domestic sheep and need for more comprehensive pathogen surveillance.
Kamath, P.L., Manlove, K., Cassirer, E.F. et al. Genetic structure of Mycoplasma ovipneumoniae informs pathogen spillover dynamics between domestic and wild Caprinae in the western United States. Sci Rep 9, 15318 (2019) doi:10.1038/s41598-019-51444-x
Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-51444-x