The Glow-Worm Churchillians by-the-Bay E-Newsletter Northern California Affiliate of the Churchill Centre Volume 3, Issue 2 Second Quarter 2011 “We are all worms. But I do believe that I am a glow-worm.” **(Violet Bonham Carter, Winston Churchill as I knew Him, page 16—WSC’s remark was made at a dinner given by Lady Mary Elcho.) August 1955 …and they lived happily ever after.
3 Memories of World War II, Part IV By David RamsayEach winter during the war when my father was away my mother organizeda pheasant shoot in the woods round Bughtrig to which she invitedneighbors and officers home on leave. Charles and I were too young to shootbut we were pressed into service as beaters, a task we greatly enjoyed.Armed with sticks we marched through the woods making a lot of noise andbeating the trees, thus dislodging the pheasants which flew out over theneighboring fields within range of the guns. We had a stock of pheasants forour larder. On the day after these shoots Charles and I went back into thefields and collected all the spent shotgun cartridges we could find and weused them as substitute toy soldiers as toys could not be found for love ormoney.In January 1941 armed with a couple of these pheasants, my mother went toDover to spend a few days for a welcome reunion with my father, whom shehad not seen since the previous summer. He gave a dinner party in her honorat which the pheasants were the main course, relished by the guests whowere used to wartime rations.
4As a good naval wife my mother closely followed the war at sea and sharedher news with me. She was particularly interested in any actions in whichher and my father‘s friends were involved.In May 1941 the German battleship Bismarck and the heavy cruiser PrinzEugen came out into the Atlantic with a mission to destroy the convoysbringing vitally needed war supplies from America. Admiral Sir Reginald‘Blinker’ Hall, the Director of Naval Intelligence in World War I, whosebiography I wrote, told his American friend, Amos Peaslee that October:‘Been reading the official description of the Bismarck even by the German’sown account she was nearer 50,000 tons than the 35,000 they agreed to keepto; shows what folly it is to expect any Hun (as he habitually and derisivelycalled Germans) to keep his word…she was a very formidable ship and hersister Tirpitz will take a lot of sinking.’ She was at least 10,000 tons largerand more heavily armed than the most modern British battleships. TheGerman warships were detected by a Swedish warship when she was still inthe Baltic and the intelligence was passed on to the British Naval Attaché inStockholm and again verified by aerial reconnaissance when they wereanchored in the Norwegian port of Bergen. Sir Reginald ‘Blinker’ Hall
5After further reconnaissance had confirmed that they had left Norwegianwaters, the C-in-C Home Fleet, Sir John ‘Jack’ Tovey, a fine fightingAdmiral, took his ships to sea to seek out and do battle with this powerfulGerman force. Two Admirals who had served with my father at Dunkirk,James Somerville and Frederick Wake-Walker were to play distinguishedroles in this action. Wake-Walker, who had done so well in commandoffshore at Dunkirk, effectively my father’s deputy, was now commanding aCruiser Squadron, which was on patrol to the East of Iceland. His two 8”gun cruisers Norfolk and Suffolk spotted the German force as it was about toenter the Denmark Straits between Iceland and Greenland and with the useof radar tracked them relentlessly, thus enabling the battle cruiser Hood andthe battleship Prince of Wales, so new that she was barely worked up, tocatch up with and engage Bismarck and Prinz Eugen. Bismarck opened fire,straddling Hood with her first salvo, hitting her and starting fires with herthird; her fifth hit blew her up. Only three members of her crew survived,one of them a midshipman, who had been at the same boarding school whichI would shortly join. Comparison of Ships Directly Involved in the Battle of the Denmark Strait, 24 May 1941At 48,400 tons the mighty Hood, as she was widely known had been thelargest ship in the Navy and an iconic symbol of national pride. Blinker Hall,as always well informed, told his American contact that he regarded ‘theloss of Hood blown up … by Bismarck’s extremely accurate gunnery as atragedy and a crime’, the latter of which he pinned on the appeasers … whohad so strongly opposed every measure of rearmament: ‘… no Government
6dared budget for a new cruiser and even the money to reconstruct her couldnot be got till war was in the air, so she could not be spared; she was due tobe entirely rebuilt, re-engined and in parts re-armored but having so fewships when war broke out she had to remain in the front line…she was neverbuilt to withstand air attack; the addition of all the anti-aircraft guns entailedfitting magazines for the ammunition and these could not be properlyprotected: it was one of these that blew up and set off the others’.Bismarck and Prince of Wales exchanged shots both scoring hits. A shellfrom Prince of Wales ruptured one of Bismarck’s oil tanks. For some reasonshe had not refueled when she was in Bergen and as she was now low on oilher Admiral, Lutjens, broke off her mission and headed for the FrenchAtlantic port of Brest. Wake-Walker’s cruisers with Prince of Wales nowunder his command continued their relentless tracking of the Germanbattleship until they eventually lost contact. Admiral of the Fleet Sir J C Tovey at his desk.The Admiralty, mistakenly believing that Lutjens was making for Germanyordered Admiral Tovey to sail east to intercept him. By the time that theULTRA decrypts of the signal traffic between Lutjens and his base revealedhis true destination, Bismarck was 150 miles south of the Home Fleetmaking it almost impossible to intercept her.Admiral Sir James Somerville, who had stood in for BHR at Dunkirk as avaluable night watchman enabling him to get some much needed sleep, wasnow commanding Force H based at Gibraltar, which normally operated inthe Western Mediterranean. The Admiralty meantime had instructedSomerville to sail north into the Atlantic to protect convoys taking asoutherly route which might be in Bismarck’s course.
7 Admiral Sir James Somerville c. 1942Somerville sailed from Gibraltar on the morning of May 24th with the battlecruiser Renown, the aircraft-carrier Ark Royal and the cruiser Sheffield. ArkRoyal, the Navy’s first purpose built carrier, was like Hood an iconic ship.She had been ‘sunk’ many times by Lord Haw Haw, the nickname ofWilliam Joyce a British traitor, who broadcast a propaganda program from aradio station in Hamburg and was hanged for treason after the war. Swordfish Torpedo AircraftForce H’s carrier borne Swordfish aircraft alone could stop Bismarckreaching Brest. On the evening of May 26, the third sortie of that day, ArkRoyal flew off 15 torpedo equipped Swordfish to attack the Germanbattleship. Although all her anti-aircraft guns were firing, two of theSwordfish’s torpedoes hit their target, one amidships and the other aft in anarea where the mighty ship was vulnerable: the steering rooms wherepowerful electric motors operated her powerful rudders. The torpedo hitjammed the rudders when they were hard a port to evade the airstrike sosuccessfully that the damage control crew could not free one of them. Themighty Bismarck was effectively crippled and could only sail in circles at 7or 8 knots towards Tovey’s approaching Fleet. As one historian wrote: ‘Theattack had lasted just half an hour but it was one of the most decisive halfhours in the history of naval warfare’ and she was delivering herself to herkillers.Blinker Hall, ready as always to praise the efficiency and fighting spirit ofthe services, told his American friend, Amos Peaslee: ‘The chase and
8sinking of the Bismarck was a good piece of work, and when you understandthat the aircraft carrier from which our naval planes made their cripplingattack was rising and falling 50 feet in the heavy sea, you will realize what agallant show it was; but the boys got off all right and got back again!! andwould do it again, too.’ The weather conditions, described by Blinker, werestrikingly similar to those when Doolittle’s bombers were launched from theUSS Hornet nearly a year later for the famous raid on Tokyo. When ArkRoyal returned to Gibraltar she was cheered by every ship in the harbor.At 0823 on May 27 the Home Fleet sighted Bismarck and at 0847 Tovey’sbattleships King George V (10 14” guns) and Rodney (9 16” guns)supported by the cruisers Norfolk, which had tracked her since encounteringher in the Denmark Straits, and Dorsetshire opened fire. Between them theyfired nearly 2,800 rounds reducing Bismarck to a blazing wreck. None of theBritish ships were hit by her shells and by 0930 her firing had ceased. Yetstoutly built like so many German warships as Tovey signaled Somerville‘he could not get her to sink by gunfire and he ordered Dorsetshire totorpedo her. At 1036 she rolled over and sank, taking with her Lutjens, herCaptain Lindemann and all but 110 members of her crew of 2,200.Tovey paid this generous tribute to Bismarck and her crew: ‘She put up amost gallant fight against impossible odds …’ He was equally generous toSomerville: ‘Force H was handled with conspicuous skill throughout theoperation … and contributed a vital share to its successful conclusion.’Later in 1941 the war became global when on June 22 Hitler invaded Russiaand on December 7 Japan attacked the US Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harborwithout first declaring war on America. My mother told me how amused shewas by Churchill’s quip when he heard of the invasion. Although he had thereputation of being vehemently anti-communist and in his own words hadsought to strangle Soviet Russia at birth he told his Secretary Jock Colville:‘I have only one purpose, the destruction of Hitler… If Hitler invaded hell Iwould at least make a favorable reference to the Devil in the House ofCommons.’On the morning after Pearl Harbor my mother told me about the attackwhich absolutely horrified her and that war between America and Japan wasnow certain. President Roosevelt described the attack as ‘a day which willlive in infamy’ and declared war on Japan with Churchill immediatelyfollowing suit.
9Blinker Hall had few illusions about the Japanese, of whose objectives hehad become suspicious when he was Director of Naval Intelligence in WorldWar I. In October 1941 he had told Peaslee: ‘We are all a bit intrigued aboutthe talks in Washington between your President and the Japs; some peoplethink that the Japs are just playing for time in the true Hitler style whereasothers think the Japs are finding way to save their face!! Personally I think itis a bit of both; if the chance comes they will strike without warning whenready (an astute forecast of the attack on Pearl Harbor two months later).’Four days after the Japanese Navy fulfilled Hall’s prophecy, Hall wrote toPeaslee: ‘I need not tell you how I felt at the treacherous attack on your fleetand airfields; the Japs did the same thing at Port Arthur when they openedthe war on Russia!! It is not often that a nation can get away with that sort ofthing…’ Writing to his sister May, he was more critical: ‘The Americanswere caught napping good and proper; they had not a single patrol out eitherin the air or in the water; and yet they are supposed to be students of history;… they could never have read the story of Port Arthur in the opening phaseof the Russo-Jap war; the Japs went in and torpedoed the Russian fleetbefore they declared war. We must expect some very nasty shocks in the FarEast; the Japs have command of the sea and know how to use it.’Once again he was to be proved right. On the morning of December 10, onlythree days after Pearl Harbor, the British battleship Prince of Wales and thebattle cruiser Repulse, which had been sent to the Far East were sunk byJapanese shore base aircraft off the coast of Malaya while searching for anenemy invasion force. Although they were close inshore they were operatingwithout any air cover in what was one of the biggest disasters in the historyof the Royal Navy.I remember how upset my mother was, as a good naval wife when she heardthe news as she and my father had friends serving on these ships, amongthem William ‘Bill’ Tennant, the Captain of Repulse who had been BHR’sbeach master ashore at Dunkirk. Fortunately, as I will relate below, hesurvived.Writing to Peaslee, Blinker Hall was highly critical of Admiral Tom Philips,the C-in-C Eastern Fleet, over the loss of the two capital ships: ‘Well if wewon’t learn the lessons we paid so dearly for at Crete and Greece (when theMediterranean Fleet lost several warships in course of evacuating the Army),we shall go on losing ships… we do pay dearly for our lessons and the foolswho will not learn them. I refer to the powers at the top; though I shall never
10understand how Tom Philips came to go out into air controlled waterswithout air support.’He drove over to condole with his late wife’s cousins, Spencer and AgnesFerguson, whose son George had gone down on Prince of Wales: ‘ I thoughtthere could be little hope for him as he was in charge of the anti-aircraft gunsand they would be firing up to the last: they are very brave but naturallycritical that the ships should have gone out with no air protection; in fact allthe world is saying the same thing …It’s all very well sending a brilliantman straight from the Admiralty to command a fleet but unless he has hadpractical experience of air attack and its effects, it’s throwing away lives andships. Had I been asked I should have suggested taking some one from theMediterranean fleet who had been through Greece and Crete; he would haveknown but it’s no good jobbing back; what we have to face is the probableloss of Hong Kong and a severe attack on our trade from the east.’BHR took a similar line to Blinker, telling my mother that if he had been incommand the moment he heard of Pearl Harbor he would have got the twobig ships out of the way of the Japanese.Prince of Wales had the reputation of being an unhappy ship- sailors tend tobe superstitious and a dockyard worker had been crushed to death in one ofher turrets while she was fitting out- a bad omen. In contrast Repulse underBill Tennant’s command was a happy ship. She was however an un-modernized World War I battle cruiser that only had 4 4” anti-aircraft gunsand was extremely vulnerable to air attack. Skillfully handled by Tennantshe survived the Japanese strike for longer than Prince of Wales.In March 1956 I met Tennant at the ceremony to dedicate a window inPortsmouth Cathedral to my father and those who had served under hiscommand at Dunkirk and Normandy. He told me about Repulse’s lastminutes and how he had survived. During the first phase of the Japaneseattack he had combed the ship, successfully evading as many as ninetorpedoes although a bomb did hit her aircraft hangar- the fire was soon putout. On his own initiative he signaled for air cover. One of Repulse’s AAguns shot down a Japanese bomber. Morale on board remained high andTennant heard a sailor on the bridge say: ‘The old man (the lower deck’sterm for the Captain) will get us through.’ He thought that his spirit did himproud but he wished that he could be as sure.
11Recognizing Repulse as a formidable adversary the Japanese planes attackedher from both port and starboard and she was hit by four torpedoes.Realizing that she was doomed Tennant ordered Abandon Ship, telling hiscrew that they had done well and noting that they were forming up on deckin good order. He was still on the bridge when the veteran battle cruiser,who, like Bismarck had fought so gallantly against impossible odds, gave agreat lurch to port and went down, her ensigns still flying.Tennant recalled that he was going down with her, seeing the color of thewater change from blue to green to brown, when he felt a massive blow inhis back and passed out. When he came to he was back on the surface and heheard a cockney voice shout: ‘It’s the old man we’d better haul him in’ andonce again he was hit in the back, this time by a boathook. Dripping with oiland probably the most disreputable looking Captain in the history of theservice, he was hauled to safety on a raft. He had been saved by a huge upcurrent of water displaced by the sinking Repulse. Collecting other rafts hefound places for many other survivors. Shortly afterwards the air cover forwhich he had signaled, arrived and drove off the Japanese aircraft, enablingthe escorting destroyers to rescue survivors.After he reached Singapore Tennant wrote to the families of each of the 513members of Repulse’s crew who had been lost. By then a Rear-Admiral, heserved under my father in the Normandy invasion, where he was in chargeof setting up the artificial Mulberry harbors.Roosevelt had only declared war on Japan not on Germany or Italy. Hitlerthen proceeded to commit the biggest mistake of his career declaring war onthe United States ironically repeating the blunder Imperial Germany hadmade in 1917 in enticing America into World War I. I remember my mothertelling me the news and breathing a hearty sigh of relief. Churchillexpressed his reaction in his The Second World War, ‘… but now at this
12very moment I knew the United States was in the war, up to the neck and into the death. So we had won after all! Being saturated and satiated withemotion and sensation, I went to bed and slept the sleep of the saved andthankful.’ Copyright David Ramsay, 2011 67th Anniversary of D-DayFollowing is an excerpt from a moving and harrowing article onthe reality of the landing on Omaha Beach. The complete piece isavailable on line at:http://www.theatlantic.com magazine/archive/1960/11/first-wave-at-omaha-beach/3365/November 1960First Wave at Omaha BeachWhen he was promoted to officer rank at eighteen, S. L. A. MARSHALL was theyoungest shave tail in the United States Army during World War I. He rejoined the Armyin 1942, became a combat historian with the rank of colonel; and the notes he made at thetime of the Normandy landing are the source of this heroic reminder. Readers willremember his frank and ennobling book about Korea, THE RIVER AND THEGAUNTLET, which was the result of still a third tour of duty.By S. L. A. MarshallUNLIKE what happens to other great battles, the passing of the years and the retelling ofthe story have softened the horror of Omaha Beach on D Day.This fluke of history is doubly ironic since no other decisive battle has ever been sothoroughly reported for the official record. While the troops were still fighting in
13Normandy, what had happened to each unit in the landing had become known throughthe eyewitness testimony of all survivors. It was this research by the field historianswhich first determined where each company had hit the beach and by what route it hadmoved inland. Owing to the fact that every unit save one had been mis-landed, it took thiswork to show the troops where they had fought.How they fought and what they suffered were also determined in detail during the fieldresearch. As published today, the map data showing where the troops came ashore checkexactly with the work done in the field; but the accompanying narrative describing theirordeal is a sanitized version of the original field notes.This happened because the Army historians, who wrote the first official book aboutOmaha Beach, basing it on the field notes, did a calculated job of sifting and weightingthe material. So saying does not imply that their judgment was wrong. Normandy was anAmerican victory; it was their duty to trace the twists and turns of fortune by whichsuccess was won. But to follow that rule slights the story of Omaha as an epic humantragedy which in the early hours bordered on total disaster. On this two-division frontlanding, only six rifle companies were relatively effective as units. They did better thanothers mainly because they had the luck to touch down on a less deadly section of thebeach. Three times that number were shattered or foundered before they could start tofight. Several contributed not a man or bullet to the battle for the high ground. But theirordeal has gone unmarked because its detail was largely ignored by history in the firstplace. The worst-fated companies were overlooked, the more wretched personalexperiences were toned down, and disproportionate attention was paid to the littleelement of courageous success in a situation which was largely characterized by tragicfailure.The official accounts which came later took their cue from this secondary source insteadof searching the original documents. Even such an otherwise splendid and popular bookon the great adventure as Cornelius Ryans The Longest Day misses the essence of theOmaha story.In everything that has been written about Omaha until now, there is less blood and ironthan in the original field notes covering any battalion landing in the first wave. Doubt it?Then lets follow along with Able and Baker companies, 116th Infantry, 29th Division.Their story is lifted from my fading Normandy notebook, which covers the landing ofevery Omaha company.ABLE Company riding the tide in seven Higgins boats is still five thousand yards fromthe beach when first taken under artillery fire. The shells fall short. At one thousandyards, Boat No. 5 is hit dead on and foundered. Six men drown before help arrives.This article available online at:http://www.theatlantic.com magazine/archive/1960/11/first-wave-at-omaha-beach/3365/
14 Memorial Day May 30, 2011 -- Our Honored Dead The Gettysburg Address Gettysburg, Pennsylvania November 19, 1863Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation,conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation soconceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of thatwar. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those whohere gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that weshould do this.But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow --this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, farabove our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember whatwe say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to bededicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so noblyadvanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us --that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which theygave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shallnot have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom --and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from theearth.Source: Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, edited by Roy P. Basler. The text above is from theso-called "Bliss Copy," one of several versions which Lincoln wrote, and believed to be the finalversion. For additional versions, you may search The Collected Works of Abraham Lincolnthrough the courtesy of the Abraham Lincoln Association. "Paul Hudson" <email@example.com>
15 Help Catalogue Our Photo CollectionShould you find that you have a spare moment during July, you maywish to visit the Museum’s Flickr Channel.Here, we have posted a selection of photograph albums donated tothe Museum by members of the public during the1970s where, due tothe failing memories of the people making donations at the time ordue to lack of notes on the back of photographs, our Curatorial teamhas drawn a blank as to how to catalogue these images as theycontain within them no immediate or obvious reference points.This sword was acquired by the RAF Museum in 1967. Can you help us identify what type?
16 Winston as journalist As WSC wrote in the first volume of The Second World War (page 62 in the Casselledition): The years from 1931 to 1935, apart from my anxiety on public affairs, were personally very pleasant to me. I earned my livelihood by dictating articles which had a wide circulation not only in Great Britain and in the United States , but also, before Hitler’s shadow fell upon them, in the most famous newspapers of sixteen European countries. I lived in fact from mouth to hand. This felicitous phrase ‘from mouth to hand’ describes his ability, honed after longpractice, to dictate his newspaper articles, gaining much time thereby. Most of thesearticles covered politics and public affairs, but there were many others written in a light-hearted vein. Here is one such — an article on American food and travel. LAND OF CORN AND LOBSTERS Winston S. Churchill Published in Collier’s on August 5, 1933 I feel shy about expressing my opinion about American food. I was everywhere received with such charming hospitality that to give any
17verdict of a critical character might seem churlish. However, as eatingand drinking are matters in which the good taste of different people anddifferent countries naturally and legitimately varies so widely, theremay be no harm in my setting down a few general impressions. Thenthere is the danger that one may be thought greedy, and reproached forsetting too much store by creature comfort and dwelling unduly upontrivialities. But here I fortify myself by Dr Johnson’s celebrated dictum:‘I look upon it that he who does not mind his belly will hardly mindanything else.’ So I will start out boldly with the assertion that Americans of everyclass live on lighter foods than their analogues in England. Fruit,vegetables and cereals play a much larger part in their bills of fare thanwith us, and they eat chicken much more often than meat - by which ofcourse I mean beef and mutton. All this is no doubt very healthful, butpersonally I am a beef-eater, and I always expect my wife to provideme with butcher’s meat once a day when I am at home. Moreover, the American chicken is a small bird compared with thestandard English fowl. Attractively served with rice and auxiliaries ofall kinds, he makes an excellent dish. Still, I am on the side of the bigchicken as regularly as Providence is on that of the big battalions.Indeed it seems strange in so large a country to find such smallchickens. Conscious, perhaps, of their inferiority, the inhabitants callthem ‘squabs’. What an insulting title for a capon! A dangerous, yet almost universal, habit of the American people isthe drinking of immense quantities of iced water. This has become aritual. If you go into a cafeteria or drug store and order a cup of coffee,a tumbler of iced water is immediately set before you. The bleakbeverage is provided on every possible occasion; whatever you order,the man behind the counter will supply this apparently indispensibleconcomitant. American meals nearly always start with a large slice of melon orgrapefruit accompanied by iced water. This is surely a somewhataustere welcome for a hungry man at the midday or evening meal.Dessert, in my view, should be eaten at the end of the meal, not at thebeginning. The influence of American customs is now so all-pervadingthat during the last few years I have noticed this habit creeping intoEngland. It should be strongly repulsed. The coffee in the United States is admirable, and a welcomecontrast to the anaemic or sticky liquid which judicious Americansrightly resent in English provincial towns. The American Blue Point isa serious undertaking. On the other hand, the American lobster isunrivalled anywhere in the world; he has a succulence and a flavourwhich I have found nowhere else. Shad roe and terrapin I have eaten
18only in the United States; I find them both entertaining. Soft-shell crabsand corn on the cob are by no means unpalatable, but should not beeaten too often. A very general custom in American society is to have a littlepreliminary repast before the company sits down at table. The guestsarrive any time within half an hour of the nominal dinner hour, andstand about conversing, smoking cigarettes and drinking cocktails.There is, of course, the admirable tomato-juice cocktail. But this is notthe one most commonly used. It was explained to me that nothing in thelaws of the United States forbids the convivial consumption in a privatehouse of any stores of liquor which happened to be in the host’s privatecellars before prohibition became effective in 1920. Many people musthave had very large and well-stocked cellars in those distant days, andthese supplies have lasted extremely well. Indeed one might almostbelieve that, like the widow’s cruse, they miraculously replenishthemselves. Alcoholic liquor could therefore, without any illegality, enter intothe composition of many kinds of cocktails and these short, hard, wetdrinks may be freely enjoyed without any presumption of illegality. Iam no devotee of cocktails, still I must admit that this preliminaryfestival while the guests are arriving is most agreeable. The cocktailsare supported by all sorts of dainty, tasty little dishes continuallyhanded round upon trays or displayed upon tables. This custom isnothing more nor less than the old custom of Imperial Russia called‘the zakouski’. I remember as a child, nearly fifty years ago, being taken by mymother on a visit to the Duke of Edinburgh, who had married a Russianprincess. There I saw exactly the same ritual, with kummel and vodkainstead of the cocktails, and the same attractive, eatable kickshaws tokeep them company. It was only after this was over that the regulardinner began. There is much to be said for this arrangement. No doubtit encourages unpunctuality, but on the other hand it protects those whohave already arrived from starving helplessly till the late comers maketheir appearances. I expect the practice has come to stay. It makes for sociability andgood mixing, both of the guests and their refreshments. Indeed I shouldnot be surprised if some day the formal sit-down dinner were droppedaltogether and an ethereal generation contented themselves withcocktails, cigarettes and caviar, and then went off and danced for glee. Ishould not approve of this; but we live in a world of change, and whocan control its oscillations? The vast size of the United States and the imperative need ofmoving about have given the American an altogether different standard
19of distances from that which prevails in our small island. He thinks aslittle of a fourteen or fifteen hours’ railway journey as we do of thehour and a half to Brighton or Oxford. He is no more balked by theprospect of travelling from New York to Palm Beach than we should beby going to Scotland. Even the mighty journey to California, fromocean to ocean, presents itself as quite an ordinary undertaking. It is odd how quickly the visitor falls into this American order ofideas. A four or six hour journey by railway soon becomes a bagatelle. Ihave made three great journeys in the United States - the first separatedfrom the two last (I am ashamed to say) by nearly thirty years. Idreaded the toil of travelling so much by railway, and it was a strongdeterrent from undertaking a lecture tour. But I am bound to say that Idid not find these long runs and this continuous travelling day after day,night after night, at all fatiguing on these later occasions. Indeed, Istarted for a journey of nearly six weeks soon after I had been struck bya taxi [in December 1931 in New York], very weak and frail, and withmuch misgivings as to my capacity to fulfil my engagements - but infact I throve on it. It was a fruitful convalescence, and I was much stronger at the endthan at the beginning. The truth is that the trains are extremelycomfortable: the enormous rolling stock, the weight of the metals andthe steady pace maintained - even when interrupted occasionally byformidable bangs and jolts - give a sense of repose which I do not feelon our quick, tremulous, and comparatively light railways. In England,indeed, except for long journeys of four or five hours, I almost alwaysgo by motor car. In America one resigns oneself easily to many hoursof train, and tranquilly settles down to work or reading without anyfeeling of impatience. When in 1929 I traversed Canada from east to west and came backacross the United States from California through Chicago to New York,and then down to the battlefields of the South, I had the wonderfulexperience of being transported (through the magnificent kindness ofCanadian and American friends) entirely in a private car. This rare andcostly luxury gave a really joyous feeling. It was a home from home.And what a sense of power and choice, to be able to stop where youwould and for as long as you would, and to sleep on till you wished toget up, and to hook onto any train when satiated with the wonders ofthe Yosemite Valley, or the Grand Canyon, or the roar of Niagara, orthe clack and clutter of the Chicago stockyards! It was like marchingand camping in wartime in enormous lands. Indeed, I meditated hiring aprivate car for my lecture tour. Alas, the cost! Twenty-four tickets weremore than my business would bear.
20 Many English people do not like the long sleeping-cars in whichstrangers of both sexes are separated from one another only by curtains,and where the temperature is often tropical till you open the window,and arctic when you do. Still, they are very practical once you are usedto them. No one could require better accommodation than a drawing-room compartment all to oneself. Our sleeping-berths are nearly alwaysat right angles to the train, and the beds are so narrow that one canhardly turn over in them. Moreover, the sheets and blankets are also onthe narrow side, and at the slightest movement come untucked. TheUnited States railway bed is a splendid soft, broad, affair. It lieslengthwise with the train, and I slept in one, night after night, assoundly as I should in any house. Nowhere in the world have I seen such gargantuan meals as areprovided upon American trains. Every plate would feed at least twopeople. I have always been amazed at the immense variety of foodstuffswhich are carried in the dining-cars, and the skill and delicacy withwhich they are cooked even upon the longest journey through the veryheart of the continent. The darky attendants with their soft voices and delightful drawl andcourteous, docile, agreeable ways were an unfailing source not only ofcomfort but of perpetual amusement to me. In view of the results of thelate presidential election [in 1932, the landslide victory of FranklinRoosevelt over Herbert Hoover], I may perhaps confess that, armedwith a medical certificate, I somewhat anticipated the verdict of theAmerican nation upon the Eighteenth Amendment. But these discreetattendants never seemed to let their eyes stray upon any vessels orcontainers not officially brought to their notice. Indeed one would havethought that where liquids were concerned they were entirely colour-blind. One of them, however, shrouding with a napkin a gold-toppedbottle which might well have contained ginger ale, when I returned tothe compartment after a few moments’ absence, made this memorableremark: ‘Yo’ ought to be very careful with this, sah. Men will steal thiswho would not steal di’monds.’ It is pleasant to reflect that such atemptation will soon be forever removed from the weaker members ofthe American nation. On one occasion only was there cause for alarm. A friend of minewhen I left California in 1929 sent as a parting gift a good-sizedsuitcase, unlabelled, which at the last minute was thrustunostentatiously into my compartment. Unluckily something seemed tohave gone wrong with its contents, and a very curious trickle had left itstrail all along the station platform. However, no one said a word; andfortunately, on examination, the damage was found to be confined to
21only one of the articles which this mysterious, anonymous packagecontained. Whenever I come to a new city I always make haste to climb thetallest building in it and examine the whole scene from this eagle’s nest.They are wonderful, these bird’s eye views; each one gives animpression of its own which lies in the memory like a well-knownpicture. I have heard the opinion expressed that all American cities arealike. I do not agree with this short-sighted view. The hotels are thesame in their excellence and comfort, in their routine and service; butanyone who will not only perch himself on a pinnacle, but thread andcircumnavigate the streets in a motor car, will soon perceive that eachcity has a panorama and a personality all its own. Nothing of course can equal the world-famous silhouette of NewYork from the sea. It is a spectacle the magnificence of which isperhaps unsurpassed in the whole world and, though each buildingtaken separately may have its failings, the entire mass of these vaststructures is potent with grandeur and beauty. But San Francisco,earthquake-defying, makes a fine counterpart as it gazes on the Pacific.Nothing could be more different from San Francisco than Los Angeles,the one towering up under its cloud canopy its buildings crowdedtogether on the narrow promontory; the other spreading its garden villasover an enormous expanse, a system of rural townships basking in thesunlight. From west to south! What lovely country surrounds the city ofAtlanta! Its rich red soils, the cotton-quilted hills and uplands, therushing, turgid rivers, are all alive with tragic memories of the CivilWar. And who would miss Chattanooga, lying in its cup between theBlue Ridge and Lookout Mountain? The scenery itself is exhilarating,but to it all is added the intense significance of history. All these ruggedheights and peaks have their meaning in military topography: a shortdrive to the battlefield of Chickamauga, kept like a beautiful park, withmany of the field batteries standing in the very positions where theyfought, is enough to reward the visitor. In Minneapolis amid its rolling plains my small party had its mostaffectionate welcome. Cincinnati, I thought, was the most beautiful ofthe inland cities of the Union. From the tower of its unsurpassed hotelthe city spreads far and wide its pageant of crimson, purple and gold,laced by silver streams that are great rivers. There is a splendour inChicago and a life-thrust that is all its own. To me, Rochester makes a personal appeal. Here it was that mygrandfather and his brother, having married two sisters, built two small,old-fashioned houses in what was then the best quarter of the town, and
22linked them by a bridge. Here they founded the newspaper which is stillthe leading daily. It would be easy to illustrate this theme further and recall the kindimpressions of Boston, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia and a dozenothers; but these examples suffice to convey the sense of variety andcharacter which the great cities of America present to a sympathetic andinquiring eye. For more than thirty years I have been accustomed to address thelargest public audiences on all sorts of topics. A lecture tour as such,therefore, had no serious terrors for me. Still, to a stranger in a foreignland, it must always be something of an ordeal to come into the close,direct relationship of speaker and listener night after night, withthousands of men and women whose outlook and traditions aresundered from his own. But American audiences yield to none in the interest, attention andgood nature with which they follow a lengthy considered statement.These large assemblies always seemed to take particular pleasure inasking questions after my address was over. At every place Iencouraged this, and sheaves of written questions were speedilycomposed and handed up, covering a discursive range of topics. Theaudiences appeared delighted when some sort of an answer was givenimmediately to each. Any fair retort, however controversial, wasreceived with the greatest good humour. I remember, for instance, that Iwas asked: ‘What do you think of the dole?’ I affected tomisunderstand the question, and replied: ‘I presume you are referring tothe Veterans’ bonus.’ This gained an immediate success. The most critical of my audiences was, of course, at Washington.Here one met the leading men of the Union, and the keen society of thepolitical capital, with all its currents of organized, responsible opinion.But the most interesting, and in some ways the most testing, of all myexperiences was not on the public platform. A Washington hostess, in the centre of the political world, invitedthe British ambassador and me to a dinner of some forty or fiftypersons. There were gathered many of the most important men andsome of the most influential women in the United States. After thedinner was over, the whole company formed a half-circle round me,and then began one of the frankest and most direct politicalinterrogations to which I have ever been subjected. The unspoken, butperfectly well-comprehended condition was that any question, howeverawkward, might be asked, and that any answer, however pointed,would be taken in good part. For two hours we wrestled strenuously, unsparingly, but in the bestof tempers, with one another, and when I was tired of defending Great
23 Britain on all her misdeeds, I counter-attacked with a series of pretty direct questions of my own. Nothing was shirked on either side - debts, disarmament, naval parity, liquor legislation, the gold standard and the dole were all tackled on the dead level. Nowhere else in the world, only between our two people, could such a discussion have proceeded. The priceless gift of a common language, and the pervading atmosphere of good sense and fellow feeling enabled us to rap all the most delicate topics without the slightest offense given or received. It was to me a memorable evening, unique in my experience, and it left in my mind enormous hopes of what will some day happen in the world when, no doubt, after most of us are dead and gone, the English-speaking peoples will really understand each other.Their images are iconic, but surely theres something a little strangeabout these 20th-century heroes and villains...Taken from a quirky new calendar by design company Takkoda,photos of pets were digitally altered to create spoof poses of the richand famous.Winston Churchill Charlie Chaplin Spock
24CHURCHILL FLASHBACK 1953Monday, Jan. 19, 1953FOREIGN RELATIONS: Opportunity AheadSave for a few jeering Irish-Americans, New York received Winston Churchillwith warmth and affection. The tabloid Daily News, which has no great love forBritain, welcomed the old lion editorially. At the apartment of his old friendBernard Baruch, Churchill received respectful visits from Governor ThomasDewey and many another notable. One midweek morning Mayor VincentImpellitteri escorted the Prime Minister to Brooklyn to visit the house where hismother, Lady Randolph Churchill, was born Jennie Jerome in 1850. As he cameout of his mothers birthplace into a cheering crowd, reporters asked Churchillhow the four-story brick and brownstone house compared with Blenheim Palace,the massive ancestral seat of his fathers family. "I am equally proud of both,"said the Prime Minister tactfully."A Great Pity." That evening Dwight Eisenhower came over to the Baruchapartment for his third meeting with Churchill in as many days. In the course oftheir long friendship. Ike and Churchill had learned to express their opinions toeach other with frankness. Their conversations last week were no less frank thanever. Ike was disturbed, and said so, by the fact that despite fine speeches aboutEuropean unity Churchill had offered no more practical support to the EuropeanDefense Community than had Clement Attlee (see INTERNATIONAL). Ike andhis advisers were irritated, too, by Churchills warning on the day of his arrival inNew York that "it would be a great pity for the U.N. armies—or the U.S. armies—to go wandering all about this vast China." Though U.S. policies are woefullymisreported by the British press—and perhaps by British diplomats—Ike felt thatafter so many public and private reassurances the Prime Minister ought to realizethat no responsible U.S. official proposed to send an army wandering aboutChina.Churchill was briefed regarding the new Administrations views on Asia by IkesSecretary of State-designate, John Foster Dulles. The American difficulty is notthat Churchill has different ideas on Asia, but that his mind is open almost to thepoint of blankness on the very large part of the world lying east of Singapore.Dulles and Churchill could agree on at least two premises: 1) Anglo-American
25 cooperation in Asia is essential; 2) Asia must be treated as a strategic unit, not as a hodgepodge of individual problems. "So Premature." The day after his final conversation with Ike, Churchill flew down to Washington for his last official meeting with President Harry Truman. The Prime Minister arrived at the White House sporting shoes with zippers down the side. Always unabashed in his pursuit of comfort, he did not hesitate to keep his unusual footgear unzippered even at formal functions. In the White House, where he and Truman were joined by Administration bigwigs including Dean Acheson and Secretary of Defense Robert Lovett, Churchill gravely reviewed the global struggle against Communism. Proudly he recalled to his host the 1946 speech at Fulton, Mo., in which, publicly proclaiming the breach between Russia and the free world, he had coined the term Iron Curtain. Mrs. Roosevelt, the Prime Minister remembered, had been disturbed at the somewhat bellicose tone of the speech, and much later, in an attempt to justify her objections, had told him, "Well, you didnt have to be so premature." Said Churchill, drawing himself up, "I replied: Mrs. Roosevelt, are not all prophets premature? " A few hours later Churchill was the Presidents host at dinner in the British Embassy. Truman came to the Churchill party from a fund-raising dinner where he had already faced seafood in aspic, petite marmite, filet mignon, stuffed artichokes, potatoes au gratin, chiffonade salad and baked Alaska. Somehow the President managed to make a respectable stab at the Embassys consomme, Dover sole, saddle of veal, potatoes duchesse, cauliflower and charlotte pralinee. It was at this semipublic occasion—there were 16 British and American officials present—that Secretary of State Dean Acheson chose to lecture the Prime Minister on Britains lackadaisical attitude toward the European Defense Community and toward settlement of her disputes with Iran and Egypt. Next day, with a careful, old mans gait, Churchill clambered into the presidential DC-6, the Independence, and headed off for two weeks in the Jamaican sunshine—which was, all pundits to the contrary, the primary reason for Churchills American trip. In Manhattan, at weeks end, Dwight Eisenhower said that he had recently asked "a man who is 78 years old—one of the worlds great leaders," if it wasnt time for him to retire. The statesmans answer: "My opportunity for my greater service to my country probably still lies ahead."* • As he told this story (at a meeting of heart specialists), Ike turned to Thomas E. Dewey, an elder statesman 28 years younger than Churchill, said: "And that certainly applies to you, too.Find this article at:http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,820835,00.html
26 Book Review -- ARISTOTLE’S NICOMACHEAN ETHICS Translated By Robert C. Bartlett and Susan D. Collins 339 pp. The University of Chicago Press. $35.Aristotle and the Higher GoodBy HARRY V. JAFFAPublished: July 1, 2011Some time in the 1920s, the Conservative statesman F. E. Smith — Lord Birkenhead— gave a copy of the “Nicomachean Ethics” to his close friend Winston Churchill. Hedid so saying there were those who thought this was the greatest book of all time.Churchill returned it some weeks later, saying it was all very interesting, but he hadalready thought most of it out for himself. But it is the very genius of Aristotle — as itis of every great teacher — to make you think he is uncovering your own thought inhis. In Churchill’s case, it is also probable that the classical tradition informed moreof his upbringing, at home and at school, than he realized.
27 Illustration by Vivienne FlesherARISTOTLE’S NICOMACHEAN ETHICSTranslated By Robert C. Bartlett And Susan D. Collins339 pp. The University of Chicago Press. $35.In 1946, in a letter to the philosopher Karl Löwith, Leo Strauss mentioned howdifficult it had been for him to understand Aristotle’s account of magnanimity,greatness of soul, in Book 4 of the “Ethics.”The difficulty was resolved when he came to realize that Churchill was a perfectexample of that virtue. So Churchill helped Leo Strauss understand Aristotle! That isperfectly consistent with Aristotle’s telling us it does not matter whether onedescribes a virtue or someone characterized by that virtue. Where the “Ethics” standsamong the greatest of all great books perhaps no one can say. That Aristotle’s text,which explores the basis of the best way of human life, belongs on any list of suchbooks is indisputable.In his great essay “On Classical Political Philosophy,” Strauss emphasizes thecontinuity between pre-philosophic political speech and its refinement by classicalpolitical philosophy. It is part of the order of nature (and of nature’s God) that pre--philosophic speech supply the matter, and philosophic speech the form, of perfectedpolitical speech, much as the chisel of the sculptor uncovers the form of the statuewithin the block of marble. Before the “Ethics” men knew that courage was a virtue,and that it meant overcoming fear in the face of danger. Aristotle says nothingdifferent from this, but he also distinguishes true virtue from its specious simulacra.The false appearance of courage may result, for instance, from overconfidence inone’s skill or strength, or from one’s failure to recognize the skill or strength of his
28opponents. The accurate assessment of one’s own superiority of strength or skill,which means one really has no reason to fear an approaching conflict, is anotherfalse appearance of courage. A false courage may also result from a passion thatblinds someone to the reality of the danger he faces. In short, the appearance ofcourage may be mistaken for actual courage whenever the rational component ofvirtue is lacking.The existence of politics before political philosophy is what makes politicalphilosophy possible. Politics is inherently controversial because human beings arepassionately attached to their opinions by interests that have nothing to do with thetruth. But because philosophers — properly so called — have no interest other thanthe truth, they alone can bring to bear the canon of reason that will transform theconflict of opinion that otherwise dominates the political world.Unfortunately, what has been called philosophy for more than a century has virtuallydestroyed any belief in the possibility of objective truth, and with it the possibility ofphilosophy. Our chaotic politics reflects this chaos of the mind. No enterprise toreplace this chaos with the cosmos of reason could be more welcome. The volumebefore us is much more than a translation. The translators, Robert C. Bartlett, whoteaches Hellenic politics at Boston College, and Susan D. Collins, a political scientistat the University of Houston, have provided helpful aids. Many Greek words cannotbe easily translated into single English equivalents — for example, the Greek wordtechne, which appears in the first sentence of the “Ethics.” It is here translated as“art,” as it usually is. But the Greeks made no distinction, as we do, between theuseful arts and the fine arts. The most precise rendering is probably “know-how,” butthat does not seem tonally right. The best solution is to use an approximation like“art” and supplement it with notes. This is what the translators have done, in thiscase and others, with considerable thoroughness.They have also supplied an informative introduction, as well as “A Note on theTranslation,” a bibliography and an outline of the work. All this precedes the maintext. Afterward comes a brief “Overview of the Moral Virtues and Vices,” a veryextensive and invaluable glossary, a list of “Key Greek Terms,” an index of propernames and at last a detailed “general index.” Together these bring the original textwithin the compass of every intelligent reader.Thomas Aquinas, writing in the 13th century, believed that in the “Ethics” Aristotlehad said everything needful for happiness in this life. Thus Aquinas did not write his
29own book on ethics, but instead wrote a commentary on Aristotle. This tradition wasextended by the greatest political philosopher of the 20th century, Leo Strauss, whowrote that all his work had no other purpose than to address “the crisis of the West.”But what is the West? And what is its crisis? According to Strauss (and many others),the West is the civilization constituted at its core by the coming together of classicalphilosophy and biblical revelation. The vitality of Western civilization results fromthe interplay of these alternative principles, though each contains within itself whatclaims to be exclusive and irrefutable authority. Symbolic of this authority are Athensand Jerusalem. In “The Second World War,” Churchill remarks that everythingvaluable in modern life and thought is an inheritance from these ancient cities. Thedebunking both of Socratic skepticism (“the unexamined life is not worth living”)and of biblical faith (“Fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom”) has led to thecrisis of the West, a chaos of moral relativism and philosophic nihilism in whichevery lifestyle, no matter how corrupt or degenerate, can be said to be as good as anyother.In their brilliant and highly readable “Interpretive Essay” Bartlett and Collinssuggest, without positively asserting, that Aristotle offers a solution to the problem,or crisis, of human well-being. But they seem to doubt whether it can meet thechallenge of the God of Abraham. But these two principles are not adversarial in allrespects. Indeed, much of Strauss’s work is a radical attack — made with the greatestintellectual competence — against the latter-day enemies of both the Bible and aSocratic Aristotle. Strauss maintained that Athens and Jerusalem, while disagreeingon the ultimate good, disagree very little, if at all, on what constitutes a morality bothgood in itself and the pathway to a higher good.Aristotle’s greatness of soul (magnanimity) may seem to resemble pride, the greatestof sins described in the biblical canon. But Thomas Aquinas’s interpretation of the“Ethics” offers proof against theological negativism. And in the “Summa ContraGentiles,” Thomas made the case for sacred doctrine on the basis of Aristotelianpremises. It is an assumption of Aristotle’s philosophy of nature that the highestgood of each species is accessible to all, or nearly all, its members. For man thehighest good is wisdom. But since few if any human beings attain it, Aristotle’snature requires a supernatural correlate: the afterlife. Whatever one thinks of thisargument, it points to a dialectical friendship between Athens and Jerusalem. All the
30more reason for them to join forces in the desperate struggle, still going on, betweencivilization and barbarism.Harry V. Jaffa is a distinguished fellow of the Claremont Institute. His booksinclude “Crisis of the House Divided: An Interpretation of the Issues in the Lincoln-Douglas Debates” and “Thomism and Aristotelianism: A Study of the Commentaryby Thomas Aquinas on the Nicomachean Ethics.”A version of this review appeared in print on July 3, 2011, on page BR16 of the Sunday Book Review withthe headline: Faith and Reason.EMPIRES OF THE MINDIntrospective -- By Raul V. FabellaRaul V. Fabella is the vice-chairman of the Institute forDevelopment and Econometric Analysis, a professor at theUP School of Economics, and a member of the NationalAcademy of Science and Technology.Winston Churchill observed in 1943 before a Harvardaudience that "the empires of the future are theempires of the mind." This was after it became widelyrecognized that "radar" invented by Robert Watson-Watt of the National Physical Laboratory played acrucial role in the pivotal Battle of Britain. Likewise, itwas after the breaking of the German war codeEnigma by Bletchley Park "eggheads" -- prominentamong who was mathematician Alan Turing -- thatturned the tide of war most prominently against theGerman U-boats, decidedly in favor of the allies.Churchill’s claim normally conjures up images of runawaygeniuses and gleaming research labs inexorably spawningfuture empires. And yet, subsequent history does not seemto anoint this view: South Vietnam was lost despite theoverwhelming superiority of the USA in science-and-technology-based firepower. Neither is pre-sequent history -
31- Churchill’s own favorite launching pad for gleaning thefuture -- friendly to the claim. Germany in the first score ofthe 20th century was arguably the most clever nation in theworld with the world’s best minds flocking to its universitiesfor enlightenment. But it opted to follow Hitler and the Nazisto perdition. Athens, the ancient world’s center ofcerebration, was swallowed up by the empire-bound centerof somatic cultivation, Sparta. The arena of non-shootingwars presents even more compelling counter-examples: theeconomic ascendance of Meiji Japan in the last quarter ofthe 19th century and of the People’s Republic of China in thefirst decade of the 21st are witnesses to singularachievements built on a decidedly inferior technological andscientific infrastructure. Something else besides pure geniusand synchrotrons appear to be at work. Was Churchillerrant?Despite advances in neurosciences, the mind remains a deepmystery. Reason is the activity of the mind most studied byspecialists; passion is the one most familiar to the generalpublic. The first, privileges adherence to "facts"; the other,adherence to "truths" however construed. A semi-permanentcold war exists between the two. A Cold War witticismrelated to isms is played out on precisely this dichotomy: "Ifyou haven’t been a Marxist by age 25, you don’t have aheart; if you are still a Marxist at age 35, you don’t have amind." Discernment is the term we use for adherence tofacts; commitment, the term we use for adherence totruths.A strong national commitment too divorced from facts canproduce disasters. Mainland China, under Mao Zedong,deployed strong national commitment to its truth, "Better aSocialist train coming late than a Capitalist train coming ontime!" The result was the disastrous Great Leap Forward.Germany and Japan in the 1930s trained their considerablenational commitment to their "truth" of manifest racialsuperiority resulting in their destruction in WWII. But inthose rare instances when a nation reconciles its truths with
32facts, miracles do happen. When Deng Xiaoping’s counsel to"seek truth from facts" became canonical in China, itdiscerned the right path ("Socialism with ChineseCharacteristics") and produced the Chinese economicmiracle. Cuba, under Fidel Castro, marched with unflaggingnational commitment under its truth "Socialism or Death"and found itself redistributing poverty. By contrast, RaulCastro has taken China’s success as a fact to re-anchor itstruth. With Deng Xiaoping’s institutional innovation in thefarm sector -- "the household responsibility system" --serving as template, Cuba has officially allowed farming andsmall businesses to play the market. Cuba is set to reconcileits truths with facts and go the way of surging Vietnam.Fragmented national commitment coming from fractiousdiscernment indeed marks many less developed countries.They are confronted with many divergent truths anchored ondivergent tribal, sectarian or religious dogmas. Fragmentedcommitment is the natural outcome. The big question is howto defragment discernment and, thus, commitment. Oneway is to create undeniable facts on the ground. India is aninteresting case. It had a very weak discernment throughoutmost of its post-independence existence. Then a punyinstitutional breakthrough turned things around: a rulechange forced on the state-monopolized telecommunicationsector starting in 1991 allowed private companies to operateVSAT (satellite dish), thus, tap the global service exportnetwork. Suddenly, Indian infotech firms could competeglobally, free of the suffocating Indian "Permit Raj." Andwith success followed the upward spiral of discernment andcommitment. One way to firmer discernment andcommitment, therefore, is through localized institutionalinnovation. Fragmented societies have cracks that can allowsmall but meaningful institutional breakthroughs indiscernment.Population policy in the Philippines is a classic arena ofconflict between adherence to facts and adherence todogma. Dogma has always triumphed and shows the level of
33discernment in the country. The passage of the RH Bill canbe a pivotal breakthrough, not so much because it willmoderate population growth as because it will start thejourney to finally wrest discernment from blind dogma.Winston Churchill was not errant. The mind -- understoodholistically as a coming together of discernment (facts) andcommitment (truths) -- is sine qua non for the empires ofthe future.Raul V. Fabella is the vice-chairman of the Institute forDevelopment and Econometric Analysis, a professor at theUP School of Economics, and a member of the NationalAcademy of Science and Technology.For comments and inquiries, please e-mail us firstname.lastname@example.org. Churchill redux:
34 MICHAEL McMENAMIN, a first amendment and media defense lawyer in Cleveland, is the author of the critically acclaimed Becoming Winston Churchill: The Untold Story of Young Winston and His American Mentor published in hardcover in the UK and US in 2007 by Greenwood World Publishing and in trade paperback in the US by Enigma Books in July 2009. The Churchill Book Club called it "Indispensable. The most important new book about Churchill, one youll come back to again and again for its extraordinary insights into Churchills genius". Martin Gilbert, Churchills official biographer, said it was "Fascinating: a tour de force that brings life and light to one of the great early influences on Winston Churchill."On May 14, 2011 Churchillians by-the-Bay enjoyed a luncheon,silent auction and a presentation by Michael McMenamin on hisbook Becoming Winston Churchill: The Untold Story of YoungWinston and His American Mentor. Available were signedvolumes of the above book and his Churchill fictional thrillerauthored with his son Patrick, The DeValera Decception. Copieswill also be available at our next event with Marcus Frost inOctober, 2011. For more information on his new volume see:winstonchurchillthrillers.com Michael and Patrick Team McMenamin
35 After our event we were pleased to learn of this honor : Enigma Books 3 The DeValera Deception Wins Next Generation Indie Book Awards! The Winston Churchill Thrillers Michael McMenamin and Patrick McMenaminEnigma Books is pleased to announce that The DeValeraDeception, the first in a series of “Winston Churchill Thrillers” bythe father-son writing team of Michael and Patrick McMenaminhas been named the 2nd Place Grand Prize Winner for Fiction bythe Next Generation Indie Book Awards, the largest not-for-profit book awards program for independent publishers.The DeValera Deception was also an Indie Awards Finalist in twoother categories:Best First Novel over 80,000 wordsand Best Cover Design-Fiction.Robert Miller, publisher of Enigma Books, said:“The Churchill saga and the 1930s are brought back to life by theMcMenamin father and son team with adventure, romance andthrilling spy stories that sets this series apart. Congratulations andmore to come!”The Parsifal Pursuit, the second Winston Churchill Thriller, isbeing published by Enigma in May, 2011 and the third Churchillthriller, The Gemini Agenda, will be issued in the fall of 2011.The AuthorsMichael McMenamin is a Churchill scholar and the author of thecritically acclaimed biography Becoming Winston Churchill, the
36Untold Story of Young Winston and His American Mentor. He is amember of the Editorial Board of Finest Hour, the quarterlyjournal of the Churchill Centre and Museum in London and acontributing editor of the leading libertarian magazine Reason.Patrick McMenamin is an award-winning television newsproducer who has produced stories for John Stossel on ABC News20/20, Fox News Channel and Fox Business Network. The awards ceremony was at the Plaza hotel in NYC on Tuesday May 24. Michael and his Grandson Teddy Wearing the three Award Medals CHURCHILL IN THE NEWSWinston ritual gets the bootBy Black Dog2nd April 2011
37Brassed off: The statue of Sir Winston Churchill in the House of CommonsIt’s been a hallowed custom for years – but now MPs have been ordered to stop rubbingthe foot of the imposing bronze statue of Winston Churchill as they enter the CommonsChamber.The practice, traditionally followed by those steeling themselves for a crucial speech,wore a hole in the great man’s left foot.It has now been restored and a strict instruction has gone out to MPs to keep off.Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1372777/Winston-ritual-gets-boot.html#ixzz1IV0SfNpHFLASHBAC K Dec. 12, 1969"I am a child of the House of Commons, its servant," said Winston Churchill. "All Iam I owe to the House of Commons." Long a part of Commons legend, the latePrime Minister is now a part of its architecture—and no insignificant part at that.Churchills bronze statue, like his impact, is larger than life. It stands 7 ft. 5 in. inheight, weighs a ton, and cost $26,400. Clementine, Baroness Spencer-Churchill, 84, handsomely turned out in fur coat and pale blue feather hat,stepped forward to unveil her famous husbands latest image. Blinking in thebright lights, she pulled the cord and then started visibly as the drapings fell, toreveal her husband in his famous "bulldog" stance, with foot, chin, belly andvision forward. Permanently threatening another step, Churchills bronzeexpresses, in the sculptors words, "an idea of impatience and hurry, of a manwanting to see something done."Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,840478,00.html#ixzz1KIyu9xKM
38New Churchill sculpture will point the way to the museumContributed photo: Artist Don Wiegand works on a clay model of his “Iron Curtain”sculpture as Winston Churchill’s granddaughter, Edwina Sandys, provides input in May2010. The finished piece — a bronze bas relief that depicts Churchill giving his “Sinewsof Peace” speech — will be placed in front of the National Churchill Museum on theWestminster College campus.By Katherine CumminsTuesday, April 12, 2011“A shadow has fallen upon the scenes so lately lighted by the Allied victory. ... FromStettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an iron curtain has descended across theContinent.”Winston Churchill’s “Sinews of Peace” speech, delivered at Westminster College in1946, is arguably — in the United States at least — the British statesman’s most famous;the invoked image of an iron curtain the most memorable.St. Louis artist Don Wiegand now seeks to capture that moment in his new “Iron Curtain”sculpture, commissioned by Richard Mahoney — a longtime member of the Board ofGovernors of the National Churchill Museum. The piece, a bas relief which depictsChurchill as he utters that famous phrase, will be dedicated during a special ceremonystarting at 11 a.m. on Friday, May 13, which will include an appearance by Churchill’sgranddaughter, Edwina Sandys.“We were looking for ways to enhance the entryway to the museum,” said Rob Havers,executive director of the museum of the reasoning behind the idea for the sculpture.“That’s the iconic line, and there are hundreds of sculptures of Churchill, but nobody hadendeavored to depict that moment.”
39Wiegand, who has created bas relief pieces memorializing Bob Hope and Charles A.Lindbergh and has work in The Vatican and at the Smithsonian Museum in Washington,D.C., said “Iron Curtain” is a “very complex composition.”“It’s a cutaway, and it will all be floating off of a column I’ve designed,” Wiegand said.“It’s contemporary and figurative both, and historical.”The relief will depict Churchill standing at the podium at Westminster, arm raised, withseveral microphones in front of him and the climbing vine that was growing on thepodium.“Mr. Mahoney picked the moment when Churchill raised his arm and dropped it and said,‘An iron curtain has descended,’” Wiegand said. “I had to use a compilation of a lot ofphotos (to capture the image), Edwina Sandys has been helping a lot.“I’m proud of it. I think it’s going to be a powerful piece,” he continued. “It’s capturing amoment that is showing and warning the world about freedom being taken away, andthat’s timeless.”Wiegand said the 300 leaves attached to the podium “are symbolic of all of humanity.”The artist has completed a rough model of “Iron Curtain” but has not finished thesculpture itself because of issues with the initial casting of the bronze.“I’ll be working on it right up to the end. I won’t see the finished piece until that morningmyself,” Wiegand said. “Everybody’s going to see it right along with me, and that’spretty fun.”Havers said he is looking forward to having the piece installed to help draw visitors in tothe museum.“I think it’s going to be a magnificent enhancement,” Havers said. “It will be a visiblecue — the way it is to be positioned, Churchill is almost gesturing to the museum.”OMG Goes Way, Way BackApril 1, 2011 by Ian Chillag --NPR
40OMG Winston Churchill!The initialism "OMG" is one of the 900 new additions to the Oxford EnglishDictionary. When they started looking for its origins, they expected itd go back 20years or so. So it was something of a surprise when they found "OMG" in a 1917letter from a British Admiral to Winston Churchill. He actually wrote:I hear that a new order of Knighthood is on the tapis. OMG!He then explained:(Oh! My! God!)That last part is no longer necessary. Anyway, if somebody calls you out forusing OMG, just tell them youre citing a 1917 letter to Winston Churchill.Dishonourable dischargeFri, Apr 01 2011 09:00 CETby Robert Hodgson497 Views 1 Comment1 of 1
41 BIG THREE: A sculpture by the president of the Russian Academy of Arts, Zurab Tsereteli depicting Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin, centre, British prime minister Winston Churchill, left, and US President Franklin Roosevelt is shown to the public in Moscow, January 2005. Photo: ReutersBudapest city council has voted to strip former Soviet dictator Josef Stalin of his honorarycitizenship of the capital. The Georgian psychopath - who was still known affectionately in theWest as Uncle Joe even as the Soviet Union he controlled was cementing a Communistgovernment in place in Hungary - had apparently been granted that honour in 1947.That, at least, is what mayor István Tarlós said had been discovered during a recent shufti at thearchives. The opposition Socialist faction on the council noted that Stalin was, in fact, not anhonorary Budapester. Caucus leader Csaba Horváth recalled that an earlier city administrationsigned a declaration in 2004 to the effect that he never had been.Nor was Stalin the only historical figure to be posthumously blackballed by city council decree lastweek. The 19th-century Austrian general Julius Jacob von Haynau was removed from thehonorary rolls, along with Count Josip Jelacic, a Croat who helped to suppress the Hungarianstruggle for independence from Habsburg rule in 1848. Ditto Austrian Minister-President FelixSchwarzenberg who invited Russia to help out, and Russian military commander Ivan Paskievichwho accepted the invitation. Also declared persona non grata by the city fathers were their 19th-century Austrian contemporaries Karl Ludwig von Grünne and Baron Karl Geringer.Read the full story at The Budapest Times
42Today is Winston Churchill DayPhoto: United Kingdom Government Public DomainToday is Winston Churchill Day • April 9th, 2011 10:34 am ETApril 9th is Winston Churchill Day. On this day in 1963, Sir ChurchillWinston became an honorary citizen of the United States ofAmerica. Although Churchill was not present, both his son andgrandson were able to attend the ceremony with President John F.Kennedy presiding.EXCLUSIVE: Anthony Hopkins Considering Title Role In Angelina JoliesChurchill And RooseveltPosted 13 hrs ago by Kara Warner in Interviews, NewsUnless youve been living under a rock, you know what Sir Anthony Hopkins hasbeen up to lately -- ruling the universe as Asgardian overloard Odin in "Thor."Naturally, being the esteemed thespian and Oscar-winner that he is, Hopkins isno stranger to portraying important and imposing figures. He is always in-demand and busy on a variety of upcoming projects. When MTV News caught upwith him during the "Thor" press day over the weekend, he revealed that he is intalks with Angelina Jolie about playing Winston Churchill in a film shesdeveloping.
44art special effects to deliver a vivid account of what Sir WinstonChurchill called a "miracle of deliverance".Visitors to "Operation Dynamo" will walk through the Secret WartimeTunnels deep beneath the castle and see, hear and feel - as neverbefore - the danger and high stakes of the evacuation. Sights andsounds will fill the tunnels. One moment, the visitor will experiencethe tense atmosphere of the operations room at Dover Castle whilethe next, they will be immersed in the action on the Dunkirk beachesas a German plane flies overhead, pursued by British anti-aircraft fire.The myths, the reality and the legacy of Operation Dynamo will be thefocus of a new exhibition charting the history of the Dover Castletunnels from Napoleonic times to the Cold War.With the operation masterminded from within the tunnels at DoverCastle, there is no more appropriate place in England to learn aboutthe Dunkirk evacuation than Dover Castle. With "Operation Dynamo",visitors will step into the tunnels and onto the beaches, boats andcommand centre during one of our darkest yet greatest hours.NewsTo keep up to date with all the latest developments in the WartimeTunnels, follow Dover Castle on Twitter, or take a look at the castlesFacebook Page.
45Deep beneath Dover Castle lie the secret wartime tunnels from where the Dunkirkevacuation – codenamed Operation Dynamo – was masterminded. The exhibition celebrates the work of Vice-Admiral Bertram Ramsay, who wasbrought out of retirement before the outbreak of war to protect the Straits of Dover, and who co-ordinated the evacuation.Patrick Kinna dies at 95;Churchills stenographer duringWWIIOBITUARIES
46Kinna was a witness to the famous encounter between anaked, bathing Winston Churchill and U.S. PresidentFranklin D. Roosevelt at the White House at Christmastime in 1941.March 23, 2009|Associated PressPatrick Kinna, whose wartime duties as stenographer to Winston Churchillincluded taking dictation as the prime minister bathed, has died. He was 95.He was a witness to the famous encounter between a naked Churchill and U.S. PresidentFranklin D. Roosevelt at the White House at Christmas time in 1941Kinna died March 14 in Brighton on Englands south coast, according toannouncements published by Hanningtons Funeral Directors. The cause of deathwas not disclosed.His shorthand and typing skills led to his first assignment with Churchill,accompanying the prime minister to Newfoundland for a meeting with Rooseveltin August 1941. He was with the prime minister again in December inWashington."Churchill was in the bath and began dictating. He would submerge himselfunder the water every now and again and come up and carry on with thedictation," Kinna said in a recording for the BBCs oral history archive."He was very absorbed in his work that morning and would not keep still for thevalet to help dress him; he kept walking around the room speaking aloud. Therewas a rat-a-tat-tat on the door, and Churchill swung the door open to PresidentRoosevelt!"Churchill simply said that he had nothing to hide from Mr. President!"Kinna was reluctant to join Churchills staff and had told the prime ministersparliamentary private secretary, or PPS, that he had decided not to accept."The PPS had restrained himself until then, but now he told me that this was thenearest thing to a royal command I was ever going to get," Kinna recalled. "If theprime minister wanted me on his staff, then I started on Monday. So I did."Kinna declined an offer to remain with Churchill after the war and served ForeignSecretary Ernest Bevin until his death in 1951.Later joining the timber company Montague Meyer, Kinna rose to be personneldirector and retired at age 60.
47 Sir Winston ChurchillUNTIL NEXT ISSUE ENJOY YOUR SUMMER