Accolade



The spectacular event of green leaves turning to reds and yellows in October and into November happens when trees have taken all the nourriture they can from the leaves that are filled with chlorophyll, the biomolecule that absorbs energy from sunlight and gives leaves their green colour.
When sunlight wanes, and leaves stop making nourishment, this green pigment is broken down into opposing colour compounds. Yellow pigments are then revealed and other chemical changes cause red coloration.


Biologically, the reason why green leaves turn to hues of reds and golds in the autumn season, is when trees have depleted all the nouriture obtained by chlorophyll. Chlorophyll is necessary for photosynthesis, allowing green leaves to absorb energy from light. Green leaves convert carbon dioxide and water into oxygen and glucose.


Although artists and poets might be aware of this biological process, they regard the glorious colour change more philosophically, or they might relate it to the theory of colour.


I have often referred to colour polarity, and polarity in general, as I find it a fascinating subject. Depending on the tree, of course, the particular green of its leaves, the colour change process seems to reach its splendid culmination when the hue of red becomes the exact opposite of the original hue of green.


A green leaf that tends towards yellow might change to a reddish gold, and a green that tends towards turquoise might change to a warm silver tint. But then the richness and variety of autumn colours defy such theorising.


The philosophical aspect is of course the fabulous crescendo of colour that heralds the cycle of life and death. Polarity. The leaves fall, or are carried off by the wind. They become brittle, then sodden and colourless. The earth reclaims them.
When leaves like those of maple or sycamore become brittle, breaking away leaving only the graceful, skeletal veins like fine lace, one always admires such exquisite, intricate, geometrical beauty.


Each year we see this, and are always enchanted, as we also are by the magic of spring. Or certainly we should be. Naturally the seasonal shows are not always the same each year, but then this enhances the wonder and beauty of natural evolution.


Autumn reminds us of the ephemerality of life. It always evokes nostalgia and reflection. But it also reassures. Whatever soothsayers claim to predict, more intent on prophesying dismal doom than paying heed to such sublime, fleeting gifts, seasons continue their cycles. Each year they graciously and poetically reveal divine, timeless truth.


 Text and images © Mirino. November, 2019

Boris Johnson


The family of Alexander Boris De Pfeffel Johnson is intriguing. Boris was born in NYC the 19th June, 1964. He has both British and American nationalities. From his grandfather (Osman Wilfred Kemal Johnson) he is also of Turkish descent. Boris’s father, Stanley Patrick Johnson (born in 1940, Penzance, Cornwall) is a writer and was a Conservative politician. He was also employed by the World Bank, and the European Commission. He fathered six children from two marriages.

From Stanley’s first marriage were born Boris, his sister, Rachel (journalist, TV panelist) two brothers who were to become equally successful, Jo (Tory MP, and minister of State for Universities and Science) and Leo (film producer and entrepreneur).
Boris’s wife Marina Wheeler, is also quite often in the limelight. She is a reputable barrister who specialises in public law and human rights.

‘Bojo’ was educated in Brussels, at The European School. Following this he attended Ashdown House in East Sussex, UK, then Eton college, Berkshire. He also read classics at Balliol College, Oxford.
He began his career as a journalist for The Times, but as he apparently misquoted a citation, The Times decided he should leave. He then became the Brussels correspondent for the Daily Telegraph. His articles contributed to Euroscepticism, or perhaps more appropriately ‘EU-scepticism’.
Formerly assistant editor of The Telegraph, he then became editor of The Spectator.

In addition to his journalism, Boris has written 21 books including The Perils of Pushy Parents, a book for all ages that he also illustrated. His most popular book is The Churchill Factor. (BJ is a great admirer of Winston Churchill.)

Despite his obvious talent as a writer, he was destined to become a politician. He served as a Junior Conservative Shadow Minister under Michael Howard and David Cameron. In 2008, BJ was elected Mayor of London, then re-elected for a second term in 2012.
Elected MP (Uxbridge and South Ruislip) in 2015, BJ stepped down as London’s Mayor. The following year he had a notable influence towards the winning Brexit vote, but was subject to Theresa May’s PM leadership. He served under her as Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.
As BJ disapproved of May’s lame, compromising Brexit approach which included the Chequers Agreement, he resigned two years later. May’s failing to obtain acceptable EU terms for Brexit determined her own resignation in 2019. BJ was elected leader of the Conservative Party then appointed the function of PM in August, 2019.

Boris Johnson is of course, a controversial figure in politics. Many ‘remainers’ dislike him intensely. They accuse him of every evil imaginable, not unlike the criticisms of the many anti-Trump democrats in the USA. But the 'remainers' seem to have illusions about the EU. Perhaps they believe that the club represents the only possible future for Europe, which must include the UK.
They regard BJ as a dated vestige of the old school, the privileged elite of GB, living in the decadent, aristocratic, British imperial past. Perhaps from their limited view point within the UK, they are oblivious to the real direction the EU executive is trying to take Europe. They seem to ignore that the ‘old school’, the conservatism, the sincere patriotism, national pride, sovereignty, defence of democracy, of cultural identity, and a wholesome resurgence of confidence, is far more preferable, than the EU executive form of elitism. An elitism which seems to foster a Marxist inspired agenda of servitude, of social conformity devoid of nations. An executive that obsessively gives priority to an irresponsible, ideological program to the utter detriment of all of the above essentially positive considerations, naturally including democracy itself.

Yet one also gets the impression that the ‘remainers’ are not as sure as they were. One can hardly ignore the negative effects of imposed, illegal immigration. One can’t dismiss the fact that the EU no longer represents the union of European nations. If the EU executive had the intention of sacrificing everything that it’s supposed to represent, for an absurd, ideological objective, it couldn’t do a better job.

As PM, Boris Johnson has a simple, logical argument in order to defend and determine Brexit, either with or without a deal, if the latter is deemed absolutely unavoidable. As the labour opposition headed by Jeremy Corbyn is naturally against what BJ proposes, he has the option of calling for a general election. In other words if Corbyn believes that the ‘remainers’ outnumber the leavers, he should go for an election.
He would know that he and the Labour Party are certainly not the first choice of the people, but if he was absolutely certain that he had the majority support for the UK to remain an EU member, then he would have everything to gain by calling for a general election.
The fact that Corbyn is not sure, and that members of the opposition seem to be less adamant about remaining than perhaps they previously were, is naturally in Boris’s, and Brexit’s favour.

Obviously it is a crucial period for the UK, for Europe, and for the EU. Perhaps even more determining for the EU. Assuming the UK leaves the EU one way or the other, and prospers from having done so in all respects, then it can only increase the already mounting EU scepticism on the continent. It would certainly cause general changes in EU policy.

Whatever is destined to be, BoJo is succeeding in boosting the moral, the patriotism, the pride, the stoic, stiff-upper-lip, inherent identity of the blitz enduring Brits, famous characteristics that may have been somewhat dampened by ‘circumstances beyond one’s control’.

And maybe one should be wary of BJ’s feigning not to take himself too seriously. This in itself is a redoubtable arm that he can wield with ruthless mastery.
Boris Johnson is absolutely determined to pull it off. No doubt inspired by the famous Winston he so admires, BJ, and the ever growing number of those who have faith in him, ‘will never surrender’.


 Text and top illustration © Mirino (with thanks for the use of the named Union Jack, and to Wikipedia for the bio info). October, 2019

Gretasque theories



As years accumulate, one tends to repeat oneself. It is not so much, or not only, because of the toll of the years, it is also because one has never been persuaded, by climate soothsayers, and certainly not by poor Greta, to change one’s opinion. And this persuades me, especially at this particular period, to continue to express it.

Is it not time that serious scientists, qualified climatologists, and reputable astronomers form a committee to establish once and for all, and to make available to the public, the truth regarding the famous climate change, to put an end to this cinema, this end of world cult which in reality is only a massive fraud, a generator of many billions of euros?
And as no one seems too concerned to ensure that these billions are used precisely to 'save the planet', it is even more grotesque.

Greta Thunberg, of course, is the ideal icon to bear the saviour's flag. She is essential to drive the nail into the heart of all those who feel guilty of driving their little cars, and therefore obediently willing to pay even more taxes on fuel. The truth is available, so why is this hypocritical pantomime allowed to go on, thus allowing many billions to be accumulated by fleecing people like so many sheep?

If climatology is a science, it would only be in terms of climate history.  We can trace the history of the planet Earth, and it is precisely this climatic history, the age of the Earth, (4.543 billion years) and the relatively short period of the existence of humanity (200,000 years) that should already be enough to put things in a realistic perspective.

Predicting, very approximately, climatic phenomena depends on this history. It depends on the recorded universal cycles including the cycles of the sun. But nothing is exactly the same. There is a constant evolution that is out of our reach, and it’s just as well.
But the seasons that depend on the obliquity (the Earth’s tilt) are still relatively stable. So if, instead of making hateful threats to the 'ignoble capitalists' to save the planet, Greta planted some potatoes in March, then some tomatoes in May or June, some cabbages and fennels in September, (also following the phases of the moon) she would become more aware of this stability. A stability that has allowed the cultivation of vineyards and the production of wine since the Celts, before the Romans who continued this fine, civilised tradition.

We cannot accurately predict climate phenomena. Thus regarding the future, climatology is no longer a science. Despite the best technology, we often make mistakes predicting the weather a few days in advance. How then can we possibly claim to be able to predict that in so many years, weeks, days, hours, etc., if we do nothing 'to save the planet', it will be the end of the world?

🌋

N’est il pas temps (justement) que les savants sĂ©rieux, les climatologues compĂ©tents, et les astronomes rĂ©putĂ©s forment un comitĂ© afin d’Ă©tablir une fois pour toutes, et mettre Ă  la disposition du public, la vĂ©ritĂ© regardant le fameux changement climatique, pour arrĂŞter ce cinĂ©ma, ce culte de fin de monde qui en rĂ©alitĂ© n’est qu’une massive fraude, un gĂ©nĂ©rateur de plusieurs milliards d’euros?
Et comme personne ne semble trop soucieux de veiller Ă  ce que ces milliards soient utilisĂ©s justement pour ‘sauver la planète,' c’est encore plus grotesque.

Greta Thunberg, bien entendu, est l’icĂ´ne idĂ©ale pour porter le drapeau de sauveur. Elle est essentielle pour enfoncer le clou au cĹ“ur de tous ceux qui se sentent coupables de conduire leurs petites voitures, et donc docilement prĂŞts de payer encore plus de taxes sur le carburant.
La vĂ©ritĂ© est disponible, donc pour quelle raison on permet ce cinĂ©ma hypocrite de continuer, Ă  part pour laisser faire accumuler des milliards et de rendre coupable les gens que l’on traite comme tant de vaches?

Si la climatologie est une science, c’est uniquement au regard de l’histoire climatique. On peut tracer l’histoire de la planète Terre, et c’est justement cette histoire climatique, l’âge de la Terre, (4.543 milliards d’ans) et la pĂ©riode relativement courte de l’existence de l’humanitĂ© (200,000 ans) qui devrait suffire dĂ©jĂ  pour mettre les choses en perspective rĂ©elle.

PrĂ©dire tant bien que mal les phĂ©nomènes climatiques dĂ©pend donc sur cette histoire. Il dĂ©pend sur les cycles universels y compris les cycles du soleil enregistrĂ©s. Mais rien n’est exactement pareil. Il y a une Ă©volution constante qui est hors de notre portĂ©e, et c’est bien ainsi.

Mais les saisons qui dĂ©pendent sur l’obliquitĂ© (l’inclination de la Terre) sont toujours relativement stables. Ainsi si au lieu de faire des menaces haineuses envers ‘les sales capitalistes’ pour sauver la planète, Greta plantait quelques pommes de terres en Mars, puis quelque tomates en Mai ou Juin, quelques choux et fenouils en Septembre, (aussi en suivant les phases de la lune) elle se rendrait mieux compte de cette stabilitĂ©. Une stabilitĂ© qui a permis la culture des vignobles et la production de vin depuis l’âge des Celtes, avant mĂŞme les Romains qui continuèrent cette belle et fine tradition.

On ne peut pas donc prĂ©dire les phĂ©nomènes climatiques avec prĂ©cision. Dans l’Ă©gard du future donc la climatologie n’est plus une science. MalgrĂ© la meilleure technologie on se trompe assez souvent de bien prĂ©dire le temps quelques jours en avance. Comment diable peut on donc prĂ©tendre prĂ©dire qu’en une telle quantitĂ© d’annĂ©es, semaines, jours, heures, etc., si on ne fait rien ‘pour sauver la planète’, ça va ĂŞtre ‘quasi’ la fin du monde?


Text and top image © Mirino (with thanks for the use of lower image) September, 2019

Elitism



What has become painfully apparent, is that the elite accord no importance whatsoever to the people, whether they are migrants or nationals. They hold the people in disdain. They go through the motions of pretending democracy is the essential requirement of society, at least in the interim period before European federalism will somehow be forced through, (the first step towards their NWO pet project) but only because it’s still an obligation. They also clearly show they have no respect for democracy.

This is now illustrated by the political pantomime in Italy. Any botched up, impractical compromise is cynically considered by the elite to be far more essential than ever agreeing to allow Italians the democratic right to elect the government of their choice, God forbid.

The elite are like countless tentacles that worm their way, complicity embracing each other, all over the globe. They stem from an enormous intricate body of international banking institutions, sectarian or masonic associations, and digital social media platforms. What they have in common is great wealth, and what seems to be a new fangled Marxist ideology. The former is a necessary attribute without which they could never qualify as ‘elite’. The latter is the likely basis of a theoretical objective which they share and which they have committed themselves by every means possible to actuate. This goal has nothing to do with nations with which the elite no longer identify. They consider nations, nationalism, and sovereignty as direct threats to their project, so the words themselves are underlined in red in the politically incorrect list.

Rare are the televised news media that refuse to support the agenda. As for online journals, reporting the truth might depend on the amount of public subscriptions, as advertising seems to pay less these days. It’s likely that any online journals that have, or had, an international reputation, and appear to be able to promote themselves with extravagant graphics, often animated, is because they covertly support the agenda. Their articles are often ridiculously revealing in this respect.

Those who consciously allow themselves to be used by the elite in order to contribute in realising the program, are generously rewarded one way or the other. They are also protected. Despite any ecclesiastical counter pressure on Bergoglio, for example, he would be protected, simply because the establishment (the elite) chose him as head of the Vatican in the first place.

Greta is being given iconic importance because the global warming scam, obviously part of the program, is not only paramount as a very effective money spinner, it's also a useful means of governing by fear and guilt complex. Greta thus gets royal tribute from yacht owners, private jet owners, celebrities, the Pope (of course), the EU, the UN, Macron, Merkel, Juncker, etc., etc.

The main, serious obstructions to the project are the VisegrĂ d Group, Russia, China, the USA under Trump, and Japan, Israel, Syria and Iran, etc. China and Russia being the most important. Megalomaniacs like Macron delude themselves in believing they have scored victories against the people (the gilet jaunes have made too many sacrifices to be so subdued, and the claimed accidental cause of the Notre Dame de Paris fire takes not only the French, but the entire world’s population as imbeciles). Macron would be amongst those who believe they have the divine power to solve irresolvable problems.

It’s ironic that at a time when Russia has lovingly revived its cultural and religious identity, the west, especially west continental Europe, is actively engrossed in sacrificing it. And that whilst western elitists try to goad the people into believing that the Russian Federation is more dangerous than even the Soviet Union was, they are embracing Marxism even through gradual Islamisation.

China is a massive, high-tech, pristine, robotic bulldozer that will crush or clear away any opposition to its interests. It has however invested in the whole world, and the whole world is its client. There would logically be a limit to how far it could go and remain solvent. How the situation develops in Hong-Kong will also be a clear indication of this.

However, it’s not unlikely that China regards what is being promoted by the elite, and allowed to happen in Europe, as a direct threat to its interests. This might include the threat to its monopoly of cheap labour. Obviously Russia is also very concerned by the Western European, ideological inanities. Trump must tread very carefully as this incredibly sinister scenario unfolds and is enacted.
What is absolutely certain, is that no sane nation will accept the imposition of an insane project, without ferociously defending its interests.


Text, top image © Mirino (lower image with thanks for its use) September, 2019 

Cayden



As usual before 8 am I walked Cayden. At the top of the entrance to our part of the village there was the cat that Cayden dislikes, because it’s the arch enemy of Gatsby, our cat. So Cayden sent it straight up a tree like an arrow. This amused me as well as two other people. A mother and her daughter. The daughter is inflicted with a form of Down syndrome. They are two of our neighbours in this tiny Italian village.

The mother, already of a certain age, looks after her daughter in an exemplary way. While the daughter still manages to walk, her mother insists that she does so, although it’s very slow and difficult. When we meet up I always ask them how they are, now in Italian although I know the mother speaks good French. And she also answers in the same way, she looks at me and vaguely shakes her head, and then brightly says, ‘we’re fine’.

When Cayden and I returned from our little walk, they were still slowly making their way down the little entrance road. The daughter was clutching the wire fencing on the side of the path for extra support. I offered them two plums of those I’d gathered from trees growing wild on the rocky banks of the wider descending road, then I noticed that Cayden seemed particularly attentive. He gently approached the daughter and gave her a little lick on the leg.

Usually I insist that Cayden return home with me, but at the bottom of the narrow road he stood still, apparently determined to wait for them.
Perhaps it’s also the Border Collie part of him, but there was obviously something else. He cared. So I told him he can stay there, knowing he would come back when he was ready.

After a while I thought I had better go and get him, and found him lying down at the bottom of our lane near the lavaggio (wash house). He was gazing across towards the mother and her daughter on the other side of the small car park opposite the lavaggio. There was another lady talking to them. The mother was talking on a mobile phone, and the daughter was holding a handkerchief and seemed to be a little upset. I waved to them, and told Cayden to get up and come with me, which he did.

I know that Cayden is a caring dog with a big heart. He shows it with Gatsby, when the cat feels insecure or hurt. He showed it with Max when his old friend knew that it was time to say goodbye. But his care and attention in this particular case really touched me, enough for me write these few words.

Text and images © Mirino, (Cayden as he is now, and as a puppy five years ago) August, 2019

Fumée



Dans Valeurs Actuelles d’aujourd’hui, Ă©tant donnĂ© qu’il s’agit d’un des rares journaux français sur lequel on peut compter, on est quand mĂŞme déçu par le rapport sur la cause officielle de l’incendie de Notre Dame de Paris, un rapport totalement privĂ© de crĂ©dibilitĂ© et de contre argument.
D’ailleurs la cause n’est pas prĂ©cisĂ©e. Mais, chose Ă©tonnante, on Ă©carte carrĂ©ment tout acte criminel. Donc sans savoir la cause après plus de deux mois d’enquĂŞtes menĂ©es par des ‘experts’, on peut quand mĂŞme catĂ©goriquement nier la possibilitĂ© d’incendie volontaire. Ceci tout seul dĂ©fie toute logique.

Ridiculement on suggère que le feu a Ă©tĂ© provoquĂ© peut-ĂŞtre par un mĂ©got de cigarette mal Ă©teint, ou par un court-circuit. Après tout, quand Notre Dame de Paris fĂ»t bâtie il n’y avait pas d’Ă©lectricitĂ©, ni de cigarettes. Par contre il y a eu beaucoup de bougies, et depuis il y a eu aussi beaucoup de guerres, et la fameuse rĂ©volution assez irrĂ©ligieuse, mais il a fallu attendre le règne de Macron, 856 annĂ©es depuis la construction de la CathĂ©drale pour qu’elle soit gravement endommagĂ©e par un incendie.

Les meilleurs experts du monde auraient beaucoup de mal Ă  persuader un peuple dotĂ© de bon sens qu’un tel feu a Ă©tĂ© dĂ©clenchĂ© par un mĂ©got de cigarette mal Ă©teint, ou par quelque phĂ©nomène Ă©lectrique. Il aurait fallu trop de temps pendant lequel le feu aurait Ă©tĂ© dĂ©couvert et Ă©teint, ceci assumant que le système d’alarme n’ait pas fonctionnĂ©. PrĂ©tend-on que les anciennes poutres de chĂŞne dans les combles puissent ĂŞtre incendiĂ©es par un mĂ©got de cigarette mal Ă©teint? Il aurait fallu beaucoup de ventilation, deux ou trois jours, et une nĂ©gligence totale de la part de ceux responsable de la sĂ©curitĂ©.

Mais c’est Ă©vident que la CathĂ©drale a pris feu trop rapidement pour que la cause soit accidentelle. En quelques minutes en somme. Tellement rapide qu’on ne pouvait mĂŞme pas l’approcher pour le combattre. Un tel incendie ne pourrait jamais se rĂ©pandre si violemment sans l’aide de combustion très inflammable. On n’a pas besoin d’ĂŞtre un expert pour le savoir, et il ne faut pas prendre les français pour des imbĂ©ciles.

Sans prendre en considĂ©ration le bilan des attaques contre les Églises en France, ce rapport après plus de deux mois de soi disant recherches est totalement ridicule, sinon insultant. Si on voulait attribuer la cause Ă  un accident involontaire, les experts auraient pu imaginer quelque chose d’un peu plus convaincant. D’ailleurs c’est plutĂ´t comme s’ils voulaient s’en laver les mains, instructions de l’exĂ©cutif oblige.

Le plus troublant de cette tragĂ©die que Macron veut rĂ©parer comme si de rien Ă©tait, en cinq ans, c’est la pensĂ©e que l’on compte restaurer Notre Dame de Paris sur ce qui semble ĂŞtre un mensonge. Si la CathĂ©drale avait Ă©tĂ© incendiĂ©e volontairement, et il n’y a rien qui ne prouve le contraire, restaurer cette icĂ´ne, cette maison de Dieu pleine d’histoire, en cachant la vĂ©ritĂ©, serait bien sinistre et ignoble.


Text © Mirino. (With thanks for the use of the photographs) June, 2019