CHAPEL END CHARLIE

Aye, how can football clubs expect managers to be loyal and committed to the cause when they display so notoriously little of those particular qualities in return? MP leaving is obviously unsettling for us all, but I've seen so bloody many managers come and go at this club that I just don't bother becoming emotionally attached to them anymore. All I will say is that appointing the next manager is obviously a pressing matter and that I can't understand those opining that David Moyes would not be a good fit here - I can think of no one better suited for this club.

You are correct in that this theory has indeed been postulated. In a similiar vein, by all accounts Stalin was repeatedly warned that Hitler was planning to invade the Soviet Union in the summer of 1941. Yet the record shows that he too failed to take the appropriate measures required to address this threat - with disastrous consequences. Stalin's folly seems well established, Roosevelt's rather less so, but perhaps the nub of the problem is that governments are constantly flooded with intelligence information from a wide variety of sources, and that much of this 'intel' is either unreliable, false or even contradictory in nature. It is not the mere gathering of intelligence that matters, it is evaluating it correctly that counts. For arguments sake say the US government did indeed receive some indication that Al qaeda was planning the 9-11 attack. This alone by no means proves that the US government therefore must have deliberately allowed this outrage to happen in order to further some expansionist 'neocon' agenda of theirs. This is a conspiracy theory too far for me, indeed a preposterous notion that only someone afflicted with a serious case of paranoia could believe. It seems rather more likely that the CIA is subject to a unremitting barrage of terrorist threat warnings, from both domestic and foreign intel sources, and that in their hearts they didn't truly believe that a mere terrorist organisation was capable of conducting an attack of this unprecedented scale and audacity anyway. In short they failed to pay sufficient attention to this particular threat. This is a thread that runs throughout history, we underestimate our opponents at our peril. A old lesson Humanity seems doomed to never learn.

Pap I think you seriously underestimate the new political reality created by the 9-11 attack. It seems to me that no US president, be they Republican or Democrat, could possibly not react decisively to this devastating attack on New York City and expect to remain in office for long. The US public demanded of their political class some form of retaliation for 9-11 ... and that is precisely what President George W Bush gave them. Indeed had 9-11 occurred in London rather than New York I'm not at all sure the UK public would have reacted much differently. The (obvious) analogy to be drawn here is with the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour on the 7th December 1941. Al Qaeda is no powerful nation, such as Imperial Japan certainly was, but the profound sense of shock and outrage caused by both attacks is perhaps roughly comparable. Indeed, in this age of mass media and instant communication, the effect on the US public of 9-11 (although clearly less serious than Pearl Harbour) may actually have been heightened. On a personal note, I expect that we can both remember exactly where we were when we heard of this outrage. I also recall that the dust had hardly settled before I had arrived at the conclusion that some form of military response to this attack was utterly inevitable. Now I'm not arguing here that retaliation should be a proper 'driver' behind the foreign policy of any nation, perhaps in a truly mature democracy cooler heads should prevail. Nevertheless, politics remains a rough and ready business and politicians must ultimately respond to the demands of the voters who elect them or expect to face the consequences.

But the USA was in effect already the sole superpower in the 'unipolar' post Cold War world that had existed ever since the demise of the Soviet Union. Therefore it's not a question of their attempting to engineer this situation because it had already been existence for some time. As for the theory that the sinister 'neo cons' employed 9-11 as a excuse to gain control of the middle east's oil reserves, that might sound more convincing had the invasion of Iraq been the sole US reaction to 9-11. But to be consistent how does that theory also explain Afghanistan - a nation not noted for the extreme wealth of its natural resources? No, it seems to me that quite clearly Afghanistan was invaded as a direct response to the Taliban's part in 9-11. It seems equally likely that the primary reason behind the US decision to topple Saddam was that (rightly or wrongly) he was seen to be a continuing threat to regional order and the security of world oil supply. On the face of it Saddam's long history of funding international terrorism and his disastrous miscalculation of invading Kuwait back in 1990 (and subsequent brutal oppression of his own people) does tend to suggest that this view is not entirely unjustified does it not? None is this is to say that I believe the George W Bush's administration behaved at all wisely in the wake of the national trauma caused by 9-11 - far from it. But the 'War on Terror' was probably a misguided but genuine reaction to 9-11 and the notion that Bush (either knowingly or not) was enacting some devilish conspiratorial plot to gain even more power for himself and his cronies in the evil 'miltary-industrial complex' leaves this observer of history unconvinced to put it mildly.

A little while ago the BBC showed a programe that covered the (extraordinary) life of William the Marshal - perhaps the most remarkable knight medieval England ever produced. With my interest thus sparked I hurriedly ordered a book off the internet in a effort to further my knowledge of The Marshal and his many deeds. Unfortunately (due to my carelessness) this book - 'The Greatest Knight' by Elizabeth Chadwick - turned out to be one of those 'historical-fiction' category novels rather than the non-fiction historical biography I had been seeking. So a accident then, but a happy one as it turned out because reading this book I soon came to the conclusion that Chadwick has a real feel for her subject and a prose style that seems to capture the spirit of that long gone Anglo-Norman world of the 12/13th Century with some aplomb. Now this book is more novel than pure history because at this distance in time there is just so much we don't know about William Marshall the man, for instance, how happy his marriage to Isabel de Clare really was is a matter of conjecture. However, based on what we do know from contemporary accounts Chadwick's interpretation of his long life seems to me a scholarly and reasonable one. The Marshal has become such a hero of mine now that I've promised myself that one fine day I will make the pilgrimage to London and visit his tomb in the Templar Church off Fleet Street. As I'm starting to suspect that William was quite possibly the greatest Englishman to ever live this seems the least I could do ...

We could I suppose have a long philosophical discussion on the nature of reality, a discourse somewhat akin to that old chestnut of wondering whether a tree falling in the forest makes any sound if there is nobody there to hear it. However I suspect the appetite for debating that type of (rather esoteric) subject matter on here is rather limited - and to be frank about it I can quite understand why. It seems to me the evidence that terrorists hijacked two commercial airliners and then crashed them into the twin towers of the WTC on 9-11 is so overwhelming that no reasonable person could possibly doubt it. The mechanism of how the resultant fires caused both towers to subsequently collapse also seems well understood. The Pentagon and 'Flight 93' incidents are less well documented of course, but here too the theory that a secret US conspiracy organised all these terrible incidents in order to further some sinister agenda of their own remains deeply unconvincing to my way of thinking. For me this theory reads more like the work of fiction it almost certainly is. Those of what we might call the 'conspiratorial mindset' will of course not accept any of this because their take on reality does not allow for that kind of explanation. From a historical perspective there is a surprisingly long tradition of this paranoia-like behaviour in American society, is it not true that if you seek conspiracy/evil everywhere then sooner or later you'll probably find it? Anyone familiar with McCarthyism or 17th Century Salem and its notorious 'Witch Trials' might well be forgiven for thinking so. Perhaps only in a society as fundamentally free and open as the USofA is today would conspiracy theorists find the freedom to express these views in the first place ... this fact being yet another of life's little ironies.

Will the last player to leave please turn the lights off on his way out ...

Sometimes the power of music can instantly grant the viewer a profound insight into the heart of a character and what makes him 'tick' in a way that might take even a gifted scriptwriter many pages to convey. For example; in Jonathan Demme's memorable 1990 thriller 'The Silence of the Lambs' it seems to me the juxtaposition between the sublime sophistication of his musical taste (from JS Bach's 'Goldberg Variations') and Lector's utterly psychotic behaviour is employed here to striking effect: The artfully chosen music, when used in combination with a (very) graphic illustration of his capability for violence, tells us all we need to know about this man's nature. Lector may be a extreme example but like many people he is a unfathomable anachronism - urbane and educated yet capable of brute savagery too. Now imagine if you can this same scene without Bach and to my way of thinking it loses a key element of its power to shock. Indeed, following the commercial and critical success of 'Silence of the Lambs' Hollywood later went on to make another film that attempted to get inside Lector's 'head' as it were, but I doubt that effort was half as effective in achieving the aim as these few minutes of 'Bach and Butchery' were. PS - earlier I forgot to include the great John Williams in my list of noted film music composers - doh! Just Google his film credits and you will see just how massive a error that was.

My advice is just listen to the work of Elmer Bernstein and/or Bernard Herrman and you won't go far wrong. There is so much film music that I love out there that narrowing the choice down to a manageable top ten list of my personal favourites is a well nigh impossible task - but I'll give it a go anyway: 1 - Bernard Herrman's score for Hitchcock's 'Vertigo'. An object lesson from the master in how to score a film. 2 - Herrman again for his brilliant work on 'Psycho'. I can't even imagine the film without that score - and I'm not just referring here to the shower scene. 3 - Lalo Schifrin's main title music from 'Bullit'. A sound almost as glacially cool as Steve McQueen was. 4 - The Luftwaffe March from 'The Battle of Britain'. Bombers and bombast in perfect harmony. 5 - Ron Goodwin's theme from 'Where Eagles Dare'. A fine example of war film music. 6 - The utterly superb soundtrack from the Coen Brothers 'O Brother Where Art Thou'. A musical education that changed my life. 7 - Anything the great Ennio Morricone scored - once heard never forgotten. 8 - Vangelis and the revolutionary soundtrack he composed for 'Blade Runner' 9 - Anton Karas and his famous Zither theme from Orson Welles's 'The Third Man'. 10 - Last but certainly not least, Elmer Bernstein and this piece that captures the spirit of the film it accompanies perfectly:

And 30 minutes made a difference did it?

I'm much enjoying the new motoring series 'Cars That Rock' (QUEST Thursday) staring AC/DC legend Brian Johnson. First up was the Mini and although some might say that particular car has had more than enough TV worship lavished on it, Brian's natural enthusiasm and his keen sense of humour resulted in a most entertaining programme. Moving swiftly on from fish 'n' chips to caviar, this week our man treated us to a visit to the Bugatti factory in France where he got to see (and drive) some of the finest and most exclusive motor cars ever crafted by the hand of man. Indeed these cars are more than mere transportation, a Bugatti (old or new) is a veritable 'work of art' on wheels. Seeing Brian violently brake a mighty Veyron from over 200mph to a standstill with both hands lifted off the steering wheel was a truly remarkable sight. I wonder if perhaps his (v funny) guest appearance on Top Gear a little while ago was the spark that led to this series? Be that as it may, Brian is a natural at this type of thing, and although the two men obviously have very different personalities, in his genuine working class style and lack of artifice there is something of the Fred Dibnah about him I think. If you knew what I thought of Fred Dibnah then you'd also know that the comparison is intended as high praise indeed.

I wonder if our apparent interest in signing Kasper Schmeichel might explain Boruc's strange non appearance at the end of season players lap of honour? Any PL team needs at least two quality keepers of course, so he'll have to like it or lump it. But you can understand why the big man might be upset because he's been top class for us.

Thanks for the kind comments from my fellow Saints fans on here. To put things in perspective I've just seen on the news a sad story about a teenage boy losing his fight against cancer. So I'm well aware that in the grand scale of human tragedy the prospect of me losing both my job, and my seat, doesn't rank very highly at all. Nevertheless, St Mary's is a part of my life I'd hate to lose.

It's a lot of money to me but I'd renew now were it not for the fact that my employer decided to issue all staff with a redundancy warning notice last Saturday. I just can't sink £600 into a new ST not knowing whether I'm going to have a job, or not, in a few weeks time. I can only hope they make there minds up re who is for the sack before the end of the month when the renewal window closes. If it turns out I'm on the verge of the dreaded boot then I'm going to miss sitting with all my mates in the Chapel more than I can say. Perhaps some of you long term ST holders on here will understand when I say that I've had the same seat since 2003/4 and that 'community' feeling I get from our little part of St Marys means a hell of a lot to me.

Fun quiz. It turns out that I'm a natural Labour supporter (89%) with strong Conservative (85%) and Liberal (83%) leanings. All of which makes this test about as useful as most are.

Oh I quite agree, they are flawed films for sure. But I kinda think of them as the cinematic equivalent of 'comfort food'. Cheese on toast will never be a gourmet dish, but it's tasty all the same. The Matrix series on the other hand I haven't bothered to watch for many years.

There was some ham on display perhaps and Hayden Christensen is surely hewn from solid teak, but I'm not so sure the vast majority of the Star Wars cast delivered performances that I'd describe as truly "awful". The problem was undoutably more the severe limitations of the scripts George Lucas gave them to work with. But without Lucas there'd be no Star Wars in the first place, so let's give the guy a break. As for the prequels being terrible films ... well I'm not so sure I can agree with that either. ITV show them regularly on Saturday afternoons and if I've got nothing better to do at the time (such as going to St Marys for instance) I must admit I'll quite happily sit down in front of the TV, immerse myself in this universe Lucas created yet again, and watch them for the umpteenth time. I'm happy to concede this behaviour may be a tad odd ...

Surely we don't need a new draft excluder quite that badly do we?

I was at first somewhat wary of the new 'mini series' version of Fargo (Channel 4 Saturday) because the original Coen Brothers film is in my opinion little short of a masterpiece - and just like overpainting the Mona Lisa you don't mess with perfection do you? However, after watching just the first two instalments I've already been forced to the conclusion that it's bloody brilliant. Any attempt to explain all that is going on here would take me the rest of the day, so I'll restrict myself to saying that although that same unique 'sense of place' has been faithfully recreated here and most of the characters will be instantly recognisable to fans of the film, the actual plot itself has been substantially changed and much expanded. Coen fans can rest assured however that the film's wonderful head-on collision between the banal, and the extreme (this is the core of its appeal I think) has been recaptured quite superbly. You know that utterly pointless scene-by-scene recreation of Hitchcock's 'Psycho' that some fool made in 1998 ... well this is the polar opposite of that feeble effort. Any good series will require a good cast of course and Fargo is no exception to that rule. There are many excellent performances on offer (Billy Bob Thornton in particular) but there is perhaps one actor who does kind of stand out from the rest. That actor is not from Minnesota, he's not even a American, it is our very own Martin Freeman. The role is of course a absolute gift to any actor, but I had thought it would be impossible that anyone could possibly match William H Macy's towering achievement in the film. Remarkably Martin Freeman has somehow come perilously close to doing just that. Those with a taste for this type of (painful) thing can watch again a repressed and inadequate man gradually steer his pitiful life towards what must be its inevitable destruction, all the consequence of his own folly. If you haven't seen Fargo yet then get yourself down to that 4OD site and catch up, because if there is a better series on TV at the moment then I haven't seen it.

But it's a daft opinion. Go back to the video evidence that is the cause of this (bogus) outrage and pay careful attention to the audio. You will notice that he mumbles, he makes a 'n' sound, but at no stage does Clarkson actually employ the racist term in question. Indeed, realising his mistake, Clarkson by all accounts went out of his way to ensure that this was not broadcast anyway. Therefore on the evidence, he behaved foolishly (behaving foolishly has of course been central to his success) but he cannot possibly be guilty of an real offence as I understand the term. Now he may well have been thinking about THAT racist word. He may even have caused offence by making others THINK about that word. However my view is that it's probably better that what George Orwell once called 'thoughtcrimes' should remain offences that exist only in fiction, rather than actually being enshrined into the common law. .................................................................... PS, Top Gear has clearly become a huge commercial success for the BBC and this programme boasts a worldwide audience that I dare say is measured in the hundreds of millions. However, a space alien reading this thread could me forgiven for thinking that well nigh everyone despises him. This odd situation reminds me somewhat of Maggie Thatcher - the records show that she won three General Elections, but nowadays no one admits to ever voting for her!

'Nemesis: The Battle for Japan 1944-45' by Max Hastings. While he is best know perhaps as a newspaper editor and political commentator Max Hastings is also a military historian of some note - a reputation this fine book will surely only enhance. 'Nemesis' deals with the final stages of Japan's agonising defeat during WWII, from MacArthur's bloody Battle of the Philippines, to the jungles of Burma, and all points in between. So a vast subject then that deserves (and gets) a big book to do it justice. What makes this history so fascinating is the level of research Hastings's has gone into in order to explore the lesser know (to me anyway) aspects of the pacific war. Mainstream accounts of the action from a British or US perspective are comparatively commonplace, as in the story behind the nuclear destruction Hiroshima and Nagasaki for example. But the Japanese viewpoint is often less fully explored and as for the (terrible) experiences of some poor Korean 'comfort woman', or the awful suffering of the people of Manila during their 'liberation'... well to be frank about it these aspects of the conflict are seldom treated here in the west with the level of respect they deserve. Beautifully written and cogently argued, the conclusions Hastings draws here about the 'endgame' of the pacific war and Imperial Japan's appalling culpability in regard to the level of suffering they inflicted on so many seem almost incontrovertible. Nemesis is a fine example of just how well executed modern military history writing has become. Highly recommended.

You know what Halo, you're right, I may have been rather unfair with regard to 'Lewis'. To be frank about it I've only ever seen a couple of 'Lewis' stories and being in state of pseudo mourning for JT at the time I may not have been able to watch it without prejudice and give this series a fair chance. The next time it is repeated I'll 'endeavour' to watch it without the handicap of preconception and unrealistic expectations. Last week they showed what is perhaps my favourite 'Morse' - Deadly Slumber - a story in which our hero investigated a wealthy book-maker suspected of murdering a doctor who was implicated in a surgical accident that left his young daughter in a permanent coma. I suspect you will comprehend my meaning when I say that the final scene of this heart breaking story is as profoundly moving a moment as anything I have ever seen broadcast on a television screen. What a fantastic bloody effort that series was.

Success is generally considered to be a good reason to hold down a job, and I don't know that he really is any of the things you claim here. But if you prefer your television sanitised then you can always watch the 'One Show' or any one of a hundred equally bland programmes. It seems to me that anyone who has ever seen his programmes will know that you take what Jeremy Clarkson says will a pretty sizeable 'pinch of salt'.

He should apologise for this trivial incident and I see that he has - that should be the end of the matter as far as I'm concerned. I think those on here calling for Clarkson to be dismissed may well deserve the 'beige television' that type of thinking will probably bring. Okay he acts like a idiot at times, just like real Human Being's do, but Top Gear is a huge international success that entertains millions and earns the BBC a small fortune in the process. I can't see the beeb wanting to end that anytime soon. As Smirking has said, if you don't like him then turn over and watch something else instead.

I can easily understand why so many Saints fans want to see SRL go to the World Cup - I too think it would be great to see what the big man could do there given the chance. However, from a parochial SFC perspective, Rickie Lambert is still such a key player for us seeing him push his (30 something) body even further in all that heat next summer and run the risk of injuring himself - after all the game time he has already had this season - could well prove detrimental to the interests of this club next season. So before we climb on our high horses again let's pause a while and ponder whether letting younger players (such as Andy Carrol or Connor Wickham) take that last place is such a bad idea after all. Perhaps the best place for our Rickie next summer is relaxing in the shade on some beach somewhere, rather than sweating his b******s off half way up the bloody Amazon.