The Angry Exile: Oh no, not again

The Hangman

Into our town the Hangman came,
Smelling of gold and blood and flame.
And he paced our bricks with a diffident air,
And built his frame in the courthouse square.
The scaffold stood by the courthouse side,
Only as wide as the door was wide;
A frame as tall, or little more,
Than the capping sill of the courthouse door.
And we wondered, whenever we had the time,
Who the criminal, what the crime
That the Hangman judged with the yellow twist
of knotted hemp in his busy fist.
And innocent though we were, with dread,
We passed those eyes of buckshot lead --
Till one cried: "Hangman, who is he
For whom you raised the gallows-tree?"
Then a twinkle grew in the buckshot eye,
And he gave us a riddle instead of reply:
"He who serves me best," said he,
"Shall earn the rope of the gallows-tree."
And he stepped down, and laid his hand
On a man who came from another land.
And we breathed again, for another's grief
At the Hangman's hand was our relief
And the gallows-frame on the courthouse lawn
By tomorrow's sun would be struck and gone.
So we gave him way, and no one spoke,
Out of respect for his Hangman's cloak.
The next day's sun looked mildly down
On roof and street in our quiet town,
And stark and black in the morning air
Was the gallows-tree in the courthouse square.
And the Hangman stood at his usual stand
With the yellow hemp in his busy hand;
With his buckshot eye and his jaw like a pike
And his air so knowing and business-like.
And we cried, "Hangman, have you not done
Yesterday, with the foreign one?"
Then we fell silent, and stood amazed,
"Oh, not for him was the gallows raised."
He laughed a laugh as he looked at us:
"Did you think I'd gone to all this fuss
To hang one man? That's a thing I do
To stretch a rope when the rope is new."
Then one cried "Murder!" and one cried "Shame!"
And into our midst the Hangman came
To that man's place. "Do you hold," said he,
"with him that was meant for the gallows-tree?"
And he laid his hand on that one's arm.
And we shrank back in quick alarm!
And we gave him way, and no one spoke
Out of fear of his Hangman's cloak.
That night we saw with dread surprise
The Hangman's scaffold had grown in size.
Fed by the blood beneath the chute,
The gallows-tree had taken root;
Now as wide, or a little more,
Than the steps that led to the courthouse door,
As tall as the writing, or nearly as tall,
Halfway up on the courthouse wall.
The third he took -- we had all heard tell --
Was a usurer, and an infidel.
"What," said the Hangman "have you to do
With the gallows-bound, and he a Jew?"
And we cried out, "Is this one he
Who has served you well and faithfully?"
The Hangman smiled: "It's a clever scheme
to try the strength of the gallows-beam."
The fourth man's dark, accusing song
Had scratched our comfort hard and long;
"And what concern," he gave us back.
"Have you for the doomed -- the doomed and Black?"
The fifth. The sixth. And we cried again,
"Hangman, Hangman, is this the man?"
"It's a trick," he said. "that we hangmen know
For easing the trap when the trap springs slow."
And so we ceased, and asked no more,
As the Hangman tallied his bloody score.
And sun by sun, and night by night,
The gallows grew to monstrous height.
The wings of the scaffold opened wide
Till they covered the square from side to side;
And the monster cross-beam, looking down,
Cast its shadow across the town.
Then through the town the Hangman came,
Through the empty streets, and called my name --
And I looked at the gallows soaring tall,
And thought, "There is no one left at all
For hanging, and so he calls to me
To help pull down the gallows-tree."
So I went out with right good hope
To the Hangman's tree and the Hangman's rope.
He smiled at me as I came down
To the courthouse square through the silent town.
And supple and stretched in his busy hand
Was the yellow twist of the hempen strand.
And he whistled his tune as he tried the trap,
And it sprang down with a ready snap --
And then with a smile of awful command
He laid his hand upon my hand.
"You tricked me. Hangman!," I shouted then,
"That your scaffold was built for other men...
And I no henchman of yours," I cried,
"You lied to me, Hangman. Foully lied!"
Then a twinkle grew in the buckshot eye,
"Lied to you? Tricked you?" he said. "Not I.
For I answered straight and I told you true --
The scaffold was raised for none but you.
For who has served me more faithfully
Then you with your coward's hope?" said he,
"And where are the others who might have stood
Side by your side in the common good?"
"Dead," I whispered. And amiably
"Murdered," the Hangman corrected me:
"First the foreigner, then the Jew...
I did no more than you let me do."
Beneath the beam that blocked the sky
None had stood so alone as I.
The Hangman noosed me, and no voice there
Cried "Stop!" for me in the empty square.

Maurice Ogden

Saturday, 26 February 2011

Oh no, not again

Last November Ken Frost at Nanny Knows Best blogged on Oldham council's decision to ban swimming goggles for health and safety reasons. And in Wales in June 2009, and Swiss Cottage in 2008, and Gloucester in 2005. It's been a recurring theme so he probably won't be shocked when he reads that the pool gauleiters are at it again:

Children have been banned from wearing goggles during school swimming lessons for fears they could hurt themselves.
Pen-pushers have slapped the ban on the swimming aids amid "fears" a pair could "snap" onto a child's face too hard, injuring them.
Parents branded the ruling by Oxfordshire County Council's healthy and safety brigade as "nutty" and "extreme."

I agree. I'd suggest that parents take no fucking notice whatsoever and stick to doing what they think best for their child.

However, bureaucrats defended its no-goggle policy claiming that it reflected national guidance provided by sports bodies.

Firstly, it's only fucking guidance, right? It's not an order. And secondly, 'national' is not the same thing as 'correct'. If national guidance said that it is imperative for the wellbeing of children that they swim only with heavy weights attached to their hands and feet would you do it? Would you? Of course you fucking wouldn't. Thirdly, national guidance takes no account of the individual and their requirements because, y'see, it's national - it can't possibly account for the tremendous variation inevitable in a country of more than 60 million people. And fourthly, looking at where the national guidance comes from it's bullshit to suggest that it's in anyway obligatory.

The ASA [Amateur Swimming Association] said it did not have a strict policy on goggle use, but offered guidance to pool operators and parents.
The STA [Swimming Teachers Association] said children should be encouraged to not wear goggles in swimming lessons, but recognised they may be necessary for medical or other reasons.

See? Only one of the two even feels goggles should be discouraged and neither of them have any legal authority whatsoever. And finally, just shut your fucking head holes and open your eyes long enough to take a look at people who swim a lot.

Clockwise from top left: Australia's Stephanie Rice, Grant Hackett and Leisel Jones, Britain's Darren Mews, Australia's Libby Trickett (coincidentally an appropriate reaction to banning goggles) and Ian Thorpe, and Britain's Caitlin McClatchley

Oh gosh. They all wear fucking goggles, don't they? In fact look at all the aquatic sporting events and you see that nearly all the competitors who spend a lot of time in the pool use goggles with the exception of water polo, in which their faces seem to be out of the water most of the time, and diving, which involves falling in as stylishly as possible before getting straight back out again. I think it's probably safe to say that the world's swimming stars do not all choose to wear goggles because they think having a line around your head is a good look.

Children will now need a medical reason for them to be allowed to wear the protective eye wear in the pool during school lessons.

No, you nannying twunts. You lot should need a specific reason for an individual child not to wear them, but if the parents are happy then you must pipe down and get lost. And unlike some other councils who've provided excuses for this ridiculous desire to ban anything that might be an issue Oxfordshire won't even do that.

A spokesman for Oxfordshire County Council refused to divulge the specific reason why goggles had been banned from its swimming pools.

So referring back to my earlier suggestion that parents simply ignore the pool gauleiters I'd add a second suggestion - that they refuse to divulge the specific reason why they're telling the gauleiters to fuck off. Or just wait until someone claims their eyesight has been damaged by pool chlorine caused by the lack of protective goggles. Then everybody will be told they can't swim without them.

'Kinell.