Tour de France -stage seven win for Brits Sky Team.

Chris Froome wins 'King of the Mountains' red dotted shirt

I sat spell bound by the fitness and energy of all the participants in the Tour de France bike race in this stage seven - Tomblaine to La Planches des Belles Filles. It was up a huge mountain pass - a gruelling uphill slog all the way by super fit bike riding athletes - each individual was super fit. I felt exhausted just watching it. There is a Team Sky - a Brit professional road racing bicycle team. As this race went on I was gripped, hoping Bradley Wiggins would steal enough points to go into an over all lead in the competition.

Then in the final sprint GB rider Chris Froome stole the show with a finishing burst that earned him the red polka jersey for 'King of the Moutains' point accumulation. Bradley Wiggins came third gaining enough point to wear the yellow over leading jersey. 

Bradley Wiggins wins overall lead up to stage seven of Tour de France and wears the yellow jersey during the next stage of the race.

King Xerxes I of Persia - His Dreadful Murder and Intrigue

King Xerxes, I was a famous Persian King who is known in the western world for his invasion of Greece. His huge army had a battle with 300 soldiers commanded by King Leonidas of Sparta. Because of this, King Xerxes has a demonised image among Europeans. This is because we view Greece as the mother of European civilisation and democracy. This is, of course, unfair on the Persian king and perhaps, the entire civilisation of Persia’s Achaemenid Dynasty.

This ancient Persian Dynasty is stooped in a rich history of which, the Greek invasion was a mere sideshow. That’s not taking away anything from the brave 300 of Sparta who all Europeans love and cherish.

King Xerxes, I of Persia lived from 519 BC until his death in 465 BC at the age of 54. His death and passing from this world is an affair of dreadful intrigue and murder. He was betrayed by a man called Artabanus and this man would try to rule in Xerxes' stead. Artabanus attempted to set himself up as regent after the death of the Persian King. He would almost destroy the declining Achaemenid Dynasty in the following months after Xerxes.

Before King Xerxes I was murdered, he is said to have had his brother and his entire family killed on the wishes of his wife and queen. One of his queens was named Esther, but the story of this queen was probably earlier in his reign. This Killing of his brother would obviously cause great tension in the royal household and make many jittery. His Queen Esther is celebrated as a heroine by Hebrews because she is remembered with affection for saving them from massacre and getting a high profile minister executed who was planning to have Jews killed in King Xerxes' name. This is a famous story, but such events and dealings within the Achaemenid household would cause tensions among other members. People who were, perhaps, less fond of this beautiful Jewish queen. The obscure lady who had risen to great power from the king's harem. When King Xerxes I was assassinated, there is no record of what became of Queen Esther. She may have died before hand or gone back to Israel or been slain too. The latter is unlikely, but if Xerxes is this powerful king with a harem of many women, perhaps Queen Esther had played her part in history and moved aside, drifting out of prominence yet leaving a wake of dissatisfaction for the king - whether she died, lived or left to fade from history. 

King Xerxes’ murderer, Commander of Royal Bodyguard – Artabanus, had come to the prominent position of the Royal Persian court. The Commander of the Bodyguard had gained strong religious support from Zoroastrian priests. He also acquired friends among the eunuchs – a powerful body of slaves that knew of harem intrigue and chatter. Artabanus also had seven sons who were put into prominent positions of the Royal Persian court. Artabanus was extremely calculating and very audacious in some form of planning and wanted to gain control of the Persian Empire and rule it directly. He had eyes and ears all about the court and access to much information. His ambition was outraged for good reasons. Despite not being related to the Achaemenid Dynasty; he might have had some distant blood line along the fringe that he thought to fashion into some legalised way of ruling. This would be once he had eliminated prominent Achaemenid persons of power. Perhaps he had heard of other relations resentful of their less prominent positions within the Royal Achaemenid family. Perhaps many were nervous of this queen who had seen murder done to the king's brother and family. There must have been a lot of tension and many might have thought Xerxes was losing his grip on his dynasty. 

King Xerxes, had an elder son who would succeed him called Prince Darius. Xerxes had many sons and daughters but Prince Darius was to be the successor. Another son, lower in line, was called Artaxerxes and it is possible that Commander of Royal Bodyguard Artabanus formulated a plan to eliminate King Xerxes and his eldest son Darius and somehow find a way to work through the younger Prince Artaxerxes.

Commander Artabanus got the close help of a powerful eunuch named Aspamitres and had King Xerxes I killed. It was then blamed upon Prince Darius as a parricide and he was quickly put to death. The vacuum of the Persian throne left Commander Artabanus as a regent dictator for a few months. History is not sure if Artabanus then tried to groom Prince Artaxerxes to his way. This would allow Artabanus to rule through the young royal or perhaps he might have tried to manipulate the young prince in some other way before taking total control over the Achaemenid Dynasty.

On the other hand, it is possible that the younger Persian Prince played along with the Commander of Bodyguard Artabanus, allowing him to eliminate all above. This would place an outside contender in direct line. It is not written so, but it could be. History is vague on this point. Whatever drove Commander Artabanus upon his ambitious crusade for power; it all went wrong when Prince Artaxerxes killed him. Some say, by personally stabbing the Commander of the Royal Bodyguard with his own sword. All of Commander Artabanus’ sons were quickly dispatched and put to death too. Then the eunuchs and priests, loyal to Artabanus, were killed. All who had supported the man were eliminated. None who tried to move and do things beyond their station in the Persian society could live.

After the death of the famous King Xerxes I of Persia and the brief interlude of a few months;  King Artaxerxes I reign from 465 BC to 424 BC began.

King Artaxerxes is seen as avenging the murder of his father King Xerxes I and elder brother Prince Darius. However, it is possible that the blame might have been put upon Commander Artabanus. It is difficult to imagine what Artabanus long term gain might be if he was not of Royal line. The society he lived in understood only things of nobility and bloodline. Was Prince Artaxerxes more involved in the plot? Or was he an unwitting pawn in over ambitious Commander Artabanus' plan?

Sinking Scharnhorst - traumatic event witnessed by British Sailor Norman Scarth.

The words below are the account of an interview by British Seaman, Norman Scarth, who was presant during the final moments of the Scharnhorst Battleship. He gave the moving interview to the BBC World Service.

On 26 December 1943 one of the great sea battles of World War II took place.

Germany's most famous battleship - the Scharnhorst - was sunk by Allied forces during the Battle of the North Cape.

Norman Scarth was an 18-year-old on board the British naval destroyer HMS Matchless, which was protecting a convoy taking vital supplies to the Russian ports of the Arctic Circle.

In a BBC World Service interview he described how he witnessed the sinking of the Scharnhorst:

Norman Scarth recalls:

On Christmas Day we had been ordered to join another convoy because it was rumoured that the Scharnhorst was out.

The Scharnhorst was greatly feared. She was the most successful fighting ship of any navy during World War II and she was the bravest ship.

We were full speed at 36 knots and going through those mountainous seas.

Norman as seventeen year old in navy blue
uniform of Home Fleet

It was a full gale blowing. To go through that at full speed, the bow would rise in the air and come down, hover there and come down with a clatter as if on concrete; mountains of water coming all over the ship.

We were ordered to join the 10th Cruiser Squadron - HMS Belfast, Norfolk and Sheffield. They had met up with the Scharnhorst and they had engaged her.

There was a brief skirmish, then the Scharnhorst broke off - she was a very fast ship - and with her superior speed she was able to get out of range.

But our vice-admiral guessed that she was heading north to attack this convoy that we had been escorting and the guess proved correct.

There was an awe of her reputation, the excitement that we may be able to end the career of this most dangerous threat to us, to Britain, to the Allies - and fear knowing what we were up against.

Hunted down

It was Boxing Day when we finally met up with 10th Cruiser Squadron and the Scharnhorst. She had abandoned her mission and set off for the Norwegian fjords, which was her base and safe haven.

She had a reputation and she deserved it.

It was pitch black and we shadowed with the use of radars.

We knew that she was heading straight towards HMS Duke of York, which was cutting off her escape. She was hit by the Duke of York and was damaged and her speed was slowed.

There was the Duke of York, the Scharnhorst, the 10th Cruiser Squadron with various destroyers and another cruiser, the Jamaica.

All of us met up and all hell broke loose. Although it was pitch black the sky was lit up, bright as day, by star shells - fired into the sky like fireworks - providing brilliant light illuminating the area as broad as day.

Towards the end we had been ordered to fire a torpedo. Because the weather had eased a little I had taken up my action station as lookout on the starboard wing of the bridge.

The Scharnhorst was close and she was lit up by the star shells and by the fires aboard her. As we steamed past to fire the torpedo I was the closest man - on the wing of the bridge - to the Scharnhorst.

She looked magnificent and beautiful. I would describe her as the most beautiful fighting ship of any navy.

Gesture of defiance

She was firing with all guns still available to her. Most of the big guns were put out. They were gradually disabled one by one. As we were steaming past at full speed a 20mm cannon was firing tracer bullets from the Scharnhorst.

A 20mm cannon was like a pea-shooter compared to the other guns and it could have no part in this battle, but it was just a gesture of defiance from the sloping deck of her.

And that's one of the things that remains in my memory - a futile gesture but it was a gesture of defiance right to the very end.

I grieve for those men every day of my life

I can picture that man on the sloping deck of the Scharnhorst. I can picture that man to this day.

Eventually it took 14 ships of the Royal Navy to find her, trap her and sink her.

At that point it went pitch black.

The star shells had finished and I presumed the Scharnhorst had been sunk.

We set off to do another torpedo run to fire from the port side and the Scharnhorst was nowhere to be seen.

So we slowed and we soon saw many men floating in the water - most of them dead, face down in the water, but some were alive.

We switched our searchlight on and I remember our captain calling out to the men in the water "Scharnhorst gesunken?" and the reply came back "Ja, Scharnhorst gesunken", so we threw scrambling nets down and began to haul these men aboard.

Thirty-six were saved out of 2,000 men.

We then received an order from the commander-in-chief to join the Duke of York. So we switched off the searchlight, pulled up the scrambling nets and steamed away.

We could still hear voices calling from the black of that Arctic winter night, calling for help, and we were leaving those men to certain death within minutes.

It seemed a terrible thing to do and it was. But it was the right thing to do.

If we had stayed a moment too long we could have joined those unfortunate men.

I can hear those voices and I grieve for those men every day of my life.

I've even had someone accuse me of being a traitor because I praised the bravery of the German sailors.

I can imagine their feelings as that searchlight went out and they heard that ship steaming away.

I truly can imagine the feelings of those men.

Veto Britain - David Cameron - Germany's European Union

I’m no politician or economist; just an ordinary worker – a cleaner, in fact, and British – an ‘ordinary Joe’ who is part of the electorate of UK. Like many Brits, I’m not anti-European and deep down I’m sure there must be something good about being in the European Union. After all, it is best to be friends and well connected with our neighbours like France and Germany or any of the other European nations.

When I listen to our own politicians they talk of the trade links being good and progressive for the UK. We pay huge sums of money into the Union. I think it amounts to the third biggest contribution behind Germany and France. However, France gets more back then the UK so I would also argue that ours is the second largest contribution. Again, if this is so; fair enough, we are after all in this Union of European nations, which were once called a ‘Common Market.’

I, as a Brit and only a humble cleaner, don’t see this Common Market thing anymore. It is now the European Union and I can’t remember when it changed. I am now reading things like fiscal Union, when European politicians speak, and federal Europe was being used a few years prior to this. As much as I like other EU nations, I’m reluctant to want to be more integrated with Germany pulling the purse strings. I’m not having a cheap pop at Germany or France (who seem to be agreeing with everything Germany wants at the moment) but I’m worried for my United Kingdom and why should I feel selfish because Britain will not renegotiate this new treaty on stronger fiscal union?

I can understand why Germany wants to adopt these hard austerity measures against the failing southern nations of the Euro Union, but why must the UK be forced to adopt these measures when the UK took the precaution of not joining the Euro currency when it was brought in by most Euro nations? The Euro currency had one level playing field that was spear headed by Germany – a great nation that in this day and age has made great and progressive strides in industry and commerce plus lots of other great things that a humble cleaner might not even think of. This great nation of Germany had inflation that is un-noticeable (say .025%) or something less. I’m inventing the low figure but I’m certain experts know it was low.

The other southern European nation were offered to join the Euro money club with larger inflation due to borrowing (say 25% or more) Was Germany expecting these nations to level out alongside their great economic performance or did they think they could always ride the storm? Were Germany and France honestly this naive? They must have realised they were adopting another nations inflation. Am I, the humble Brit cleaner, getting something wrong here? Is it me who doesn’t see the wood for the trees?

Perhaps I’m being too British – selfish and biased, but I honestly think David Cameron, our British Prime Minister, got it right when he walked away from the revised treaty that Germany UNDERSTANDERBLY wants. David Cameron wants his British government to adopt its own regulations towards our London banking industry, and as a Brit I do know what happens when money restrictions are put upon big business corporations. In the seventies when we Brits overtaxed them; they left and went somewhere else. Inflation was ripe and Europe called us the ‘Sick Man of Europe’. Again, this was probably true at the time.

Along came a real butt buster of a Prime Minister called Margaret Thatcher. She grabbed Britain by the scruff of the neck and really kicked our arses for years during the eighties decade. Christ do I remember some of her medicine. At the time I cursed this woman and her Conservative party, but she got inflation down and got the country up and running to some degree of decency. I hate to admit it, but she did and it leaves a bitter pill in my throat to admit she got some things right. After going through all of that, I remember feeling relieved when the UK did not want to join the Euro currency club. It was not a problem with Germany or France or the northern European countries, but I could not see the same efforts brought to bare against Italian, Greek or Spanish inflation by these respective nations. Even though, I'm a cleaner, I'm sure we were wise not to enter the Euro even when it marginalised us (UK) as a consequence.

When the economic strife came, because of the US economy, it reflected on all and the Euro has been badly hit. When British banks like the Royal Bank of Scotland and Northern Rock were in danger of going under; they were bailed out by British tax payers. We did not like this but we reluctantly went with our elected government and stabilised these banks. No burden was put on the EU. We brought in measures against big rewards for failure among big economic institutions, but these rewards remain for success and rightly so. We control this and do not want this dangerous European legislation that might drive these institutions abroad. Even though Britain is not involved in the Euro and remains better equipped to deal with the recession then most of the other European countries, we were still prepared to help, but we wanted concessions to protect our London banking industry. Europe must UNDERSTAND this.

It was the European Union that was intransigent and not the British before David Cameron used his veto. We can’t afford to adopt this legislation and would be very foolish to consider it. We control our own finance and think in terms of a Common Market. What is wrong with that? We are prepared to help but will not have this fiscal Union that will put us in Europe with Germany pulling the purse strings. I’m not being anti-German, but we don’t need that nation’s strong guidance like other countries in the EU do.

Now we have a situation in Britain where the Euro-phobics are gaining ground for us to leave the EU. This would be a great shame, but I’m beginning to see that sadly they could be right. When other European nations catch a cold; they want to bury themselves in Europe – we want to distance ourselves and sought it out.

We are marginalised in Europe by our own choice concerning currency and fiscal Union, but we still like the old Common Market aspect. You (the EU) could get help, but we (UK) don’t want your stringent regulations concerning our London institutions. Europe is pushing Britain out into the cold and it is the fault of Germany UNDERSTANDABLY wanting it her own way with the purse strings, because she has to concerning the Eurozone members. However, for none Eurozone members, who still retain their safe three star ratings and their own finances; Germany might not get what she wants on this front and she might need to throw the odd bone. The trouble in the Eurozone was Germany and France having ill-deserved confidence concerning other Eurozone countries’ abilities to level out and control borrowing. Also other non-Eurozone nations might reflect on this matter more before March and the next meeting.

Sadly, most Brits are delighted by David Cameron's veto because they think it might lead to a referendum on us leaving the EU altogether. They think this is an opportunity in that direction. I’m hoping it would not come to this, but how long will Britain stay in the cold before she looks in on herself? The UK will not conform with German led Eurozone Europe on this and I think the cross roads is fast approaching. I don't think there is a way out and perhaps there might come an amicable parting of the ways in the near future.