'TUNES OF GLORY'; A TRULY GREAT FILM.

I've just watched an oldish film, 'Tunes of Glory' starring Alec Guinness and John Mills, and with a superb supporting cast as well.

Most younger viewers will not have watched this and have probably never heard of its stars; if they have heard of the principal actors, they wouldn't have watched it because it's old and lacks the crash, bang wallop lunacy of the rubbish they habitually watch.

I've actually seen this film on several occasions and was every bit as gripped today as I have ever been. It's a wonderful story centering on the tensions created in a Scottish regiment when a new colonel, John Mills, is appointed. The senior Major who's been acting Colonel, Guinness, and the new Colonel have vastly different approaches to, experience of, and history of army life and the result is a brilliant film, culminating in the suicide of Mills and the collapse of Guinness as he realises, and tries to make up for, the enormity of the actions of himself and his fellow officers.

There is little background music other than is needed for the direct needs of the scenes and, what there is, is mostly provided by bagpipes, in my opinion the greatest instrument ever invented (and I'm not Scottish, or even have Scottish ancestry). The supporting cast are marvellous and the petty jealousies and little intrigues add to the whole effect of the film.

As 'Major Sinclair', Guinness should undoubtedly have been a genuine contender for the 'Best Actor Oscar', and yet he wasn't even nominated. Mills could easily have been in contention for 'Best Supporting Actor' but, again, wasn't even nominated. Of course, they weren't American and Guiness had won the Oscar only a couple of years before for 'Bridge Over the River Kwai', so their chances must have been reduced; the yanks do like to give their accolades to their own obscure 'stars', rather than to genuine talent, and only deign to go outside of their borders on rare occasions. Nonetheless, this is a film I shall watch again and again, and I'd encourage everyone else to see it at least once.

'GAY MARRIAGE' IS AN OXYMORON.

Noting some of the recent discussion about so-called 'gay marriage' makes me despair.

Marriage, by definition, is an act between a man and a woman. I don't take this view from any religious standpoint but from one of simple natural logic. Obviously, the various churches tend to look on the matter slightly differently and may well say that marriage, at its roots, is a religious sacrament, but it is still an arrangement between a man and a woman. To suggest that 2 men or 2 women can enter into a marriage is madness.

If 2 homosexuals, male or female, wish to enter into a formal union then I have no objection and neither should the state. Indeed, it might be argued that the state should introduce some form of legal arrangement, separate from marriage, that any couple can utilise in order to become a legally recognized pair, but this should not be referred to as marriage. It could, in fact, be suggested that the very idea of 'civil marriage' should be done away with and such unions could then be extended to any couple. However, 'marriage' of homosexuals in church really is an oxymoron.

Another consequence of all the recent 'equality' nonsense surrounding this and associated issues has been the lunacy that allows for a birth certificate to be altered in the event of its subject undergoing a sex-change operation; what lunacy. Surgery cannot change biological facts and for the state to pretend that it can is ridiculous. Again, we now have a situation in which children can be deemed to have 2 parents of the same sex, denying the biological necessity that one is male and one is female. Such crazy nonsense, so beloved of the left wing loonies who currently dominate so much of our lives, will inevitably create some horrendous problems in the future for those who are provided with a birth certificate which reflects such situations but, by then, the idiots who created the mess will be long gone.

Why do we all just sit back and let these things be imposed on us ? They are clearly rdiculous nonsense and yet the mass of the population does nothing other than whinge while having a pint at 'The Dog and Duck'. Will we never do anything more.

SCOTTISH NATIONALIST DRIVEL

Apparently, old 'Whatsisname' Salmond has had a life-long ambition to gain independence for Scotland. That said, he's also a true believer in the European Union and the Euro. His very compelling, if somewhat laughable and even lunatic arguments, would have Scotland being freed and reborn as a super-efficient economic nation within the EU. What planet does this cretin inhabit ?

Salmond loves to ignore reality in favour of his own highly restrictive approach to this matter. He seems to believe that Scotland is an economic dynamo waiting to be unleashed, rather than being the backwater that it is; he ignores the fact that Scotland was a centre of major engineering until the Scottish Trades' Unions destroyed this power base in the period between 1950 and 1990. He ignores the fact that Scotland's history is littered with failure rather than success and the fact that Scottish enterprise and innovation ended many years ago. He blames its failures wholly and squarely on its inclusion within the United Kingdom and on the 'unfair' way that it's been treated and ignores Scotland's inherent weakness.

Salmond is quick to blame such matters on the politicians who have ruled in Westminster for the last 300 years, without acknowledging that every Socialist administration in the last 100 of these years has been in power, at least partly and sometimes wholly, due to the votes of Scottish socialists. For the 48 years since 1964, Labour has been in power for 24; Salmond ignores this or, at least, ignores the fact that every Labour Government relies heavily on its Scottish support.

The United Kingdom was created in 1707 and attempting to unravel it today would be next to impossible, as well as being completely stupid. There is little real support for independence in Scotland, after all, the country hasn't been truly 'independent', since 1603; in fact, it hasn't existed as a separate entity since 1707 and the Act of Union. If Scotland did secede from the United Kingdom, how would it survive ? Salmond has few, if any, real and substantial answers to this simple question.

Salmond also happily ignores the most pertinent of all questions, that of the rights of the rest of the people of the United Kingdom. If Scots do want to be separated from the rest of us, that has a profound impact on those remaining in the Union; surely, therefore, they should also be entitled to a say. Equally, who does, in fact, have a say in Salmond's proposed referendum ? 'Scots' as a nationality, do not exist; identifying those who are entitled to vote is, therefore, another nightmare. Do English, Irish and Welsh, plus all others who live in Scotland have a vote ? What about Scots who live abroad ? How do you define who is a 'Scot' ?

The whole notion is ridiculous and yet it seems to have political credence. Why ? How ? Is the UK Government really so weak and pathetic that it can't tell Salmond where to go ? If so, what does that say about the "State of the Union" ?

FRANK CARSON : ANGELIC COMEDIAN.

It's reported that Frank Carson's funeral has been held in Belfast.

Carson was, without doubt, one of the funniest comedians of his age. If memory serves, he first came to the notice of a wider audience in 'Opportunity Knocks' and was then a regular in the 1970s series of stand-up comedy spots, 'The Comedians', a show that also launched the careers of many others; it was a show that was a 'must' in our house and Carson stood held and shoulders above most of the other performers.

His broad accent suited his style to a tee; his catch phrases, "It's the way I tell 'em" and "What a cracker", have almost become common language. His comedic talent was brilliant. 

Frank Carson brought laughter to millions and he will surely be missed by as many, and more.