Carry on camping!!!

What do these two pictures have in common?

Answer: One is the box containing the key to the fire escape, the other is the distance to said fire escape.

The Interesting part is that my office is in between these two points.


Scenario: A fire blocks the main everyday door from safley beeing used. Yours truly and three colegues are then trapped in the our offices. We have the uncofortable choice of a) approaching burning area to receive potentially red-hot key and then scarpering back down the coridoor to the fire escape or b) burning in our rooms.

N.B. Although on the ground floor, escape via the windows is not an option as these are barred up.

I'm sure this all looked very good on paper when someone drew up the regulations, but the stupidity of the situation astounds me.

Lets just hope there isn't a fire ..... oh I forgot, the building is still wired with a 1960/70s installation and fuse box and too many kettles switched on at the same time fuses the whole thing. 

It's the little things that matter!

When you are tired even the smallest injustice can be enough to ruin your day. Just such an instance occurred last Sunday at the Orlen petrol station on the A2 between Lodz and Poddebice.

I was returning home after a very long and tiring weekend teaching in Warsaw and had to stop for petrol. I only had 30zl in cash and thought this would be enough to get me home.

Orlen stil has petrol attendants who pump the petrol for you and so I asked for 30zl worth. I am used to people sometimes misshearing my 30 as 40 and so had the money in my hand. The guy did his job and I replaced the cap and went in to pay.

After standing in a long que I finally told the woman at the desk my pump number and said 30zl placeing the money down at the same time. She looked at the money and said "And 37 grosze."

I said ofcourse "er no it was 30zl." To which she showed me her screen an stated again 30.37zl. I protested (calmly I think) that it was not me, it was the tall bloke who works there. She repeated her demand for 37 gr.

Now at this point let me explain, I am inclined to argue over the smallest things for the sake of a principle at the best of times; but in this case I truly didn't have any more money. If I did I would have got more petrol.

I said that it was not my fault and that it was the petrol attendants fault and that if they look at the CCTV they will see this. She ofcourse protested and pointed to the amount again. I repeated that it was not my fault and I'm not interested in her 37gr problem. She eventually gave up and cleared the till, putting the receipt down on the counter. I was a bit unsure as to whether that was the end of it, but took her refusal to talk to me ad a sign that I could go; and so left.

The moral of the story? A guy who can not stop a pump to within 1gr of the amount required should not be employed as a petrol pump attendent! Idiot!!!

Belarus and the false idolatry nature of sanctions

There seems to be an ever present vogue within international relations when it comes to how to deal with States that are considered at odds with the excepted view of what a State should be. Whether it be Iran and nuclear ambitions or Zimbabwe and political rights, the International Community and the international press congress around the idea of sanctions. We here of smart-sanctions and the like; strategically geared to hurt those in power, and not the normal citizen. Yet, looking back over the course of the post-war history it is difficult to see discernible examples of where sanctions brought about the desired regime change.

Jacek Pawlicki (Gazeta Wyborcza) in his January 31^st article claimed that the EU should stop pussy-footing about and start imposing real and punitive sanctions. Pawlicki claimed that the sanctions should be installed regardless of the side-effects (translated in Eurotopics as: “even if this means that parts of the country are reduced to poverty”). The journalist then went on to clarify that: “The impact of these measures could be softened by lifting the visa restrictions for ordinary Belarusian citizens or by providing numerous grants for young people or financial backing for independent media.”

The shear absurdity of this premise begs the casual reader to take stock and confirm that they have not inadvertently entered a dream-state. It only takes a cursory look at the history of sanction use to see that when employed non-specifically sanctions not only have little effect, they do indeed worsen the situation. Take Cuba for example; over forty years of a US embargo have not brought the pro-western outburst and collapse of the communist regime we assume they were intended to bring. Sanctions have allowed a dictatorial regime to justify itself as the defender of the nation against the “harsh imperialists”. Iran is yet another example where sanctions have had little effect and can be argued to have increased the patriotic fever in the country.

Sanctions no matter how “smart” invariable damage the ordinary citizen. Leaders, by the very nature of their position, manage to side-step such effects. In the process of damaging the average “Jo” sanctions increase a feeling of isolation and a need for a strong leader in troubled times. Therefore sanctions can have the direct opposite of the desired effect. Pawlicki's call for a lifting of visa restrictions seems a heartless joke in comparison. The knock-on effect of such sanctions and visa restrictions could be a deluge of poor hungry refugees leaving behind a bitter and trustless country to stick to its guns.

The EU should embrace Belarus and use positive tactics to attract ordinary Belorussians to “convert”. Lukashenko still has a large following of ordinary people. It is these ordinary people that must be won. Poland's cultural program (BELSAT TV broadcasts etc...) has far more potential for change. It is only with a true grass-roots change that any real democracy can be forged.