Marble, AD 66-8

Celebrating Nero's success over the Parthians, the breastplate of this statue depicts the emperor as the Sun riding in his chariot. The same image decorated the awning of the Theatre of Pompey in Rome during Tiridates's coronation. Below, two mythological figures symbolise the Parthian submission to Rome. The statue originall carried a portrait of Nero like the one displayed above, stressing his martial qualities.

[British Museum]

 

Nero: the Man Behind the Myth

(May - Oct 2021)

 

Nero is known as one of Rome's most infamous rulers, notorious for his cruelty, debauchery and madness.

The last male descendant of the emperor Augustus, Nero succeeded to the throne in AD 54 aged just 16 and died a violent death at 30. His turbulent rule saw momentous events including the Great Fire of Rome, Boudicca's rebellion in Britain, the execution of his own mother and first wife, grand projects and extravagant excesses.

Drawing on the latest research, this major exhibition questions the traditional narrative of the ruthless tyrant and eccentric performer, revealing a different Nero, a populist leader at a time of great change in Roman society.

Through some 200 spectacular objects, from the imperial palace in Rome to the streets of Pompeii, follow the young emperor’s rise and fall and make up your own mind about Nero. Was he a young, inexperienced ruler trying his best in a divided society, or the merciless, matricidal megalomaniac history has painted him to be?

 

Nero was the 5th emperor of Rome and the last of Rome’s first dynasty, the Julio-Claudians, founded by Augustus (the adopted son of Julius Caesar). Nero is known as one of Rome’s most infamous rulers, notorious for his cruelty and debauchery. He ascended to power in AD 54 aged just 16 and died at 30. He ruled at a time of great social and political change, overseeing momentous events such as the Great Fire of Rome and Boudica’s rebellion in Britain. He allegedly killed his mother and two of his wives, only cared about his art and had very little interest in ruling the empire.

Most of what we know about Nero comes from the surviving works of three historians – Tacitus, Suetonius and Cassius Dio. All written decades after Nero’s death, their accounts have long shaped our understanding of this emperor’s rule. However, far from being impartial narrators presenting objective accounts of past events, these authors and their sources wrote with a very clear agenda in mind. Nero’s demise brought forward a period of chaos and civil war – one that ended only when a new dynasty seized power, the Flavians. Authors writing under the Flavians all had an interest in legitimising the new ruling family by portraying the last of the Julio-Claudians in the worst possible light, turning history into propaganda. These accounts became the ‘historical’ sources used by later historians, therefore perpetuating a fabricated image of Nero, which has survived all the way to the present.

Nero was born Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus on 15 December AD 37.

He was the son of Gnaeus Domitius Ahenobarbus and Agrippina the Younger. Both Gnaeus and Agrippina were the grandchildren of Augustus, making Nero Augustus’ great, great grandson with a strong claim to power.

Nero was only two years old when his mother was exiled and three when his father died. His inheritance was taken from him and he was sent to live with his aunt. However, Nero’s fate changed again when Claudius became emperor, restoring the boy’s property and recalling his mother Agrippina from exile.

In AD 49 the emperor Claudius married Agrippina, and adopted Nero the following year. It is at this point that Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus changed his name to Nero Claudius Caesar Drusus Germanicus. In Roman times it was normal to change your name when adopted, abandoning your family name in favour of your adoptive father’s. Nero was a common name among members of the Claudian family, especially in Claudius’ branch.

Nero and Agrippina offered Claudius a politically useful link back to Augustus, strengthening his position.

Claudius appeared to favour Nero over his natural son, Britannicus, marking Nero as the designated heir.

When Claudius died in AD 54, Nero became emperor just two months before turning 17.

As he was supported by both the army and the senate, his rise to power was smooth. His mother Agrippina exerted a significant influence, especially at the beginning of his rule.

The Roman historians Tacitus, Suetonius and Cassius Dio all claim that Nero, fed up with Agrippina’s interference, decided to kill her.

Given the lack of eyewitnesses, there is no way of knowing if or how this happened. However, this did not stop historians from fabricating dramatic stories of Agrippina’s murder, asserting that Nero tried (and failed) to kill her with a boat engineered to sink, before sending his men to do the job.

Agrippina allegedly told them to stab her in the womb that bore Nero, her last words clearly borrowed from stage plays.

It is entirely possible, as claimed by Nero himself, that Agrippina chose (or was more likely forced) to take her own life after her plot against her son was discovered.

Early in his rule, Nero had to contend with a rebellion in the newly conquered province of Britain.

In AD 60–61, Queen Boudica of the Iceni tribe led a revolt against the Romans, attacking and laying waste to important Roman settlements. The possible causes of the rebellion were numerous – the greed of the Romans exploiting the newly conquered territories, the recalling of loans made to local leaders, ongoing conflict in Wales and, above all, violence against the family of Prasutagus, Boudica’s husband and king of the Iceni.

Boudica and the rebels destroyed Colchester, London and St Albans before being heavily defeated by Roman troops. After the uprising, the governor of Britain Suetonius Paulinus introduced harsher laws against the Britons, until Nero replaced him with the more conciliatory governor Publius Petronius Turpilianus.

The marriage between Nero and Octavia, aged 15 and 13/14 at the time, was arranged by their parents in order to further legitimise Nero’s claim to the throne. Octavia was the daughter of the emperor Claudius from a previous marriage, so when Claudius married Agrippina and adopted her son Nero, Nero and Octavia became brother and sister. In order to arrange their marriage, Octavia had to be adopted into another family.

Their marriage was not a happy one. According to ancient writers, Nero had various affairs until his lover Poppaea Sabina convinced him to divorce his wife. Octavia was first exiled then executed in AD 62 on adultery charges. According to ancient writers, her banishment and death caused great unrest among the public, who sympathised with the dutiful Octavia.

No further motives were offered for Octavia’s death other than Nero’s passion for Poppaea, and we will probably never know what transpired at court. The fact that Octavia couldn’t produce an heir while Poppaea was pregnant with Nero’s daughter likely played an important role in deciding Octavia’s fate.

On 19 July AD 64, a fire started close to the Circus Maximus. The flames soon encompassed the entire city of Rome and the fire raged for nine days. Only four of the 14 districts of the capital were spared, while three were completely destroyed.

Rome had already been razed by flames – and would be again in its long history – but this event was so severe it came to be known as the Great Fire of Rome.

Later historians blamed Nero for the event, claiming that he set the capital ablaze in order to clear land for the construction of a vast new palace. According to Suetonius and Cassius Dio, Nero took in the view of the burning city from the imperial residence while playing the lyre and singing about the fall of Troy. This story, however, is fictional.

Tacitus, the only historian who was actually alive at the time of the Great Fire of Rome (although only 8 years old), wrote that Nero was not even in Rome when the fire started, but returned to the capital and led the relief efforts.

Tacitus, Suetonius and Cassius Dio all describe Nero as being blinded by passion for his wife Poppaea, yet they accuse him of killing her, allegedly by kicking her in an outburst of rage while she was pregnant.

Interestingly, pregnant women being kicked to death by enraged husbands is a recurring theme in ancient literature, used to explore the (self) destructive tendencies of autocrats. The Greek writer Herodotus tells the story of how the Persian king Cambyses kicked his pregnant wife in the stomach, causing her death. A similar episode is told of Periander, tyrant of Corinth. Nero is just one of many allegedly ‘mad’ tyrants for which this literary convention was used.

Poppaea probably died from complications connected with her pregnancy and not at Nero’s hands. She was given a lavish funeral and was deified.

Centred on greater Iran, the Parthian empire was a major political and cultural power and a long-standing enemy of Rome. The two powers had long been contending for control over the buffer state of Armenia and open conflict sparked again during Nero’s rule. The Parthian War started in AD 58 and, after initial victories and following set-backs, ended in AD 63 when a diplomatic solution was reached between Nero and the Parthian king Vologases I.

According to this settlement Tiridates, brother of the Parthian king, would rule over Armenia, but only after having travelled all the way to Rome to be crowned by Nero.

The journey lasted 9 months, Tiridates’ retinue included 3,000 Parthian horsemen and many Roman soldiers. The coronation ceremony took place in the summer of AD 66 and the day was celebrated with much pomp: all the people of Rome saw the new king of Armenia kneeling in front of Nero. This was the Golden Day of Nero’s rule

In AD 68, Vindex, the governor of Gaul (France), rebelled against Nero and declared his support for Galba, the governor of Spain. Vindex was defeated in battle by troops loyal to Nero, yet Galba started gaining more military support.

It was at this point that Nero lost the support of Rome’s people due to a grain shortage, caused by a rebellious commander who cut the crucial food supply from Egypt to the capital. Abandoned by the people and declared an enemy of the state by the senate, Nero tried to flee Rome and eventually committed suicide.

Following his death, Nero’s memory was condemned (a practice called damnatio memoriae) and the images of the emperor were destroyed, removed or reworked. However, Nero was still given an expensive funeral and for a long time people decorated his tomb with flowers, some even believing he was still alive.

After Nero’s death, civil war ensued. At the end of the so-called ‘Year of the Four Emperors’ (AD 69), Vespasian became emperor and started a new dynasty: the Flavians.

[Francesca Bologna, curator, for British Museum]

 

Taken in the British Museum

From the autumn 2016 trip to Vietnam:

 

If ever there were a good way to finish up a trip, this particular Sunday in October would be it. Before arriving in Hanoi, I honestly had exceptionally low expectations. A bit like Saigon, if you are to go online and try to look up a list of places to visit – basically a tourist’s stock photography checklist, as it may be – you don’t find much that’s appealing. Well…I didn’t, anyway, and as a result, I had pretty low expectations for Hanoi.

 

The charm and beauty of Hanoi, however, isn’t in any one particular place. It’s in the experience of the entire city. (I’d say the same for Saigon, but multiply that a few times for Hanoi.) On this day in the Old Quarter in particular, I kept finding myself thinking, “Oh, my God, I shouldn’t be this lucky as a photographer…” Today ended up being mostly about people, with a little food and historical locations mixed in.

 

As I mentioned in the last set of posting, today would start off a bit sad with Junebug leaving for China a day before I would. So, we were checked out of our room by 6:00 in the morning or so. The breakfast at the Art Trendy was wonderful. Buffet with a mix of made-to-order omelets mixed in. Strong work, Art Trendy, strong work…

 

When June left, I really had nothing to do since it was still six in the morning and I was temporarily homeless as I had to switch hotels. So…I sat around the lobby for about two hours (possibly slightly awkward for the poor girls working there, but oh, well; I had to sit somewhere).

 

Around 8:00, I finally dragged my old bones out of the hotel and walked the five to ten minutes down the street to the Aquarius, where I politely asked them to hold my non-camera bag until I come back around 1:00 in the afternoon to check in.

 

After that, I was finally off with my cameras to enjoy an early Sunday morning in the bustling Old Quarter. On the street where the hotel is situated are a number of restaurants where locals were jammed in to enjoy noodles, steamed buns, and the like. It was wonderful to be among that crowd (though someone tried to scold me ever so slightly for taking pictures of people eating).

 

Since this was right next to St. Joseph’s Cathedral – and it was Sunday morning – I found my way back into the church where we crashed the wedding the afternoon before and realized that I almost got locked into Sunday mass while walking around taking pictures. So…I stayed. I prayed. And my prayer was answered when I realized the side doors and even the back door were open. (Ok…I didn’t really think I was locked in a church, but it did feel like it a little bit.)

 

Upon exiting the church, a handful of frames under my belt, I walked along the lovely streets photographing shops and people. At Caphe, I piggybacked on someone else’s photo shoot – it looked like they were doing a promo for the place, or possibly just a personal shoot for five women, though I have a feeling it was the former. At any rate, I was quite pleased with that little set and am presenting quite a few of those here, even if they’re a little redundant.

 

My ultimate goal with this wandering was to find my way to the Hanoi Hilton. Now, I’m not taking about the hotel chain, of course, but rather the prison that U.S. prisoners of war sarcastically called the Hanoi Hilton during the Vietnam War. (This is the prison where Senator John McCain was interred while a POW, and there are one or two pictures to that effect here.)

 

This prison has a particularly interesting history (and morbid since…well…it’s a prison). It’s about a hundred years old and was founded by the French colonialists around the turn of the 20th century. During the first 50 years of its history, the French imprisoned Vietnamese insurgents and those who wanted independence. In the eyes of the French…renegades (hence the imprisonment). In the eyes of the Vietnamese – especially the current government – patriots and national heroes. If they were truly freedom fighters, then I would probably side with the current government on that one.

 

The French even had a guillotine installed here and overcrowding was a major problem. There were plenty of escape attempts, and more were successful than you may think, which is a little peculiar.

 

After the battle of Bien Dien Phu and the ejection of the French from the north (and before the U.S. got involved in the south), the prison changed hands and was under control of Ho Chi Minh. During the Vietnam War, it became one of the main prisons for U.S. POWs, as I alluded to above.

 

The propaganda claims that the Vietcong were absolutely humane and decent with U.S. prisoners, allowing them to observe their religious rites (Christmas celebrations, etc.), allowed prisoners to smoke and enjoy leisure (board games, basketball, etc.), and claimed they were well-fed.

 

This is certainly how it’s presented in the prison/museum currently. If you were to go online, though, and try to find a contrary report, you would find that this was all coerced and staged to make it appear as if things were on the up and up. (For anyone curious, per my Vietnamese friends, the general education in Vietnam today is how terrible the French and U.S. were for colonizing and torturing the country and keeping it from its independence.)

 

So, what’s the truth of what really happened? Who knows? Outside of firsthand accounts, it’s impossible to know for certain and even then, memory can be a tricky thing. I tend to like to say the truth is always somewhere between two opposing viewpoints, no matter what the topic may be.

 

From an impartial and purely photographic point of view, the prison, currently a museum/memorial, is an interesting place to spend an hour or two. Some of the exhibits seem a bit cheesy, but some are quite tasteful and well done. There’s also an informational video. You’ll have to see this with a bit of imagination (the prison, that is), as at least half of it has been leveled for high rise buildings. At least there’s some tangible piece of it left to visit, including the main gate (Maison Centrale).

 

After about two hours here at the Hanoi Hilton, I walked over towards the Opera House to get a few daytime shots but, really, to get lunch at El Gaucho. I was looking forward to a proper steak. The prices were astronomical (though justifiable based on what I ate), though I just opted for a steak salad. It was so good I contemplated going back for dinner, but had other plans.

 

With a happy stomach, I went back to finally check in at the Aquarius Hotel and got my workout huffing up six flights of stairs each time I went out. I relaxed here for a few hours until 4:00 when a dear friend of mine came to town to see me.

 

Ngan and I had an ice cream at Baskin Robbins right in front of St. Joe’s before heading over to the Temple of Literature. This is a temple dedicated to education and, bless my soul, it’s a place where university graduates come for graduation pictures.

 

On this particular day – a warm, sunny, late Sunday afternoon – it was packed with college students. And it was beautiful to see that many people happy, full of hopes and dreams, and dressed in either cap and gown or traditional Vietnamese clothes. In short…I had a field day shooting for an hour here.

 

Around 5:00, Ngan had to head back to school, and I went back to my hotel. I had one more meeting. Hoa, who traveled around Thailand & Cambodia with me in May, flew back to see me this evening. She picked me up at 6:00 on her scooter and rode me all around Hanoi by evening.

 

She started by taking me to Ho Chi Minh’s Mausoleum (which I consider a lot more photogenic in its setting than the Great Gangster’s Mausoleum on Tiananmen Square). This one, at least, was in a parklike setting. At evening, it’s well-lit and you can find people relaxing in the grass in front of it. During the day, you can visit and there are quite a few buildings behind the mausoleum that you can also see.

 

After a few minutes here, Hoa took me by West Lake – the largest lake in Hanoi, as I mentioned yesterday – and just drove me around for over an hour, it seemed. My impressions that Hanoi (even out of the Old Quarter) seemed to be a good place to live – though I’d be concerned about the air pollution – and people here seemed to be happy. Also…Vietnamese really love their coffee.

 

We finally returned to the Old Quarter for dinner at one of the famous restaurants she recommended and she treated me to a wonderful dinner. I can’t recall what we ate (the Vietnamese names of it, anyway), but it was nice.

 

After dinner, she drove me over towards the Opera House and then, finally, we stopped by Hoan Kiem Lake in the heart of the Quarter and walked around the lake. It was getting close to 10:00 by this time, and I wanted to get back to the hotel to get a few hours sleep before waking up for my early flight in the morning. Hoa came to the airport with me to see me off.

 

If ever there were a great way to finish a great trip, this was it. I absolutely loved Vietnam – honestly, a lot more than I imagined I would, even with every single person I know who’d ever come here saying what a fantastic country this is – and would gladly come back. This seems to be one of the kinds of countries that you would never get tired of or, if you did, it would sure take a long time. With that, I’ll bid goodbye to Vietnam for now with the hopes that I’ll someday return to this land of amazing food, landscapes, and people.

 

As always, thanks for dropping by and viewing these pictures. Please feel free to leave any questions or comments and I’ll answer as I have time.

Greater Manchester Police (GMP) has welcomed 113 new police officers to the ranks.

 

The new recruits were sworn in at an attestation ceremony at Bolton Town Hall last night, Tuesday 24 October 2017.

 

Chief Constable Ian Hopkins, Police and Magistrate Peter Rogerson were in attendance at the legally binding event.

 

Family and friends of the new officers watched on proudly as each of them made an oath to uphold the office of constable with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality.

 

To find out more about Greater Manchester Police please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

 

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

 

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

 

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give a statement.

 

Greater Manchester Police proudly welcomed 140 new officers to the force at an attestation ceremony at Bolton Town Hall on the evening of Wednesday 8 January 2020.

  

In the presence of family and friends, the new officers took the Police Oath in front of magistrate Stephen Paine. In the oath they swore to uphold the office of constable with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality.

  

The ceremony marks the official commencement of their police duties.

  

Chief Constable Ian Hopkins welcomed each new recruit to the force.

  

Mayor of Bolton, Councillor Hilary Fairclough, was in attendance as was Andy Burnham, Mayor of Greater Manchester.

  

For more information about Policing in Greater Manchester please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

  

To contact Greater Manchester Police for a less urgent matter or make a report online you can also visit www.gmp.police.uk.

  

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

  

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

  

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give evidence.

 

Greater Manchester Police proudly welcomed 140 new officers to the force at an attestation ceremony at Bolton Town Hall on the evening of Wednesday 8 January 2020.

  

In the presence of family and friends, the new officers took the Police Oath in front of magistrate Stephen Paine. In the oath they swore to uphold the office of constable with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality.

  

The ceremony marks the official commencement of their police duties.

  

Chief Constable Ian Hopkins welcomed each new recruit to the force.

  

Mayor of Bolton, Councillor Hilary Fairclough, was in attendance as was Andy Burnham, Mayor of Greater Manchester.

  

For more information about Policing in Greater Manchester please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

  

To contact Greater Manchester Police for a less urgent matter or make a report online you can also visit www.gmp.police.uk.

  

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

  

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

  

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give evidence.

 

Greater Manchester Police proudly welcomed 140 new officers to the force at an attestation ceremony at Bolton Town Hall on the evening of Wednesday 8 January 2020.

  

In the presence of family and friends, the new officers took the Police Oath in front of magistrate Stephen Paine. In the oath they swore to uphold the office of constable with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality.

  

The ceremony marks the official commencement of their police duties.

  

Chief Constable Ian Hopkins welcomed each new recruit to the force.

  

Mayor of Bolton, Councillor Hilary Fairclough, was in attendance as was Andy Burnham, Mayor of Greater Manchester.

  

For more information about Policing in Greater Manchester please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

  

To contact Greater Manchester Police for a less urgent matter or make a report online you can also visit www.gmp.police.uk.

  

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

  

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

  

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give evidence.

 

Yesterday, Tuesday 22 January 2019, Greater Manchester Police welcomed 100 new recruits to the Force. The officers were officially sworn in at a formal ceremony attended by Chief Constable Ian Hopkins, senior officers and magistrate Stephen Paine.

 

The attestation ceremony was held at Stockport Town Hall.

 

The Mayor of Stockport, Councillor Walter Brett, was also on hand to welcome the new recruits.

 

Family and friends watched the new officers make their oath to uphold their role with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality throughout their time in post.

 

New recruits have to complete a two year probation period which includes classroom based learning and a year of active patrol. During their training they will have the same of level of authority as regular officers, including the power of arrest.

 

The new recruits are replacing those who have either retired or left the organisation and therefore helping GMP to maintain current officer numbers.

 

To find out more about Greater Manchester Police please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

 

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

 

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

 

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give a statement.

Yesterday, Tuesday 22 January 2019, Greater Manchester Police welcomed 100 new recruits to the Force. The officers were officially sworn in at a formal ceremony attended by Chief Constable Ian Hopkins, senior officers and magistrate Stephen Paine.

 

The attestation ceremony was held at Stockport Town Hall.

 

The Mayor of Stockport, Councillor Walter Brett, was also on hand to welcome the new recruits.

 

Family and friends watched the new officers make their oath to uphold their role with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality throughout their time in post.

 

New recruits have to complete a two year probation period which includes classroom based learning and a year of active patrol. During their training they will have the same of level of authority as regular officers, including the power of arrest.

 

The new recruits are replacing those who have either retired or left the organisation and therefore helping GMP to maintain current officer numbers.

 

To find out more about Greater Manchester Police please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

 

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

 

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

 

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give a statement.

Yesterday, Tuesday 22 January 2019, Greater Manchester Police welcomed 100 new recruits to the Force. The officers were officially sworn in at a formal ceremony attended by Chief Constable Ian Hopkins, senior officers and magistrate Stephen Paine.

 

The attestation ceremony was held at Stockport Town Hall.

 

The Mayor of Stockport, Councillor Walter Brett, was also on hand to welcome the new recruits.

 

Family and friends watched the new officers make their oath to uphold their role with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality throughout their time in post.

 

New recruits have to complete a two year probation period which includes classroom based learning and a year of active patrol. During their training they will have the same of level of authority as regular officers, including the power of arrest.

 

The new recruits are replacing those who have either retired or left the organisation and therefore helping GMP to maintain current officer numbers.

 

To find out more about Greater Manchester Police please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

 

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

 

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

 

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give a statement.

Marble, AD 1-50

Germanicus, a grandson of Augustus's sister, was a young and popular general. Augustus obliged Tiberius to adopt Germanicus although Tiberius already had a son of his own. This caused tensions. Germanicus died in Syria, allegedly from poisoning.

[British Museum]

 

Nero: the Man Behind the Myth

(May - Oct 2021)

 

Nero is known as one of Rome's most infamous rulers, notorious for his cruelty, debauchery and madness.

The last male descendant of the emperor Augustus, Nero succeeded to the throne in AD 54 aged just 16 and died a violent death at 30. His turbulent rule saw momentous events including the Great Fire of Rome, Boudicca's rebellion in Britain, the execution of his own mother and first wife, grand projects and extravagant excesses.

Drawing on the latest research, this major exhibition questions the traditional narrative of the ruthless tyrant and eccentric performer, revealing a different Nero, a populist leader at a time of great change in Roman society.

Through some 200 spectacular objects, from the imperial palace in Rome to the streets of Pompeii, follow the young emperor’s rise and fall and make up your own mind about Nero. Was he a young, inexperienced ruler trying his best in a divided society, or the merciless, matricidal megalomaniac history has painted him to be?

 

Nero was the 5th emperor of Rome and the last of Rome’s first dynasty, the Julio-Claudians, founded by Augustus (the adopted son of Julius Caesar). Nero is known as one of Rome’s most infamous rulers, notorious for his cruelty and debauchery. He ascended to power in AD 54 aged just 16 and died at 30. He ruled at a time of great social and political change, overseeing momentous events such as the Great Fire of Rome and Boudica’s rebellion in Britain. He allegedly killed his mother and two of his wives, only cared about his art and had very little interest in ruling the empire.

Most of what we know about Nero comes from the surviving works of three historians – Tacitus, Suetonius and Cassius Dio. All written decades after Nero’s death, their accounts have long shaped our understanding of this emperor’s rule. However, far from being impartial narrators presenting objective accounts of past events, these authors and their sources wrote with a very clear agenda in mind. Nero’s demise brought forward a period of chaos and civil war – one that ended only when a new dynasty seized power, the Flavians. Authors writing under the Flavians all had an interest in legitimising the new ruling family by portraying the last of the Julio-Claudians in the worst possible light, turning history into propaganda. These accounts became the ‘historical’ sources used by later historians, therefore perpetuating a fabricated image of Nero, which has survived all the way to the present.

Nero was born Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus on 15 December AD 37.

He was the son of Gnaeus Domitius Ahenobarbus and Agrippina the Younger. Both Gnaeus and Agrippina were the grandchildren of Augustus, making Nero Augustus’ great, great grandson with a strong claim to power.

Nero was only two years old when his mother was exiled and three when his father died. His inheritance was taken from him and he was sent to live with his aunt. However, Nero’s fate changed again when Claudius became emperor, restoring the boy’s property and recalling his mother Agrippina from exile.

In AD 49 the emperor Claudius married Agrippina, and adopted Nero the following year. It is at this point that Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus changed his name to Nero Claudius Caesar Drusus Germanicus. In Roman times it was normal to change your name when adopted, abandoning your family name in favour of your adoptive father’s. Nero was a common name among members of the Claudian family, especially in Claudius’ branch.

Nero and Agrippina offered Claudius a politically useful link back to Augustus, strengthening his position.

Claudius appeared to favour Nero over his natural son, Britannicus, marking Nero as the designated heir.

When Claudius died in AD 54, Nero became emperor just two months before turning 17.

As he was supported by both the army and the senate, his rise to power was smooth. His mother Agrippina exerted a significant influence, especially at the beginning of his rule.

The Roman historians Tacitus, Suetonius and Cassius Dio all claim that Nero, fed up with Agrippina’s interference, decided to kill her.

Given the lack of eyewitnesses, there is no way of knowing if or how this happened. However, this did not stop historians from fabricating dramatic stories of Agrippina’s murder, asserting that Nero tried (and failed) to kill her with a boat engineered to sink, before sending his men to do the job.

Agrippina allegedly told them to stab her in the womb that bore Nero, her last words clearly borrowed from stage plays.

It is entirely possible, as claimed by Nero himself, that Agrippina chose (or was more likely forced) to take her own life after her plot against her son was discovered.

Early in his rule, Nero had to contend with a rebellion in the newly conquered province of Britain.

In AD 60–61, Queen Boudica of the Iceni tribe led a revolt against the Romans, attacking and laying waste to important Roman settlements. The possible causes of the rebellion were numerous – the greed of the Romans exploiting the newly conquered territories, the recalling of loans made to local leaders, ongoing conflict in Wales and, above all, violence against the family of Prasutagus, Boudica’s husband and king of the Iceni.

Boudica and the rebels destroyed Colchester, London and St Albans before being heavily defeated by Roman troops. After the uprising, the governor of Britain Suetonius Paulinus introduced harsher laws against the Britons, until Nero replaced him with the more conciliatory governor Publius Petronius Turpilianus.

The marriage between Nero and Octavia, aged 15 and 13/14 at the time, was arranged by their parents in order to further legitimise Nero’s claim to the throne. Octavia was the daughter of the emperor Claudius from a previous marriage, so when Claudius married Agrippina and adopted her son Nero, Nero and Octavia became brother and sister. In order to arrange their marriage, Octavia had to be adopted into another family.

Their marriage was not a happy one. According to ancient writers, Nero had various affairs until his lover Poppaea Sabina convinced him to divorce his wife. Octavia was first exiled then executed in AD 62 on adultery charges. According to ancient writers, her banishment and death caused great unrest among the public, who sympathised with the dutiful Octavia.

No further motives were offered for Octavia’s death other than Nero’s passion for Poppaea, and we will probably never know what transpired at court. The fact that Octavia couldn’t produce an heir while Poppaea was pregnant with Nero’s daughter likely played an important role in deciding Octavia’s fate.

On 19 July AD 64, a fire started close to the Circus Maximus. The flames soon encompassed the entire city of Rome and the fire raged for nine days. Only four of the 14 districts of the capital were spared, while three were completely destroyed.

Rome had already been razed by flames – and would be again in its long history – but this event was so severe it came to be known as the Great Fire of Rome.

Later historians blamed Nero for the event, claiming that he set the capital ablaze in order to clear land for the construction of a vast new palace. According to Suetonius and Cassius Dio, Nero took in the view of the burning city from the imperial residence while playing the lyre and singing about the fall of Troy. This story, however, is fictional.

Tacitus, the only historian who was actually alive at the time of the Great Fire of Rome (although only 8 years old), wrote that Nero was not even in Rome when the fire started, but returned to the capital and led the relief efforts.

Tacitus, Suetonius and Cassius Dio all describe Nero as being blinded by passion for his wife Poppaea, yet they accuse him of killing her, allegedly by kicking her in an outburst of rage while she was pregnant.

Interestingly, pregnant women being kicked to death by enraged husbands is a recurring theme in ancient literature, used to explore the (self) destructive tendencies of autocrats. The Greek writer Herodotus tells the story of how the Persian king Cambyses kicked his pregnant wife in the stomach, causing her death. A similar episode is told of Periander, tyrant of Corinth. Nero is just one of many allegedly ‘mad’ tyrants for which this literary convention was used.

Poppaea probably died from complications connected with her pregnancy and not at Nero’s hands. She was given a lavish funeral and was deified.

Centred on greater Iran, the Parthian empire was a major political and cultural power and a long-standing enemy of Rome. The two powers had long been contending for control over the buffer state of Armenia and open conflict sparked again during Nero’s rule. The Parthian War started in AD 58 and, after initial victories and following set-backs, ended in AD 63 when a diplomatic solution was reached between Nero and the Parthian king Vologases I.

According to this settlement Tiridates, brother of the Parthian king, would rule over Armenia, but only after having travelled all the way to Rome to be crowned by Nero.

The journey lasted 9 months, Tiridates’ retinue included 3,000 Parthian horsemen and many Roman soldiers. The coronation ceremony took place in the summer of AD 66 and the day was celebrated with much pomp: all the people of Rome saw the new king of Armenia kneeling in front of Nero. This was the Golden Day of Nero’s rule

In AD 68, Vindex, the governor of Gaul (France), rebelled against Nero and declared his support for Galba, the governor of Spain. Vindex was defeated in battle by troops loyal to Nero, yet Galba started gaining more military support.

It was at this point that Nero lost the support of Rome’s people due to a grain shortage, caused by a rebellious commander who cut the crucial food supply from Egypt to the capital. Abandoned by the people and declared an enemy of the state by the senate, Nero tried to flee Rome and eventually committed suicide.

Following his death, Nero’s memory was condemned (a practice called damnatio memoriae) and the images of the emperor were destroyed, removed or reworked. However, Nero was still given an expensive funeral and for a long time people decorated his tomb with flowers, some even believing he was still alive.

After Nero’s death, civil war ensued. At the end of the so-called ‘Year of the Four Emperors’ (AD 69), Vespasian became emperor and started a new dynasty: the Flavians.

[Francesca Bologna, curator, for British Museum]

 

Taken in the British Museum

Marble, AD 1-100

The young boy's job was to light the way at night with his lantern. He had fallen asleep, dutifully waiting for his master. The reality was starkly different. In AD 61, a distinguished senator was murdered by one of his household staff. Despite protests by the people, Nero backed the senate's decision to upholad an existing law. It stipulated that all enslaved members of the owner's household should be executed - a ruthless collective punishment intended as a deterrent.

[British Museum]

 

Nero: the Man Behind the Myth

(May - Oct 2021)

 

Nero is known as one of Rome's most infamous rulers, notorious for his cruelty, debauchery and madness.

The last male descendant of the emperor Augustus, Nero succeeded to the throne in AD 54 aged just 16 and died a violent death at 30. His turbulent rule saw momentous events including the Great Fire of Rome, Boudicca's rebellion in Britain, the execution of his own mother and first wife, grand projects and extravagant excesses.

Drawing on the latest research, this major exhibition questions the traditional narrative of the ruthless tyrant and eccentric performer, revealing a different Nero, a populist leader at a time of great change in Roman society.

Through some 200 spectacular objects, from the imperial palace in Rome to the streets of Pompeii, follow the young emperor’s rise and fall and make up your own mind about Nero. Was he a young, inexperienced ruler trying his best in a divided society, or the merciless, matricidal megalomaniac history has painted him to be?

 

Nero was the 5th emperor of Rome and the last of Rome’s first dynasty, the Julio-Claudians, founded by Augustus (the adopted son of Julius Caesar). Nero is known as one of Rome’s most infamous rulers, notorious for his cruelty and debauchery. He ascended to power in AD 54 aged just 16 and died at 30. He ruled at a time of great social and political change, overseeing momentous events such as the Great Fire of Rome and Boudica’s rebellion in Britain. He allegedly killed his mother and two of his wives, only cared about his art and had very little interest in ruling the empire.

Most of what we know about Nero comes from the surviving works of three historians – Tacitus, Suetonius and Cassius Dio. All written decades after Nero’s death, their accounts have long shaped our understanding of this emperor’s rule. However, far from being impartial narrators presenting objective accounts of past events, these authors and their sources wrote with a very clear agenda in mind. Nero’s demise brought forward a period of chaos and civil war – one that ended only when a new dynasty seized power, the Flavians. Authors writing under the Flavians all had an interest in legitimising the new ruling family by portraying the last of the Julio-Claudians in the worst possible light, turning history into propaganda. These accounts became the ‘historical’ sources used by later historians, therefore perpetuating a fabricated image of Nero, which has survived all the way to the present.

Nero was born Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus on 15 December AD 37.

He was the son of Gnaeus Domitius Ahenobarbus and Agrippina the Younger. Both Gnaeus and Agrippina were the grandchildren of Augustus, making Nero Augustus’ great, great grandson with a strong claim to power.

Nero was only two years old when his mother was exiled and three when his father died. His inheritance was taken from him and he was sent to live with his aunt. However, Nero’s fate changed again when Claudius became emperor, restoring the boy’s property and recalling his mother Agrippina from exile.

In AD 49 the emperor Claudius married Agrippina, and adopted Nero the following year. It is at this point that Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus changed his name to Nero Claudius Caesar Drusus Germanicus. In Roman times it was normal to change your name when adopted, abandoning your family name in favour of your adoptive father’s. Nero was a common name among members of the Claudian family, especially in Claudius’ branch.

Nero and Agrippina offered Claudius a politically useful link back to Augustus, strengthening his position.

Claudius appeared to favour Nero over his natural son, Britannicus, marking Nero as the designated heir.

When Claudius died in AD 54, Nero became emperor just two months before turning 17.

As he was supported by both the army and the senate, his rise to power was smooth. His mother Agrippina exerted a significant influence, especially at the beginning of his rule.

The Roman historians Tacitus, Suetonius and Cassius Dio all claim that Nero, fed up with Agrippina’s interference, decided to kill her.

Given the lack of eyewitnesses, there is no way of knowing if or how this happened. However, this did not stop historians from fabricating dramatic stories of Agrippina’s murder, asserting that Nero tried (and failed) to kill her with a boat engineered to sink, before sending his men to do the job.

Agrippina allegedly told them to stab her in the womb that bore Nero, her last words clearly borrowed from stage plays.

It is entirely possible, as claimed by Nero himself, that Agrippina chose (or was more likely forced) to take her own life after her plot against her son was discovered.

Early in his rule, Nero had to contend with a rebellion in the newly conquered province of Britain.

In AD 60–61, Queen Boudica of the Iceni tribe led a revolt against the Romans, attacking and laying waste to important Roman settlements. The possible causes of the rebellion were numerous – the greed of the Romans exploiting the newly conquered territories, the recalling of loans made to local leaders, ongoing conflict in Wales and, above all, violence against the family of Prasutagus, Boudica’s husband and king of the Iceni.

Boudica and the rebels destroyed Colchester, London and St Albans before being heavily defeated by Roman troops. After the uprising, the governor of Britain Suetonius Paulinus introduced harsher laws against the Britons, until Nero replaced him with the more conciliatory governor Publius Petronius Turpilianus.

The marriage between Nero and Octavia, aged 15 and 13/14 at the time, was arranged by their parents in order to further legitimise Nero’s claim to the throne. Octavia was the daughter of the emperor Claudius from a previous marriage, so when Claudius married Agrippina and adopted her son Nero, Nero and Octavia became brother and sister. In order to arrange their marriage, Octavia had to be adopted into another family.

Their marriage was not a happy one. According to ancient writers, Nero had various affairs until his lover Poppaea Sabina convinced him to divorce his wife. Octavia was first exiled then executed in AD 62 on adultery charges. According to ancient writers, her banishment and death caused great unrest among the public, who sympathised with the dutiful Octavia.

No further motives were offered for Octavia’s death other than Nero’s passion for Poppaea, and we will probably never know what transpired at court. The fact that Octavia couldn’t produce an heir while Poppaea was pregnant with Nero’s daughter likely played an important role in deciding Octavia’s fate.

On 19 July AD 64, a fire started close to the Circus Maximus. The flames soon encompassed the entire city of Rome and the fire raged for nine days. Only four of the 14 districts of the capital were spared, while three were completely destroyed.

Rome had already been razed by flames – and would be again in its long history – but this event was so severe it came to be known as the Great Fire of Rome.

Later historians blamed Nero for the event, claiming that he set the capital ablaze in order to clear land for the construction of a vast new palace. According to Suetonius and Cassius Dio, Nero took in the view of the burning city from the imperial residence while playing the lyre and singing about the fall of Troy. This story, however, is fictional.

Tacitus, the only historian who was actually alive at the time of the Great Fire of Rome (although only 8 years old), wrote that Nero was not even in Rome when the fire started, but returned to the capital and led the relief efforts.

Tacitus, Suetonius and Cassius Dio all describe Nero as being blinded by passion for his wife Poppaea, yet they accuse him of killing her, allegedly by kicking her in an outburst of rage while she was pregnant.

Interestingly, pregnant women being kicked to death by enraged husbands is a recurring theme in ancient literature, used to explore the (self) destructive tendencies of autocrats. The Greek writer Herodotus tells the story of how the Persian king Cambyses kicked his pregnant wife in the stomach, causing her death. A similar episode is told of Periander, tyrant of Corinth. Nero is just one of many allegedly ‘mad’ tyrants for which this literary convention was used.

Poppaea probably died from complications connected with her pregnancy and not at Nero’s hands. She was given a lavish funeral and was deified.

Centred on greater Iran, the Parthian empire was a major political and cultural power and a long-standing enemy of Rome. The two powers had long been contending for control over the buffer state of Armenia and open conflict sparked again during Nero’s rule. The Parthian War started in AD 58 and, after initial victories and following set-backs, ended in AD 63 when a diplomatic solution was reached between Nero and the Parthian king Vologases I.

According to this settlement Tiridates, brother of the Parthian king, would rule over Armenia, but only after having travelled all the way to Rome to be crowned by Nero.

The journey lasted 9 months, Tiridates’ retinue included 3,000 Parthian horsemen and many Roman soldiers. The coronation ceremony took place in the summer of AD 66 and the day was celebrated with much pomp: all the people of Rome saw the new king of Armenia kneeling in front of Nero. This was the Golden Day of Nero’s rule

In AD 68, Vindex, the governor of Gaul (France), rebelled against Nero and declared his support for Galba, the governor of Spain. Vindex was defeated in battle by troops loyal to Nero, yet Galba started gaining more military support.

It was at this point that Nero lost the support of Rome’s people due to a grain shortage, caused by a rebellious commander who cut the crucial food supply from Egypt to the capital. Abandoned by the people and declared an enemy of the state by the senate, Nero tried to flee Rome and eventually committed suicide.

Following his death, Nero’s memory was condemned (a practice called damnatio memoriae) and the images of the emperor were destroyed, removed or reworked. However, Nero was still given an expensive funeral and for a long time people decorated his tomb with flowers, some even believing he was still alive.

After Nero’s death, civil war ensued. At the end of the so-called ‘Year of the Four Emperors’ (AD 69), Vespasian became emperor and started a new dynasty: the Flavians.

[Francesca Bologna, curator, for British Museum]

 

Taken in the British Museum

Greater Manchester Police proudly welcomed 140 new officers to the force at an attestation ceremony at Bolton Town Hall on the evening of Wednesday 8 January 2020.

  

In the presence of family and friends, the new officers took the Police Oath in front of magistrate Stephen Paine. In the oath they swore to uphold the office of constable with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality.

  

The ceremony marks the official commencement of their police duties.

  

Chief Constable Ian Hopkins welcomed each new recruit to the force.

  

Mayor of Bolton, Councillor Hilary Fairclough, was in attendance as was Andy Burnham, Mayor of Greater Manchester.

  

For more information about Policing in Greater Manchester please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

  

To contact Greater Manchester Police for a less urgent matter or make a report online you can also visit www.gmp.police.uk.

  

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

  

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

  

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give evidence.

 

Yesterday, Tuesday 22 January 2019, Greater Manchester Police welcomed 100 new recruits to the Force. The officers were officially sworn in at a formal ceremony attended by Chief Constable Ian Hopkins, senior officers and magistrate Stephen Paine.

 

The attestation ceremony was held at Stockport Town Hall.

 

The Mayor of Stockport, Councillor Walter Brett, was also on hand to welcome the new recruits.

 

Family and friends watched the new officers make their oath to uphold their role with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality throughout their time in post.

 

New recruits have to complete a two year probation period which includes classroom based learning and a year of active patrol. During their training they will have the same of level of authority as regular officers, including the power of arrest.

 

The new recruits are replacing those who have either retired or left the organisation and therefore helping GMP to maintain current officer numbers.

 

To find out more about Greater Manchester Police please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

 

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

 

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

 

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give a statement.

Greater Manchester Police proudly welcomed 152 new officers in the force's largest attestation ceremony to date on the evening of Tuesday 22nd October 2019, at Stockport Town Hall.

 

In front of family and friends, all officers partook in the Police Oath which is their promise to the Queen in front of a magistrate to uphold the office of constable with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality.

 

The ceremony marks the official start of the officers commencing their duties, and is a milestone to be celebrated.

 

Chief Constable Ian Hopkins was in attendance to welcome each and every new recruit to the force.

 

Also in attendance were Greater Manchester’s Deputy Mayor, Baroness Beverley Hughes and the Mayor of Stockport, Councillor Laura Booth.

 

For more information about Policing in Greater Manchester please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

 

To contact Greater Manchester Police for a less urgent matter or make a report online you can also visit www.gmp.police.uk.

 

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

 

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

 

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give evidence.

 

From the autumn 2016 trip to Vietnam:

 

If ever there were a good way to finish up a trip, this particular Sunday in October would be it. Before arriving in Hanoi, I honestly had exceptionally low expectations. A bit like Saigon, if you are to go online and try to look up a list of places to visit – basically a tourist’s stock photography checklist, as it may be – you don’t find much that’s appealing. Well…I didn’t, anyway, and as a result, I had pretty low expectations for Hanoi.

 

The charm and beauty of Hanoi, however, isn’t in any one particular place. It’s in the experience of the entire city. (I’d say the same for Saigon, but multiply that a few times for Hanoi.) On this day in the Old Quarter in particular, I kept finding myself thinking, “Oh, my God, I shouldn’t be this lucky as a photographer…” Today ended up being mostly about people, with a little food and historical locations mixed in.

 

As I mentioned in the last set of posting, today would start off a bit sad with Junebug leaving for China a day before I would. So, we were checked out of our room by 6:00 in the morning or so. The breakfast at the Art Trendy was wonderful. Buffet with a mix of made-to-order omelets mixed in. Strong work, Art Trendy, strong work…

 

When June left, I really had nothing to do since it was still six in the morning and I was temporarily homeless as I had to switch hotels. So…I sat around the lobby for about two hours (possibly slightly awkward for the poor girls working there, but oh, well; I had to sit somewhere).

 

Around 8:00, I finally dragged my old bones out of the hotel and walked the five to ten minutes down the street to the Aquarius, where I politely asked them to hold my non-camera bag until I come back around 1:00 in the afternoon to check in.

 

After that, I was finally off with my cameras to enjoy an early Sunday morning in the bustling Old Quarter. On the street where the hotel is situated are a number of restaurants where locals were jammed in to enjoy noodles, steamed buns, and the like. It was wonderful to be among that crowd (though someone tried to scold me ever so slightly for taking pictures of people eating).

 

Since this was right next to St. Joseph’s Cathedral – and it was Sunday morning – I found my way back into the church where we crashed the wedding the afternoon before and realized that I almost got locked into Sunday mass while walking around taking pictures. So…I stayed. I prayed. And my prayer was answered when I realized the side doors and even the back door were open. (Ok…I didn’t really think I was locked in a church, but it did feel like it a little bit.)

 

Upon exiting the church, a handful of frames under my belt, I walked along the lovely streets photographing shops and people. At Caphe, I piggybacked on someone else’s photo shoot – it looked like they were doing a promo for the place, or possibly just a personal shoot for five women, though I have a feeling it was the former. At any rate, I was quite pleased with that little set and am presenting quite a few of those here, even if they’re a little redundant.

 

My ultimate goal with this wandering was to find my way to the Hanoi Hilton. Now, I’m not taking about the hotel chain, of course, but rather the prison that U.S. prisoners of war sarcastically called the Hanoi Hilton during the Vietnam War. (This is the prison where Senator John McCain was interred while a POW, and there are one or two pictures to that effect here.)

 

This prison has a particularly interesting history (and morbid since…well…it’s a prison). It’s about a hundred years old and was founded by the French colonialists around the turn of the 20th century. During the first 50 years of its history, the French imprisoned Vietnamese insurgents and those who wanted independence. In the eyes of the French…renegades (hence the imprisonment). In the eyes of the Vietnamese – especially the current government – patriots and national heroes. If they were truly freedom fighters, then I would probably side with the current government on that one.

 

The French even had a guillotine installed here and overcrowding was a major problem. There were plenty of escape attempts, and more were successful than you may think, which is a little peculiar.

 

After the battle of Bien Dien Phu and the ejection of the French from the north (and before the U.S. got involved in the south), the prison changed hands and was under control of Ho Chi Minh. During the Vietnam War, it became one of the main prisons for U.S. POWs, as I alluded to above.

 

The propaganda claims that the Vietcong were absolutely humane and decent with U.S. prisoners, allowing them to observe their religious rites (Christmas celebrations, etc.), allowed prisoners to smoke and enjoy leisure (board games, basketball, etc.), and claimed they were well-fed.

 

This is certainly how it’s presented in the prison/museum currently. If you were to go online, though, and try to find a contrary report, you would find that this was all coerced and staged to make it appear as if things were on the up and up. (For anyone curious, per my Vietnamese friends, the general education in Vietnam today is how terrible the French and U.S. were for colonizing and torturing the country and keeping it from its independence.)

 

So, what’s the truth of what really happened? Who knows? Outside of firsthand accounts, it’s impossible to know for certain and even then, memory can be a tricky thing. I tend to like to say the truth is always somewhere between two opposing viewpoints, no matter what the topic may be.

 

From an impartial and purely photographic point of view, the prison, currently a museum/memorial, is an interesting place to spend an hour or two. Some of the exhibits seem a bit cheesy, but some are quite tasteful and well done. There’s also an informational video. You’ll have to see this with a bit of imagination (the prison, that is), as at least half of it has been leveled for high rise buildings. At least there’s some tangible piece of it left to visit, including the main gate (Maison Centrale).

 

After about two hours here at the Hanoi Hilton, I walked over towards the Opera House to get a few daytime shots but, really, to get lunch at El Gaucho. I was looking forward to a proper steak. The prices were astronomical (though justifiable based on what I ate), though I just opted for a steak salad. It was so good I contemplated going back for dinner, but had other plans.

 

With a happy stomach, I went back to finally check in at the Aquarius Hotel and got my workout huffing up six flights of stairs each time I went out. I relaxed here for a few hours until 4:00 when a dear friend of mine came to town to see me.

 

Ngan and I had an ice cream at Baskin Robbins right in front of St. Joe’s before heading over to the Temple of Literature. This is a temple dedicated to education and, bless my soul, it’s a place where university graduates come for graduation pictures.

 

On this particular day – a warm, sunny, late Sunday afternoon – it was packed with college students. And it was beautiful to see that many people happy, full of hopes and dreams, and dressed in either cap and gown or traditional Vietnamese clothes. In short…I had a field day shooting for an hour here.

 

Around 5:00, Ngan had to head back to school, and I went back to my hotel. I had one more meeting. Hoa, who traveled around Thailand & Cambodia with me in May, flew back to see me this evening. She picked me up at 6:00 on her scooter and rode me all around Hanoi by evening.

 

She started by taking me to Ho Chi Minh’s Mausoleum (which I consider a lot more photogenic in its setting than the Great Gangster’s Mausoleum on Tiananmen Square). This one, at least, was in a parklike setting. At evening, it’s well-lit and you can find people relaxing in the grass in front of it. During the day, you can visit and there are quite a few buildings behind the mausoleum that you can also see.

 

After a few minutes here, Hoa took me by West Lake – the largest lake in Hanoi, as I mentioned yesterday – and just drove me around for over an hour, it seemed. My impressions that Hanoi (even out of the Old Quarter) seemed to be a good place to live – though I’d be concerned about the air pollution – and people here seemed to be happy. Also…Vietnamese really love their coffee.

 

We finally returned to the Old Quarter for dinner at one of the famous restaurants she recommended and she treated me to a wonderful dinner. I can’t recall what we ate (the Vietnamese names of it, anyway), but it was nice.

 

After dinner, she drove me over towards the Opera House and then, finally, we stopped by Hoan Kiem Lake in the heart of the Quarter and walked around the lake. It was getting close to 10:00 by this time, and I wanted to get back to the hotel to get a few hours sleep before waking up for my early flight in the morning. Hoa came to the airport with me to see me off.

 

If ever there were a great way to finish a great trip, this was it. I absolutely loved Vietnam – honestly, a lot more than I imagined I would, even with every single person I know who’d ever come here saying what a fantastic country this is – and would gladly come back. This seems to be one of the kinds of countries that you would never get tired of or, if you did, it would sure take a long time. With that, I’ll bid goodbye to Vietnam for now with the hopes that I’ll someday return to this land of amazing food, landscapes, and people.

 

As always, thanks for dropping by and viewing these pictures. Please feel free to leave any questions or comments and I’ll answer as I have time.

From the autumn 2016 trip to Vietnam:

 

If ever there were a good way to finish up a trip, this particular Sunday in October would be it. Before arriving in Hanoi, I honestly had exceptionally low expectations. A bit like Saigon, if you are to go online and try to look up a list of places to visit – basically a tourist’s stock photography checklist, as it may be – you don’t find much that’s appealing. Well…I didn’t, anyway, and as a result, I had pretty low expectations for Hanoi.

 

The charm and beauty of Hanoi, however, isn’t in any one particular place. It’s in the experience of the entire city. (I’d say the same for Saigon, but multiply that a few times for Hanoi.) On this day in the Old Quarter in particular, I kept finding myself thinking, “Oh, my God, I shouldn’t be this lucky as a photographer…” Today ended up being mostly about people, with a little food and historical locations mixed in.

 

As I mentioned in the last set of posting, today would start off a bit sad with Junebug leaving for China a day before I would. So, we were checked out of our room by 6:00 in the morning or so. The breakfast at the Art Trendy was wonderful. Buffet with a mix of made-to-order omelets mixed in. Strong work, Art Trendy, strong work…

 

When June left, I really had nothing to do since it was still six in the morning and I was temporarily homeless as I had to switch hotels. So…I sat around the lobby for about two hours (possibly slightly awkward for the poor girls working there, but oh, well; I had to sit somewhere).

 

Around 8:00, I finally dragged my old bones out of the hotel and walked the five to ten minutes down the street to the Aquarius, where I politely asked them to hold my non-camera bag until I come back around 1:00 in the afternoon to check in.

 

After that, I was finally off with my cameras to enjoy an early Sunday morning in the bustling Old Quarter. On the street where the hotel is situated are a number of restaurants where locals were jammed in to enjoy noodles, steamed buns, and the like. It was wonderful to be among that crowd (though someone tried to scold me ever so slightly for taking pictures of people eating).

 

Since this was right next to St. Joseph’s Cathedral – and it was Sunday morning – I found my way back into the church where we crashed the wedding the afternoon before and realized that I almost got locked into Sunday mass while walking around taking pictures. So…I stayed. I prayed. And my prayer was answered when I realized the side doors and even the back door were open. (Ok…I didn’t really think I was locked in a church, but it did feel like it a little bit.)

 

Upon exiting the church, a handful of frames under my belt, I walked along the lovely streets photographing shops and people. At Caphe, I piggybacked on someone else’s photo shoot – it looked like they were doing a promo for the place, or possibly just a personal shoot for five women, though I have a feeling it was the former. At any rate, I was quite pleased with that little set and am presenting quite a few of those here, even if they’re a little redundant.

 

My ultimate goal with this wandering was to find my way to the Hanoi Hilton. Now, I’m not taking about the hotel chain, of course, but rather the prison that U.S. prisoners of war sarcastically called the Hanoi Hilton during the Vietnam War. (This is the prison where Senator John McCain was interred while a POW, and there are one or two pictures to that effect here.)

 

This prison has a particularly interesting history (and morbid since…well…it’s a prison). It’s about a hundred years old and was founded by the French colonialists around the turn of the 20th century. During the first 50 years of its history, the French imprisoned Vietnamese insurgents and those who wanted independence. In the eyes of the French…renegades (hence the imprisonment). In the eyes of the Vietnamese – especially the current government – patriots and national heroes. If they were truly freedom fighters, then I would probably side with the current government on that one.

 

The French even had a guillotine installed here and overcrowding was a major problem. There were plenty of escape attempts, and more were successful than you may think, which is a little peculiar.

 

After the battle of Bien Dien Phu and the ejection of the French from the north (and before the U.S. got involved in the south), the prison changed hands and was under control of Ho Chi Minh. During the Vietnam War, it became one of the main prisons for U.S. POWs, as I alluded to above.

 

The propaganda claims that the Vietcong were absolutely humane and decent with U.S. prisoners, allowing them to observe their religious rites (Christmas celebrations, etc.), allowed prisoners to smoke and enjoy leisure (board games, basketball, etc.), and claimed they were well-fed.

 

This is certainly how it’s presented in the prison/museum currently. If you were to go online, though, and try to find a contrary report, you would find that this was all coerced and staged to make it appear as if things were on the up and up. (For anyone curious, per my Vietnamese friends, the general education in Vietnam today is how terrible the French and U.S. were for colonizing and torturing the country and keeping it from its independence.)

 

So, what’s the truth of what really happened? Who knows? Outside of firsthand accounts, it’s impossible to know for certain and even then, memory can be a tricky thing. I tend to like to say the truth is always somewhere between two opposing viewpoints, no matter what the topic may be.

 

From an impartial and purely photographic point of view, the prison, currently a museum/memorial, is an interesting place to spend an hour or two. Some of the exhibits seem a bit cheesy, but some are quite tasteful and well done. There’s also an informational video. You’ll have to see this with a bit of imagination (the prison, that is), as at least half of it has been leveled for high rise buildings. At least there’s some tangible piece of it left to visit, including the main gate (Maison Centrale).

 

After about two hours here at the Hanoi Hilton, I walked over towards the Opera House to get a few daytime shots but, really, to get lunch at El Gaucho. I was looking forward to a proper steak. The prices were astronomical (though justifiable based on what I ate), though I just opted for a steak salad. It was so good I contemplated going back for dinner, but had other plans.

 

With a happy stomach, I went back to finally check in at the Aquarius Hotel and got my workout huffing up six flights of stairs each time I went out. I relaxed here for a few hours until 4:00 when a dear friend of mine came to town to see me.

 

Ngan and I had an ice cream at Baskin Robbins right in front of St. Joe’s before heading over to the Temple of Literature. This is a temple dedicated to education and, bless my soul, it’s a place where university graduates come for graduation pictures.

 

On this particular day – a warm, sunny, late Sunday afternoon – it was packed with college students. And it was beautiful to see that many people happy, full of hopes and dreams, and dressed in either cap and gown or traditional Vietnamese clothes. In short…I had a field day shooting for an hour here.

 

Around 5:00, Ngan had to head back to school, and I went back to my hotel. I had one more meeting. Hoa, who traveled around Thailand & Cambodia with me in May, flew back to see me this evening. She picked me up at 6:00 on her scooter and rode me all around Hanoi by evening.

 

She started by taking me to Ho Chi Minh’s Mausoleum (which I consider a lot more photogenic in its setting than the Great Gangster’s Mausoleum on Tiananmen Square). This one, at least, was in a parklike setting. At evening, it’s well-lit and you can find people relaxing in the grass in front of it. During the day, you can visit and there are quite a few buildings behind the mausoleum that you can also see.

 

After a few minutes here, Hoa took me by West Lake – the largest lake in Hanoi, as I mentioned yesterday – and just drove me around for over an hour, it seemed. My impressions that Hanoi (even out of the Old Quarter) seemed to be a good place to live – though I’d be concerned about the air pollution – and people here seemed to be happy. Also…Vietnamese really love their coffee.

 

We finally returned to the Old Quarter for dinner at one of the famous restaurants she recommended and she treated me to a wonderful dinner. I can’t recall what we ate (the Vietnamese names of it, anyway), but it was nice.

 

After dinner, she drove me over towards the Opera House and then, finally, we stopped by Hoan Kiem Lake in the heart of the Quarter and walked around the lake. It was getting close to 10:00 by this time, and I wanted to get back to the hotel to get a few hours sleep before waking up for my early flight in the morning. Hoa came to the airport with me to see me off.

 

If ever there were a great way to finish a great trip, this was it. I absolutely loved Vietnam – honestly, a lot more than I imagined I would, even with every single person I know who’d ever come here saying what a fantastic country this is – and would gladly come back. This seems to be one of the kinds of countries that you would never get tired of or, if you did, it would sure take a long time. With that, I’ll bid goodbye to Vietnam for now with the hopes that I’ll someday return to this land of amazing food, landscapes, and people.

 

As always, thanks for dropping by and viewing these pictures. Please feel free to leave any questions or comments and I’ll answer as I have time.

From the autumn 2016 trip to Vietnam:

 

If ever there were a good way to finish up a trip, this particular Sunday in October would be it. Before arriving in Hanoi, I honestly had exceptionally low expectations. A bit like Saigon, if you are to go online and try to look up a list of places to visit – basically a tourist’s stock photography checklist, as it may be – you don’t find much that’s appealing. Well…I didn’t, anyway, and as a result, I had pretty low expectations for Hanoi.

 

The charm and beauty of Hanoi, however, isn’t in any one particular place. It’s in the experience of the entire city. (I’d say the same for Saigon, but multiply that a few times for Hanoi.) On this day in the Old Quarter in particular, I kept finding myself thinking, “Oh, my God, I shouldn’t be this lucky as a photographer…” Today ended up being mostly about people, with a little food and historical locations mixed in.

 

As I mentioned in the last set of posting, today would start off a bit sad with Junebug leaving for China a day before I would. So, we were checked out of our room by 6:00 in the morning or so. The breakfast at the Art Trendy was wonderful. Buffet with a mix of made-to-order omelets mixed in. Strong work, Art Trendy, strong work…

 

When June left, I really had nothing to do since it was still six in the morning and I was temporarily homeless as I had to switch hotels. So…I sat around the lobby for about two hours (possibly slightly awkward for the poor girls working there, but oh, well; I had to sit somewhere).

 

Around 8:00, I finally dragged my old bones out of the hotel and walked the five to ten minutes down the street to the Aquarius, where I politely asked them to hold my non-camera bag until I come back around 1:00 in the afternoon to check in.

 

After that, I was finally off with my cameras to enjoy an early Sunday morning in the bustling Old Quarter. On the street where the hotel is situated are a number of restaurants where locals were jammed in to enjoy noodles, steamed buns, and the like. It was wonderful to be among that crowd (though someone tried to scold me ever so slightly for taking pictures of people eating).

 

Since this was right next to St. Joseph’s Cathedral – and it was Sunday morning – I found my way back into the church where we crashed the wedding the afternoon before and realized that I almost got locked into Sunday mass while walking around taking pictures. So…I stayed. I prayed. And my prayer was answered when I realized the side doors and even the back door were open. (Ok…I didn’t really think I was locked in a church, but it did feel like it a little bit.)

 

Upon exiting the church, a handful of frames under my belt, I walked along the lovely streets photographing shops and people. At Caphe, I piggybacked on someone else’s photo shoot – it looked like they were doing a promo for the place, or possibly just a personal shoot for five women, though I have a feeling it was the former. At any rate, I was quite pleased with that little set and am presenting quite a few of those here, even if they’re a little redundant.

 

My ultimate goal with this wandering was to find my way to the Hanoi Hilton. Now, I’m not taking about the hotel chain, of course, but rather the prison that U.S. prisoners of war sarcastically called the Hanoi Hilton during the Vietnam War. (This is the prison where Senator John McCain was interred while a POW, and there are one or two pictures to that effect here.)

 

This prison has a particularly interesting history (and morbid since…well…it’s a prison). It’s about a hundred years old and was founded by the French colonialists around the turn of the 20th century. During the first 50 years of its history, the French imprisoned Vietnamese insurgents and those who wanted independence. In the eyes of the French…renegades (hence the imprisonment). In the eyes of the Vietnamese – especially the current government – patriots and national heroes. If they were truly freedom fighters, then I would probably side with the current government on that one.

 

The French even had a guillotine installed here and overcrowding was a major problem. There were plenty of escape attempts, and more were successful than you may think, which is a little peculiar.

 

After the battle of Bien Dien Phu and the ejection of the French from the north (and before the U.S. got involved in the south), the prison changed hands and was under control of Ho Chi Minh. During the Vietnam War, it became one of the main prisons for U.S. POWs, as I alluded to above.

 

The propaganda claims that the Vietcong were absolutely humane and decent with U.S. prisoners, allowing them to observe their religious rites (Christmas celebrations, etc.), allowed prisoners to smoke and enjoy leisure (board games, basketball, etc.), and claimed they were well-fed.

 

This is certainly how it’s presented in the prison/museum currently. If you were to go online, though, and try to find a contrary report, you would find that this was all coerced and staged to make it appear as if things were on the up and up. (For anyone curious, per my Vietnamese friends, the general education in Vietnam today is how terrible the French and U.S. were for colonizing and torturing the country and keeping it from its independence.)

 

So, what’s the truth of what really happened? Who knows? Outside of firsthand accounts, it’s impossible to know for certain and even then, memory can be a tricky thing. I tend to like to say the truth is always somewhere between two opposing viewpoints, no matter what the topic may be.

 

From an impartial and purely photographic point of view, the prison, currently a museum/memorial, is an interesting place to spend an hour or two. Some of the exhibits seem a bit cheesy, but some are quite tasteful and well done. There’s also an informational video. You’ll have to see this with a bit of imagination (the prison, that is), as at least half of it has been leveled for high rise buildings. At least there’s some tangible piece of it left to visit, including the main gate (Maison Centrale).

 

After about two hours here at the Hanoi Hilton, I walked over towards the Opera House to get a few daytime shots but, really, to get lunch at El Gaucho. I was looking forward to a proper steak. The prices were astronomical (though justifiable based on what I ate), though I just opted for a steak salad. It was so good I contemplated going back for dinner, but had other plans.

 

With a happy stomach, I went back to finally check in at the Aquarius Hotel and got my workout huffing up six flights of stairs each time I went out. I relaxed here for a few hours until 4:00 when a dear friend of mine came to town to see me.

 

Ngan and I had an ice cream at Baskin Robbins right in front of St. Joe’s before heading over to the Temple of Literature. This is a temple dedicated to education and, bless my soul, it’s a place where university graduates come for graduation pictures.

 

On this particular day – a warm, sunny, late Sunday afternoon – it was packed with college students. And it was beautiful to see that many people happy, full of hopes and dreams, and dressed in either cap and gown or traditional Vietnamese clothes. In short…I had a field day shooting for an hour here.

 

Around 5:00, Ngan had to head back to school, and I went back to my hotel. I had one more meeting. Hoa, who traveled around Thailand & Cambodia with me in May, flew back to see me this evening. She picked me up at 6:00 on her scooter and rode me all around Hanoi by evening.

 

She started by taking me to Ho Chi Minh’s Mausoleum (which I consider a lot more photogenic in its setting than the Great Gangster’s Mausoleum on Tiananmen Square). This one, at least, was in a parklike setting. At evening, it’s well-lit and you can find people relaxing in the grass in front of it. During the day, you can visit and there are quite a few buildings behind the mausoleum that you can also see.

 

After a few minutes here, Hoa took me by West Lake – the largest lake in Hanoi, as I mentioned yesterday – and just drove me around for over an hour, it seemed. My impressions that Hanoi (even out of the Old Quarter) seemed to be a good place to live – though I’d be concerned about the air pollution – and people here seemed to be happy. Also…Vietnamese really love their coffee.

 

We finally returned to the Old Quarter for dinner at one of the famous restaurants she recommended and she treated me to a wonderful dinner. I can’t recall what we ate (the Vietnamese names of it, anyway), but it was nice.

 

After dinner, she drove me over towards the Opera House and then, finally, we stopped by Hoan Kiem Lake in the heart of the Quarter and walked around the lake. It was getting close to 10:00 by this time, and I wanted to get back to the hotel to get a few hours sleep before waking up for my early flight in the morning. Hoa came to the airport with me to see me off.

 

If ever there were a great way to finish a great trip, this was it. I absolutely loved Vietnam – honestly, a lot more than I imagined I would, even with every single person I know who’d ever come here saying what a fantastic country this is – and would gladly come back. This seems to be one of the kinds of countries that you would never get tired of or, if you did, it would sure take a long time. With that, I’ll bid goodbye to Vietnam for now with the hopes that I’ll someday return to this land of amazing food, landscapes, and people.

 

As always, thanks for dropping by and viewing these pictures. Please feel free to leave any questions or comments and I’ll answer as I have time.

I wanted to implement one of my drawings into a design

Greater Manchester Police (GMP) has welcomed 113 new police officers to the ranks.

 

The new recruits were sworn in at an attestation ceremony at Bolton Town Hall last night, Tuesday 24 October 2017.

 

Chief Constable Ian Hopkins, Police and Magistrate Peter Rogerson were in attendance at the legally binding event.

 

Family and friends of the new officers watched on proudly as each of them made an oath to uphold the office of constable with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality.

 

To find out more about Greater Manchester Police please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

 

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

 

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

 

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give a statement.

 

Greater Manchester Police (GMP) has welcomed 113 new police officers to the ranks.

 

The new recruits were sworn in at an attestation ceremony at Bolton Town Hall last night, Tuesday 24 October 2017.

 

Chief Constable Ian Hopkins, Police and Magistrate Peter Rogerson were in attendance at the legally binding event.

 

Family and friends of the new officers watched on proudly as each of them made an oath to uphold the office of constable with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality.

 

To find out more about Greater Manchester Police please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

 

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

 

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

 

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give a statement.

 

Greater Manchester Police has welcomed 89 new police officers to the ranks.

 

The new recruits were sworn in at an attestation ceremony at Bolton Town Hall last night, Tuesday 11 June 2019.

 

Chief Constable Ian Hopkins, Deputy Chief Constable Ian Pilling, Deputy Major of Greater Manchester Bev Hughes and Magistrate Joan Cooper were in attendance at the event.

 

The Mayor of Bolton, Councillor Hilary Fairclough and her consort were guests of honour.

 

Family and friends of the new officers watched on proudly as each of took an oath to uphold the office of constable with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality.

 

To find out more about Greater Manchester Police please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

 

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

 

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

 

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give a statement.

 

Greater Manchester Police has welcomed 89 new police officers to the ranks.

 

The new recruits were sworn in at an attestation ceremony at Bolton Town Hall last night, Tuesday 11 June 2019.

 

Chief Constable Ian Hopkins, Deputy Chief Constable Ian Pilling, Deputy Major of Greater Manchester Bev Hughes and Magistrate Joan Cooper were in attendance at the event.

 

The Mayor of Bolton, Councillor Hilary Fairclough and her consort were guests of honour.

 

Family and friends of the new officers watched on proudly as each of took an oath to uphold the office of constable with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality.

 

To find out more about Greater Manchester Police please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

 

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

 

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

 

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give a statement.

 

Greater Manchester Police proudly welcomed 140 new officers to the force at an attestation ceremony at Bolton Town Hall on the evening of Wednesday 8 January 2020.

  

In the presence of family and friends, the new officers took the Police Oath in front of magistrate Stephen Paine. In the oath they swore to uphold the office of constable with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality.

  

The ceremony marks the official commencement of their police duties.

  

Chief Constable Ian Hopkins welcomed each new recruit to the force.

  

Mayor of Bolton, Councillor Hilary Fairclough, was in attendance as was Andy Burnham, Mayor of Greater Manchester.

  

For more information about Policing in Greater Manchester please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

  

To contact Greater Manchester Police for a less urgent matter or make a report online you can also visit www.gmp.police.uk.

  

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

  

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

  

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give evidence.

 

Yesterday, Tuesday 22 January 2019, Greater Manchester Police welcomed 100 new recruits to the Force. The officers were officially sworn in at a formal ceremony attended by Chief Constable Ian Hopkins, senior officers and magistrate Stephen Paine.

 

The attestation ceremony was held at Stockport Town Hall.

 

The Mayor of Stockport, Councillor Walter Brett, was also on hand to welcome the new recruits.

 

Family and friends watched the new officers make their oath to uphold their role with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality throughout their time in post.

 

New recruits have to complete a two year probation period which includes classroom based learning and a year of active patrol. During their training they will have the same of level of authority as regular officers, including the power of arrest.

 

The new recruits are replacing those who have either retired or left the organisation and therefore helping GMP to maintain current officer numbers.

 

To find out more about Greater Manchester Police please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

 

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

 

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

 

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give a statement.

Elaborate monument to Sir William Leigh 1631 & wife Elizabeth Whorwood 1664/5 erected by their younger surviving son George

 

"Sacred to the memory of William Leigh Knight and also Elizabeth his wife. He came from both the lines of Leigh and Berkeley, enriched with noble blood, and ornamented each family with his virtues; as a youth he devoted himself not unhappily to work of scholarship at Oxford; of full age, having entered into matrimony, it was his custom to give his wealth in alms compassionately and liberally, not without loss; the office of justice of the peace he executed for many years with the greatest impartiality not just the letter of the law; attacked at length by consumption, he changed this life for a better, in the month of November, in the year of the Christian era 1631, aged 46.

And four sons and as many daughters the issue of his marriage, of these three, namely, Isabel, Elizabeth and Anne, survive both parents. Two of the sons, namely William and George, the father left still living; the mother only the elder.

She was the daughter of William Whorwood, Knight, of Stafford. Bereaved of her husband, for 34 years of uninterrupted widowhood she drew out a truly religious life; her house always offered a refuge to the poor of the neighbourhood, and an asylum to faithful subjects of the king (in most difficult times). This not unseemly monument to the best of husbands and to herself was set up with a generous endowment from the liberal hand of the younger son while he lived; at length she acquired immortality by a perfect death on the 23rd March in the Christian year 1664 / 5 aged 83 "

 

Sir William was the son & heir of Sir Rowland Leigh of Longborrow & Catherine daughter of Sir Richard Berkeley of Stoke Gifford Gloc by Elizabeth daughter of William Rede

He was the grandson of Sir Thomas Leigh 1571, Lord Mayor of London (who had been granted the manor after the the Dissolution of Hailes Abbey) & Alice daughter of John Barker of Haughmond, whose other grandchildren were Joan Bond wife of Leonard Darre / Dare c1554-1615 at South Pool flic.kr/p/uR6Ynm & Dionysia Bond Winston at LongBurton flic.kr/p/5Z7TQS )

His brother Thomas of Stoneleigh m Catherine daughter of Sir John Spencer of Wormleighton 1586 & Katherine Kitson / Kytson flic.kr/p/bV2tf8

  

He m Elizabeth daughter of Sir William Whorwood 1614 of Stafford , West Bromwich & Sandwell by Ann daughter of John Field / Feild ,heiress niece of Henry Field 1584 of Kings Norton at Queenhill Worc www.flickr.com/gp/52219527@N00/8x2L39

Children - 4 son & 4 daughters

1. William d1690 of Adlestrop m Margaret daughter of Sir William Guise of Elmore m2 ……. Sanders of Warwick m3 Joan daughter of Thomas Pury of Gloucester & Mary Alye )

2. George 1656 of Frogmill (a royalist captain in the civil war, who erected the monument ) m (2nd husband) Susannah widow of Robert Heydon 1647 of Frogmill & Shipton Solers ; who m3 William Stratford 1685 ) www.flickr.com/gp/52219527@N00/9y53Yi

3. ……… died an infant www.flickr.com/gp/52219527@N00/1q0T5u

4. Thomas died young www.flickr.com/gp/52219527@N00/40m7fV

1. Catherine died young died young www.flickr.com/gp/52219527@N00/Tg5670

2. Isabel / Isabella m1 Gervase Warmstrey of Worcester, gent, m2 Sir John Covert of Slaugham 1679 son of Walter Covert by 2nd cousin Anne daughter of John Covert

3. Elizabeth b1611 m 1632 John Chamberlaine / Chamberlayne of Maugersbury Gloc son of Edmund Chamberlayne 1634 & Grace Strangways / Strangeways

4. Anne m1 William Hodges of Broadwell 1644 www.flickr.com/gp/52219527@N00/454LX0 son of Anthony Hodges & Merriell Child m2 Roger Waterworth 1651 m3 John son of Sir Herbert Croft MP ) www.flickr.com/gp/52219527@N00/H60M05

 

At the top of the monument are figures of Chastity carrying a palm; Fortitude wearing a lion's skin, carrying the club of Hercules; and Justice carrying a balance .

 

Other simple Leigh monuments lie on the floor nearby in memory of their children "What early hopes were given; Death soon ript their tender buds and snatch'd them ripe for heav'n"

 

During the Civil War Elizabeth provided shelter for Royalists in the Civil War and lit bonfires to celebrate their victories.

 

The main manor remained in the possession of the Leigh family until 1921 when it was sold.

- Church of St James, Longborough Gloucestershire

 

books.google.co.uk/books?id=DuwDAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA441&amp...

Picture with thanks - copyright Mike Searle CCL www.geograph.org.uk/photo/3939319

 

As fossil hunters jet off to exotic places in the relentless search for ape-men fossils and the ever elusive 'missing links', down in the basement of the British museum of Natural History, virtually undisturbed for more than a century, languishes an amazing fossil which could dramatically overturn current views of human history. This fossil from Grande Terre in Guadeloupe was acquired by the museum in 1812, and publically displayed as a curiosity. However, in the latter part of the 19th century the fossil was removed from public display and has not been exhibited since. It is somewhat extraordinary that (although the specimen has been in its possession for over 200 years at the time of writing) the museum is not able to provide a proper technical report or any stock photographs of this specimen, despite its potential scientific importance.

 

This remarkable specimen is comprised of a skeleton of a human female solidly embedded in a block of lower Miocene limestone (lower Miocene rock was formed around 25 million years ago according to uniformitarian dating). The skeleton displays all the characteristics of having been embedded in the limestone sediment whilst the sediment was still in a fluid state, and the rock has subsequently hardened around it. If this is so, then this 100% human fossil would be dated at least 22 million years older than the oldest alleged 'ape-man' fossil yet discovered. Not surprisingly, some evolutionists have dismissed the skeleton as a later, intrusive burial. But have produced no convincing evidence for this claim. Surely therefore, it is time to commission a proper objective study of the fossil by sedimentologists, forensic scientists and other highly qualified experts so that the matter can be fairly assessed. It is deplorable that such a fascinating and scientifically valuable specimen should now lay ignored, forgotten and unseen in a publicly owned museum.

 

Unfortunately, this specimen is just one of many other extremely interesting human ancestor fossils which have been summarily dismissed for superficial reasons, and then quietly forgotten, apparently because they do not fit in with preconceived ideas about human evolution.

This is in stark contrast to the massive publicity and highly imaginative claims which regularly accompany extremely fragmentary and dubious 'ape-men' finds (see 'Jiggery Pokery' www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/15703065445 ).

 

Some other examples of forgotten fossil ancestors.

Casteneldo.

Parts of a human skull were found in Pliocene clay strata, followed by the discovery of the scattered remains of 2 children and a human female skeleton in the same deposits. The layers above the finds were intact and undisturbed. 2 experts who studied the find were convinced that they were genuine Pliocene specimens. Even so, they were later dismissed by evolutionists as intrusive burials on the grounds that the bones were not fully fossilised. However, lack of fossilisation is not unknown in clay deposits and the undisturbed upper layers and scattered nature of the finds rule out intrusive burial. But these human bones would be too far old to fit the ape to human evolution story, so the intrusive burial claim had to be accepted regardless of the evidence. Hence the Casteneldo specimens are now conveniently forgotten or ignored.

 

Calaveras skull.

A fossilised human skull and part of a lower jaw were discovered encased in cemented Pliocene gravel 130 feet below the surface at bald hill, California. Several experts who examined and investigated the find (including the state geologist prof. Whitney) were convinced that the remains and circumstances of the find were genuine. Human tools and other artifacts were quite frequently found by geologists in the same deposits. But this human skull would be far too old for evolutionists to accept. So it was dismissed by evolutionist 'expert' opinion as a practical joke, on the grounds that it closely resembled modern Indian skulls!! And had a calcerous surface coating similar to some other skulls which had been found in caves. Although there was no evidence for such a practical joke, Calaveras does not appear in any human evolution charts and is now totally ignored.

 

Foxhall jaw.

A human jaw was found in the 'red crag' layer near Ipswich (late Pliocene). Numerous stone tools were also found in a layer below the jaw. The tool discoveries were verified by a special commission of experts. Drawings were made of the jaw, but unfortunately the jawbone itself disappeared. The disappearance of the jaw was considered sufficient reason for the evolutionary establishment to reject it as a possible human ancestor. This was very convenient, as once again it would have been too old to fit the ape to human evolution story. However, although the very dubious, monkey-like, Peking man fossils have also disappeared, Peking man is still widely cited as a human ancestor in books, charts and museum displays etc.

Double standards indeed!

 

More examples:

The Olmo skull, the Galley Hill skeleton, the Clichy skeleton, the Abbeville jaw, the Natchez pelvis.

There is not space to give full details of these and others here, but they are all 100% human remains found in deposits dated as far too old (by uniformitarian/geologic column dating) to fit the ape to human evolution theory. So consequently, it is really no surprise that they have all been rejected and forgotten.

 

Evolutionist 'experts' reject all these and other examples that are incongruous to the human, evolution story.

That would be fine if we could trust them to be objective. However, we have seen from the history of the promotion of Darwinism that evolutionists are far from impartial or objective.

We have seen evolution 'experts' endorsing the Piltdown Man fake for over 40 years, we have seen that they endorsed Nebraska Man - (which was not a man or ape, but a single tooth from a peccary) and used it as evidence supporting evolution in the famous Scopes Trial, we have seen that they endorsed South West Colorado Man - which was a tooth from a horse, they also endorsed Orce Man - which was the skullcap from a donkey, they endorsed the very dubious Java Man fossil, and continued to endorse it even after the man who found it (Dr. Dubois) admitted it was from a giant gibbon. So evidence against evolution is in no way given equal treatment by evolutionists as evidence for.

Therefore, the fact that evolutionists and notorious evolutionist websites, such as talkorigins, refute ALL incongruous fossil evidence against evolution cannot be taken seriously. Only an impartial assessment by persons with no ideological axe to grind should be acceptable.

 

So we can conclude from all this that the human evolution story is not as clear cut as we are usually led to believe. It is certainly an area where preconceived ideas and wishful thinking dominate. Where ideology frequently takes precedence over scientific objectivity. And where contradictory evidence is ensured a minimum of publicity, and inconvenient skeletons are guaranteed to be quickly shoved into proverbial closets, never to be seen or mentioned again.

 

Evolutionists are notorious for presenting dubious, and even faked evidence, supporting evolution to the public.

Bizarrely, here is an example of evolutionists actually faking evidence AGAINST evolution, in an attempt to discredit the genuine evidence and arguments against evolution, by muddying the waters.

Also. no doubt, to try to embarrass scientists who don't accept there is any good evidence for progressive evolution.

Onyate Man - Fossil of man being eaten by a dinosaur, the alleged cover-up ...

www.nmsr.org/Archive.html

 

From the autumn 2016 trip to Vietnam:

 

If ever there were a good way to finish up a trip, this particular Sunday in October would be it. Before arriving in Hanoi, I honestly had exceptionally low expectations. A bit like Saigon, if you are to go online and try to look up a list of places to visit – basically a tourist’s stock photography checklist, as it may be – you don’t find much that’s appealing. Well…I didn’t, anyway, and as a result, I had pretty low expectations for Hanoi.

 

The charm and beauty of Hanoi, however, isn’t in any one particular place. It’s in the experience of the entire city. (I’d say the same for Saigon, but multiply that a few times for Hanoi.) On this day in the Old Quarter in particular, I kept finding myself thinking, “Oh, my God, I shouldn’t be this lucky as a photographer…” Today ended up being mostly about people, with a little food and historical locations mixed in.

 

As I mentioned in the last set of posting, today would start off a bit sad with Junebug leaving for China a day before I would. So, we were checked out of our room by 6:00 in the morning or so. The breakfast at the Art Trendy was wonderful. Buffet with a mix of made-to-order omelets mixed in. Strong work, Art Trendy, strong work…

 

When June left, I really had nothing to do since it was still six in the morning and I was temporarily homeless as I had to switch hotels. So…I sat around the lobby for about two hours (possibly slightly awkward for the poor girls working there, but oh, well; I had to sit somewhere).

 

Around 8:00, I finally dragged my old bones out of the hotel and walked the five to ten minutes down the street to the Aquarius, where I politely asked them to hold my non-camera bag until I come back around 1:00 in the afternoon to check in.

 

After that, I was finally off with my cameras to enjoy an early Sunday morning in the bustling Old Quarter. On the street where the hotel is situated are a number of restaurants where locals were jammed in to enjoy noodles, steamed buns, and the like. It was wonderful to be among that crowd (though someone tried to scold me ever so slightly for taking pictures of people eating).

 

Since this was right next to St. Joseph’s Cathedral – and it was Sunday morning – I found my way back into the church where we crashed the wedding the afternoon before and realized that I almost got locked into Sunday mass while walking around taking pictures. So…I stayed. I prayed. And my prayer was answered when I realized the side doors and even the back door were open. (Ok…I didn’t really think I was locked in a church, but it did feel like it a little bit.)

 

Upon exiting the church, a handful of frames under my belt, I walked along the lovely streets photographing shops and people. At Caphe, I piggybacked on someone else’s photo shoot – it looked like they were doing a promo for the place, or possibly just a personal shoot for five women, though I have a feeling it was the former. At any rate, I was quite pleased with that little set and am presenting quite a few of those here, even if they’re a little redundant.

 

My ultimate goal with this wandering was to find my way to the Hanoi Hilton. Now, I’m not taking about the hotel chain, of course, but rather the prison that U.S. prisoners of war sarcastically called the Hanoi Hilton during the Vietnam War. (This is the prison where Senator John McCain was interred while a POW, and there are one or two pictures to that effect here.)

 

This prison has a particularly interesting history (and morbid since…well…it’s a prison). It’s about a hundred years old and was founded by the French colonialists around the turn of the 20th century. During the first 50 years of its history, the French imprisoned Vietnamese insurgents and those who wanted independence. In the eyes of the French…renegades (hence the imprisonment). In the eyes of the Vietnamese – especially the current government – patriots and national heroes. If they were truly freedom fighters, then I would probably side with the current government on that one.

 

The French even had a guillotine installed here and overcrowding was a major problem. There were plenty of escape attempts, and more were successful than you may think, which is a little peculiar.

 

After the battle of Bien Dien Phu and the ejection of the French from the north (and before the U.S. got involved in the south), the prison changed hands and was under control of Ho Chi Minh. During the Vietnam War, it became one of the main prisons for U.S. POWs, as I alluded to above.

 

The propaganda claims that the Vietcong were absolutely humane and decent with U.S. prisoners, allowing them to observe their religious rites (Christmas celebrations, etc.), allowed prisoners to smoke and enjoy leisure (board games, basketball, etc.), and claimed they were well-fed.

 

This is certainly how it’s presented in the prison/museum currently. If you were to go online, though, and try to find a contrary report, you would find that this was all coerced and staged to make it appear as if things were on the up and up. (For anyone curious, per my Vietnamese friends, the general education in Vietnam today is how terrible the French and U.S. were for colonizing and torturing the country and keeping it from its independence.)

 

So, what’s the truth of what really happened? Who knows? Outside of firsthand accounts, it’s impossible to know for certain and even then, memory can be a tricky thing. I tend to like to say the truth is always somewhere between two opposing viewpoints, no matter what the topic may be.

 

From an impartial and purely photographic point of view, the prison, currently a museum/memorial, is an interesting place to spend an hour or two. Some of the exhibits seem a bit cheesy, but some are quite tasteful and well done. There’s also an informational video. You’ll have to see this with a bit of imagination (the prison, that is), as at least half of it has been leveled for high rise buildings. At least there’s some tangible piece of it left to visit, including the main gate (Maison Centrale).

 

After about two hours here at the Hanoi Hilton, I walked over towards the Opera House to get a few daytime shots but, really, to get lunch at El Gaucho. I was looking forward to a proper steak. The prices were astronomical (though justifiable based on what I ate), though I just opted for a steak salad. It was so good I contemplated going back for dinner, but had other plans.

 

With a happy stomach, I went back to finally check in at the Aquarius Hotel and got my workout huffing up six flights of stairs each time I went out. I relaxed here for a few hours until 4:00 when a dear friend of mine came to town to see me.

 

Ngan and I had an ice cream at Baskin Robbins right in front of St. Joe’s before heading over to the Temple of Literature. This is a temple dedicated to education and, bless my soul, it’s a place where university graduates come for graduation pictures.

 

On this particular day – a warm, sunny, late Sunday afternoon – it was packed with college students. And it was beautiful to see that many people happy, full of hopes and dreams, and dressed in either cap and gown or traditional Vietnamese clothes. In short…I had a field day shooting for an hour here.

 

Around 5:00, Ngan had to head back to school, and I went back to my hotel. I had one more meeting. Hoa, who traveled around Thailand & Cambodia with me in May, flew back to see me this evening. She picked me up at 6:00 on her scooter and rode me all around Hanoi by evening.

 

She started by taking me to Ho Chi Minh’s Mausoleum (which I consider a lot more photogenic in its setting than the Great Gangster’s Mausoleum on Tiananmen Square). This one, at least, was in a parklike setting. At evening, it’s well-lit and you can find people relaxing in the grass in front of it. During the day, you can visit and there are quite a few buildings behind the mausoleum that you can also see.

 

After a few minutes here, Hoa took me by West Lake – the largest lake in Hanoi, as I mentioned yesterday – and just drove me around for over an hour, it seemed. My impressions that Hanoi (even out of the Old Quarter) seemed to be a good place to live – though I’d be concerned about the air pollution – and people here seemed to be happy. Also…Vietnamese really love their coffee.

 

We finally returned to the Old Quarter for dinner at one of the famous restaurants she recommended and she treated me to a wonderful dinner. I can’t recall what we ate (the Vietnamese names of it, anyway), but it was nice.

 

After dinner, she drove me over towards the Opera House and then, finally, we stopped by Hoan Kiem Lake in the heart of the Quarter and walked around the lake. It was getting close to 10:00 by this time, and I wanted to get back to the hotel to get a few hours sleep before waking up for my early flight in the morning. Hoa came to the airport with me to see me off.

 

If ever there were a great way to finish a great trip, this was it. I absolutely loved Vietnam – honestly, a lot more than I imagined I would, even with every single person I know who’d ever come here saying what a fantastic country this is – and would gladly come back. This seems to be one of the kinds of countries that you would never get tired of or, if you did, it would sure take a long time. With that, I’ll bid goodbye to Vietnam for now with the hopes that I’ll someday return to this land of amazing food, landscapes, and people.

 

As always, thanks for dropping by and viewing these pictures. Please feel free to leave any questions or comments and I’ll answer as I have time.

Greater Manchester Police has welcomed 89 new police officers to the ranks.

 

The new recruits were sworn in at an attestation ceremony at Bolton Town Hall last night, Tuesday 11 June 2019.

 

Chief Constable Ian Hopkins, Deputy Chief Constable Ian Pilling, Deputy Major of Greater Manchester Bev Hughes and Magistrate Joan Cooper were in attendance at the event.

 

The Mayor of Bolton, Councillor Hilary Fairclough and her consort were guests of honour.

 

Family and friends of the new officers watched on proudly as each of took an oath to uphold the office of constable with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality.

 

To find out more about Greater Manchester Police please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

 

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

 

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

 

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give a statement.

 

Greater Manchester Police has welcomed 89 new police officers to the ranks.

 

The new recruits were sworn in at an attestation ceremony at Bolton Town Hall last night, Tuesday 11 June 2019.

 

Chief Constable Ian Hopkins, Deputy Chief Constable Ian Pilling, Deputy Major of Greater Manchester Bev Hughes and Magistrate Joan Cooper were in attendance at the event.

 

The Mayor of Bolton, Councillor Hilary Fairclough and her consort were guests of honour.

 

Family and friends of the new officers watched on proudly as each of took an oath to uphold the office of constable with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality.

 

To find out more about Greater Manchester Police please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

 

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

 

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

 

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give a statement.

 

Yesterday, Tuesday 22 January 2019, Greater Manchester Police welcomed 100 new recruits to the Force. The officers were officially sworn in at a formal ceremony attended by Chief Constable Ian Hopkins, senior officers and magistrate Stephen Paine.

 

The attestation ceremony was held at Stockport Town Hall.

 

The Mayor of Stockport, Councillor Walter Brett, was also on hand to welcome the new recruits.

 

Family and friends watched the new officers make their oath to uphold their role with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality throughout their time in post.

 

New recruits have to complete a two year probation period which includes classroom based learning and a year of active patrol. During their training they will have the same of level of authority as regular officers, including the power of arrest.

 

The new recruits are replacing those who have either retired or left the organisation and therefore helping GMP to maintain current officer numbers.

 

To find out more about Greater Manchester Police please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

 

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

 

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

 

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give a statement.

Yesterday, Tuesday 22 January 2019, Greater Manchester Police welcomed 100 new recruits to the Force. The officers were officially sworn in at a formal ceremony attended by Chief Constable Ian Hopkins, senior officers and magistrate Stephen Paine.

 

The attestation ceremony was held at Stockport Town Hall.

 

The Mayor of Stockport, Councillor Walter Brett, was also on hand to welcome the new recruits.

 

Family and friends watched the new officers make their oath to uphold their role with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality throughout their time in post.

 

New recruits have to complete a two year probation period which includes classroom based learning and a year of active patrol. During their training they will have the same of level of authority as regular officers, including the power of arrest.

 

The new recruits are replacing those who have either retired or left the organisation and therefore helping GMP to maintain current officer numbers.

 

To find out more about Greater Manchester Police please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

 

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

 

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

 

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give a statement.

Greater Manchester Police proudly welcomed 152 new officers in the force's largest attestation ceremony to date on the evening of Tuesday 22nd October 2019, at Stockport Town Hall.

 

In front of family and friends, all officers partook in the Police Oath which is their promise to the Queen in front of a magistrate to uphold the office of constable with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality.

 

The ceremony marks the official start of the officers commencing their duties, and is a milestone to be celebrated.

 

Chief Constable Ian Hopkins was in attendance to welcome each and every new recruit to the force.

 

Also in attendance were Greater Manchester’s Deputy Mayor, Baroness Beverley Hughes and the Mayor of Stockport, Councillor Laura Booth.

 

For more information about Policing in Greater Manchester please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

 

To contact Greater Manchester Police for a less urgent matter or make a report online you can also visit www.gmp.police.uk.

 

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

 

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

 

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give evidence.

 

From the autumn 2016 trip to Vietnam:

 

If ever there were a good way to finish up a trip, this particular Sunday in October would be it. Before arriving in Hanoi, I honestly had exceptionally low expectations. A bit like Saigon, if you are to go online and try to look up a list of places to visit – basically a tourist’s stock photography checklist, as it may be – you don’t find much that’s appealing. Well…I didn’t, anyway, and as a result, I had pretty low expectations for Hanoi.

 

The charm and beauty of Hanoi, however, isn’t in any one particular place. It’s in the experience of the entire city. (I’d say the same for Saigon, but multiply that a few times for Hanoi.) On this day in the Old Quarter in particular, I kept finding myself thinking, “Oh, my God, I shouldn’t be this lucky as a photographer…” Today ended up being mostly about people, with a little food and historical locations mixed in.

 

As I mentioned in the last set of posting, today would start off a bit sad with Junebug leaving for China a day before I would. So, we were checked out of our room by 6:00 in the morning or so. The breakfast at the Art Trendy was wonderful. Buffet with a mix of made-to-order omelets mixed in. Strong work, Art Trendy, strong work…

 

When June left, I really had nothing to do since it was still six in the morning and I was temporarily homeless as I had to switch hotels. So…I sat around the lobby for about two hours (possibly slightly awkward for the poor girls working there, but oh, well; I had to sit somewhere).

 

Around 8:00, I finally dragged my old bones out of the hotel and walked the five to ten minutes down the street to the Aquarius, where I politely asked them to hold my non-camera bag until I come back around 1:00 in the afternoon to check in.

 

After that, I was finally off with my cameras to enjoy an early Sunday morning in the bustling Old Quarter. On the street where the hotel is situated are a number of restaurants where locals were jammed in to enjoy noodles, steamed buns, and the like. It was wonderful to be among that crowd (though someone tried to scold me ever so slightly for taking pictures of people eating).

 

Since this was right next to St. Joseph’s Cathedral – and it was Sunday morning – I found my way back into the church where we crashed the wedding the afternoon before and realized that I almost got locked into Sunday mass while walking around taking pictures. So…I stayed. I prayed. And my prayer was answered when I realized the side doors and even the back door were open. (Ok…I didn’t really think I was locked in a church, but it did feel like it a little bit.)

 

Upon exiting the church, a handful of frames under my belt, I walked along the lovely streets photographing shops and people. At Caphe, I piggybacked on someone else’s photo shoot – it looked like they were doing a promo for the place, or possibly just a personal shoot for five women, though I have a feeling it was the former. At any rate, I was quite pleased with that little set and am presenting quite a few of those here, even if they’re a little redundant.

 

My ultimate goal with this wandering was to find my way to the Hanoi Hilton. Now, I’m not taking about the hotel chain, of course, but rather the prison that U.S. prisoners of war sarcastically called the Hanoi Hilton during the Vietnam War. (This is the prison where Senator John McCain was interred while a POW, and there are one or two pictures to that effect here.)

 

This prison has a particularly interesting history (and morbid since…well…it’s a prison). It’s about a hundred years old and was founded by the French colonialists around the turn of the 20th century. During the first 50 years of its history, the French imprisoned Vietnamese insurgents and those who wanted independence. In the eyes of the French…renegades (hence the imprisonment). In the eyes of the Vietnamese – especially the current government – patriots and national heroes. If they were truly freedom fighters, then I would probably side with the current government on that one.

 

The French even had a guillotine installed here and overcrowding was a major problem. There were plenty of escape attempts, and more were successful than you may think, which is a little peculiar.

 

After the battle of Bien Dien Phu and the ejection of the French from the north (and before the U.S. got involved in the south), the prison changed hands and was under control of Ho Chi Minh. During the Vietnam War, it became one of the main prisons for U.S. POWs, as I alluded to above.

 

The propaganda claims that the Vietcong were absolutely humane and decent with U.S. prisoners, allowing them to observe their religious rites (Christmas celebrations, etc.), allowed prisoners to smoke and enjoy leisure (board games, basketball, etc.), and claimed they were well-fed.

 

This is certainly how it’s presented in the prison/museum currently. If you were to go online, though, and try to find a contrary report, you would find that this was all coerced and staged to make it appear as if things were on the up and up. (For anyone curious, per my Vietnamese friends, the general education in Vietnam today is how terrible the French and U.S. were for colonizing and torturing the country and keeping it from its independence.)

 

So, what’s the truth of what really happened? Who knows? Outside of firsthand accounts, it’s impossible to know for certain and even then, memory can be a tricky thing. I tend to like to say the truth is always somewhere between two opposing viewpoints, no matter what the topic may be.

 

From an impartial and purely photographic point of view, the prison, currently a museum/memorial, is an interesting place to spend an hour or two. Some of the exhibits seem a bit cheesy, but some are quite tasteful and well done. There’s also an informational video. You’ll have to see this with a bit of imagination (the prison, that is), as at least half of it has been leveled for high rise buildings. At least there’s some tangible piece of it left to visit, including the main gate (Maison Centrale).

 

After about two hours here at the Hanoi Hilton, I walked over towards the Opera House to get a few daytime shots but, really, to get lunch at El Gaucho. I was looking forward to a proper steak. The prices were astronomical (though justifiable based on what I ate), though I just opted for a steak salad. It was so good I contemplated going back for dinner, but had other plans.

 

With a happy stomach, I went back to finally check in at the Aquarius Hotel and got my workout huffing up six flights of stairs each time I went out. I relaxed here for a few hours until 4:00 when a dear friend of mine came to town to see me.

 

Ngan and I had an ice cream at Baskin Robbins right in front of St. Joe’s before heading over to the Temple of Literature. This is a temple dedicated to education and, bless my soul, it’s a place where university graduates come for graduation pictures.

 

On this particular day – a warm, sunny, late Sunday afternoon – it was packed with college students. And it was beautiful to see that many people happy, full of hopes and dreams, and dressed in either cap and gown or traditional Vietnamese clothes. In short…I had a field day shooting for an hour here.

 

Around 5:00, Ngan had to head back to school, and I went back to my hotel. I had one more meeting. Hoa, who traveled around Thailand & Cambodia with me in May, flew back to see me this evening. She picked me up at 6:00 on her scooter and rode me all around Hanoi by evening.

 

She started by taking me to Ho Chi Minh’s Mausoleum (which I consider a lot more photogenic in its setting than the Great Gangster’s Mausoleum on Tiananmen Square). This one, at least, was in a parklike setting. At evening, it’s well-lit and you can find people relaxing in the grass in front of it. During the day, you can visit and there are quite a few buildings behind the mausoleum that you can also see.

 

After a few minutes here, Hoa took me by West Lake – the largest lake in Hanoi, as I mentioned yesterday – and just drove me around for over an hour, it seemed. My impressions that Hanoi (even out of the Old Quarter) seemed to be a good place to live – though I’d be concerned about the air pollution – and people here seemed to be happy. Also…Vietnamese really love their coffee.

 

We finally returned to the Old Quarter for dinner at one of the famous restaurants she recommended and she treated me to a wonderful dinner. I can’t recall what we ate (the Vietnamese names of it, anyway), but it was nice.

 

After dinner, she drove me over towards the Opera House and then, finally, we stopped by Hoan Kiem Lake in the heart of the Quarter and walked around the lake. It was getting close to 10:00 by this time, and I wanted to get back to the hotel to get a few hours sleep before waking up for my early flight in the morning. Hoa came to the airport with me to see me off.

 

If ever there were a great way to finish a great trip, this was it. I absolutely loved Vietnam – honestly, a lot more than I imagined I would, even with every single person I know who’d ever come here saying what a fantastic country this is – and would gladly come back. This seems to be one of the kinds of countries that you would never get tired of or, if you did, it would sure take a long time. With that, I’ll bid goodbye to Vietnam for now with the hopes that I’ll someday return to this land of amazing food, landscapes, and people.

 

As always, thanks for dropping by and viewing these pictures. Please feel free to leave any questions or comments and I’ll answer as I have time.

•Artist: Raymond Chard (b. 1895)

•Title: Thomas Johnson, Jr. (1732-1819)

•Date: 1926

•Medium: Oil on Canvas

•Dimensions: 40 × 30"

•Accession Number: MSA SC 1545-1105

 

Thomas Johnson (1732-1819)

 

MSA SC 3520-743

 

Governor of Maryland, 1777-1779 (Federalist)

 

Biographical Profile

 

•Born: November 4, 1732 near St. Leonard’s Creek, Calvert County

•Father: Thomas Johnson

•Mother: Dorcas (Sedgwick) Johnson

•Education: attended public schools; studied law with Stephen Bordley

•Religious Affiliation: Anglican

•Marriage: February 16, 1766 to Ann Jennings

•Children: Thomas Jennings, James, Joshua, Anne Jennings, Elizabeth, Rebecca, Dorcas

•Military Service:

oSenior Brigadier General, Maryland Militia, 1776-1777

oLeader of the Maryland troops sent to help General Washington retreat through New Jersey

•Positions:

oLawyer

oClerk of indictments, Frederick County, appointed 1760, Anne Arundel County, 1761

oLower House, Anne Arundel County, 1762-1774, Frederick County, 1780-1781, 1786-1788

oCommittee of Correspondence, Anne Arundel County, 1774

oDelegate, Continental Congress, 1774-1776

oFirst Council of Safety, Western Shore, 1775

oConventions, Anne Arundel County, 1774-1776, Caroline County, 1776

oGovernor of Maryland, 1777-1779

oMaryland Senate elector, Frederick County, 1786

oJudge, Court of Appeals for Tax Assessments, Frederick County, 1786

oDelegate, Constitution Ratification Convention, Frederick County, 1788

oDirector, Potomac Company, president, 1789

oChief Judge, General Court, 1790-1791

oMember, Board of Commissioners, District of Columbia, 1791-1794

oAssociate Justice, U.S. Supreme Court, 1791-1793 (resigned)

oJustice, Orphans’ Court, Frederick County, 1799

•Died: October 26, 1819 at “Rose Hill,” near Frederick Town, Frederick County

•Buried: All Saints’ Parish Cemetery, Frederick Town

 

761 words Biography Project, Maryland State Archives

 

Johnson, Thomas (1732-1819), lawyer, politician, and justice, was born on 4 Nov 1732 near St. Leonard’s Creek in Calvert County, Maryland, the fifth child of Thomas Johnson (1702-1777) and his wife Dorcas Sedgwick (1705-1770), daughter of Joshua Sedgwick. Johnson had two older and five younger brothers and two older and two younger sisters; one brother died in infancy. Both his parents were Maryland natives of English descent; his paternal grandfather emigrated from Yarmouth, England.

After receiving his primary education at home, Johnson moved to Annapolis where he obtained employment with the Land Office, under the Register, Thomas Jennings. Johnson left this position to study law with noted attorney Stephen Bordley. Johnson was first admitted to practice in the Annapolis Mayor’s Court in 1756 and subsequently gained admittance to various county courts and to the Provincial and Chancery courts by 1767. Having established himself as a successful lawyer, Johnson in 1766 married Anne Jennings (1745-1794), daughter of his former employer. The couple had seven children, three sons and four daughters.

 

In addition to his law practice, Johnson was a partner with Annapolis merchant Lancelot Jacques in a western Maryland iron furnace from the 1760s to the early 1770s. He also formed a partnership with three of his brothers in an ironworks that included several furnaces, forges, glassworks, and mills, principally the Catoctin Furnace near the town of Frederick.

 

Johnson’s public career began in 1762, with election as the Anne Arundel County representative to the Lower House of the Maryland General Assembly. Serving in that body until 1774, he participated in committees to guide the Stamp Act Congress, to resolve the constitutional rights of freemen, and to supervise building of a new State House. In 1774, Thomas Johnson was elected to represent Maryland in the Continental Congress. On 15 June 1775 during the second Continental Congress, he had the honor of nominating George Washington as Commander-in-Chief of the Continental Army. From Jan 1776 to Feb 1777, Johnson was a senior brigadier general in the Maryland Militia, and commanded troops sent to aid Washington during his retreat through New Jersey in the winter of 1776-1777.

 

On 13 Feb 1777, the legislature elected Johnson as the first governor of the State of Maryland. His inauguration, held in the State House which he helped to create, followed on 21 March 1777. Johnson was re-elected unanimously in Nov 1777 and Nov 1778 (the statutory limit for consecutive terms). As governor during the Revolutionary War, Johnson prepared for possible invasion by British forces and secured provisions for Washington’s troops.

 

Upon leaving office, Johnson settled at “Richfield,” his Frederick County estate. Although elected to represent Maryland in Congress in both Dec 1779 and Oct 1780, he declined to serve. Instead, in Dec 1780 Johnson accepted a seat from Frederick County in the House of Delegates, where he encouraged a vote in favor of the Articles of Confederation. He resigned this post in Dec 1781 and resumed the practice of law, but returned to the House in 1787 and 1788 to shepherd the Federal Constitution through the ratification process and to support George Washington in his bid for the Presidency. On 20 April 1790, Johnson accepted an appointment as Chief Judge of the General Court, serving until Oct 1791 when Washington appointed him to the United States Supreme Court. Johnson also headed the Board of Commissioners of the Federal City, helping to choose a site and a name for the new national capital.

 

Johnson left the bench in 1793, and declined an appointment as Secretary of State. He came out of retirement for a final time on 22 Feb 1800 to deliver a funeral oration for his friend, George Washington. Thomas Johnson died on 26 Oct 1819 at “Rose Hill,” the Frederick home of his son-in-law. He was buried in the family vault in All Saints’ Parish cemetery, but in 1913 Johnson’s body was removed to Mt. Olivet Cemetery where a monument was erected in his honor.

 

The following essay is taken from Frank F. White, Jr., The Governors of Maryland 1777-1970 (Annapolis: The Hall of Records Commission, 1970), 3-9.

 

“THOMAS JOHNSON, Maryland’s first elected State governor, was born in Calvert County on November 4, 1732, the son of Thomas and Dorcas (Sedgewick) Johnson. His grandfather, also named Thomas Johnson, had come to Maryland from Yarmouth, England in the last half of the seventeenth century following his elopement with Mary Baker, a chancery ward, whom he had been forbidden to marry because the marrying of maids in chancery was unlawful. They fled from England, settling at St. Leonard’s, where the future governor was born, the fifth of twelve children.

 

“Thomas Johnson received his early education at home. When he was a young man, his parents sent him to Annapolis, where he came into contact with educated men. There, he studied law under Stephen Bordley following which he was admitted to the Bar. On February 16, 1766, he married Ann Jennings, the daughter of his employer Thomas Jennings. They had eight children.

 

“In 1762, he was elected to represent Anne Arundel County in the lower House of the General Assembly, serving in that body until 1774. His early legislative career was marked by several outstanding accomplishments. Following the passage of the Stamp Act in 1765, he was named one of the members of the committee to draw up instructions for the guidance of Maryland’s representatives to the Stamp Act Congress which met in New York in that year. Two years later, he was appointed to the committee which drafted resolutions on the constitutional rights and privileges of the freemen of the Province. In 1768, he was named to a committee to draft a memorial to the King ‘on the late acts of Parliament imposing duties on the colonies for the sole purpose of raising a revenue.’ He was also one of the Superintendents selected to supervise the building of a new ‘Stadt House’ in Annapolis. Then, in 1773, he was chosen a member of the standing Committee of Correspondence and Enquiry to obtain ‘the most early and authentick Intelligence of all such Acts and Resolutions of the British Parliament or Proceedings of Administration as may relate to, or affect the British Colonies in America, and to keep [p. 4] up and maintain a Correspondence and Communication with our Sister Colonies respecting these important proceedings from Time to Time to lay before this House.’

 

“In 1774, Thomas Johnson was elected to the Convention of Maryland and was named, together with Matthew Tilghman, Robert Goldsborough, William Paca, and Samuel Chase, as deputies to arrange for a meeting to take steps to relieve Boston. Up until this time, Johnson had restricted his public service to Maryland. His election to the Continental Congress widened his horizon and commenced to build his reputation. He served as a member of the Congress between 1774 and 1777. It was John Adams who said of him ‘Johnson of Maryland, has a clear and cool head. . . . He is a deliberating man, but not a shining orator; his passion and imagination do not appear enough for an orator; his reason and penetration appear, but not his rhetoric.’

 

“On October 2, 1774, the Congress passed a resolution requesting the preparation of an address to the Crown for the redress of grievances. Johnson was selected to draft it together with Richard Henry Lee, John Adams, and Patrick Henry. Following the adjournment of that session of Congress, Johnson returned home where he once more became a member of the Committee of Correspondence.

 

“The Second Continental Congress met in Philadelphia in May 1775. During that session, his most important accomplishment was his speech on June 15, 1775 in which he nominated George Washington to be Commander-in-Chief of the Continental Army. Washington’s election was unanimous.

 

“On August 1, 1775, following the adjournment of Congress, Johnson returned to his home. In late July he took his seat in the Provincial Convention, being chosen one of the delegates from Anne Arundel County. He was placed on the committee to draft the Association of the Freemen of Maryland, a declaration of rights for a new form of government and a pledge of loyalty to the patriot cause. In late August he became a member of the Council of Safety, a group which carried on the executive functions between sessions of the Provincial Convention.

 

“In the fall of 1775, Johnson again took his seat in Congress, being selected a member of the important Committee on Claims. On December 7, he was back in Annapolis for the session of the Provincial Convention and to organize resistance in Maryland. Early in January 1776, the Convention elected him senior Brigadier General of Militia, so that for the next few months he had to locate arms and ammunition, clothing and supplies, and money with which he was to raise and equip an army.

 

“Johnson was not in Philadelphia during the deliberations leading to the Declaration of Independence. Consequently, he did not sign the document. He was, instead, in Annapolis voting on July 6, 1776, in favor [p. 5] of the adoption of the Declaration of the Delegates of Maryland which declared Maryland’s separation from England.

 

“In the same month, he organized and personally led the ‘Flying Camp,’ a regiment of 1,800 soldiers who later marched from Frederick to Washington’s headquarters in New Jersey.

 

“In the summer of 1776, the first Convention to prepare a State Constitution met in Annapolis. In the election of delegates from Anne Arundel County, Johnson was a candidate but for some unknown reason, he was defeated. At the time, he was more concerned with the problems of raising and equipping the militia. On August 26, however, Caroline County held a special election to replace a delegate who had accepted a commission in the Flying Camp, and Johnson was elected to succeed him, taking his seat on August 30. Johnson played an important role in the proceedings, recommending the adoption of a simple oath as a prerequisite for holding office in the State.

 

“Maryland’s first Constitution required the immediate election of a governor by both houses of the Legislature. Accordingly, on February 13, 1777, the two houses met for this purpose. Johnson received forty votes out of the fifty-two cast, with the remaining ballots being scattered among his opponents. Samuel Chase received nine, and Matthew Tilghman, George Plater and William Paca each received one. The newly-elected Governor qualified on March 20, a man held in the highest esteem in all the colonies. He was inaugurated with great pomp in the State House in Annapolis on Friday, March 21, 1777. The soldiers who were drawn up for review on the lawn, fired three volleys, and batteries of artillery fired a salute of thirteen rounds. A gala night followed the inauguration, the state ball revived memories of the brilliant entertainments that had won for Annapolis international renown in the days preceding the Revolution.

 

“Several days after his inauguration, the Legislature considered what it termed ‘the proper mode of intercourse or communication with the governor.’ The Committee appointed to report on the matter established guidelines for the relations of the legislature with the executive. ‘All affairs or matters of business which the governor may think fit to communicate or in which he would have the advice and direction of the legislature, and which, according to the constitution would properly fall under their deliberation ought to be addressed to the general assembly and laid first before the senate, except what relates to supplies, which ought to be laid before the house of delegates.’ The Committee went on to insist ‘that all applications and addresses to the governor be made jointly, or separately, as occasions and circumstances may require; and when the governor would personally communicate any business to both houses, he may repair to the senate, who shall appoint two of their members to acquaint the house of delegates, that the governor requests their attendance in the senate house.’

 

“In the summer of 1777, the British fleet under Admiral Howe sailed [p. 6] up the Chesapeake, creating consternation everywhere. Governor Johnson issued a proclamation, in which he called upon the people to lend their aid to repel any possible invasion of Maryland. ‘To defend our liberties requires our exertions,’ he declared. ‘Our wives, our children and our country implore our assistance: motives amply sufficient to arm every one who can be called a man.’ Here was no mincing of words. The British headed for Philadelphia, but Johnson’s proclamation stirred the people to determined resistance.

 

“The term of governor under the Constitution of 1776, was only for one year and a governor could not be re-elected to serve more than three consecutive terms. Johnson was re-elected unanimously both in November 1777 and in November 1778. He devoted his first year in office to the prevention of a Tory insurrection on the Eastern Shore, and combatting the invasion of the State by Lord Howe. In his second term, he considered such problems as frustrating disloyalty among the people, as well as attempting to secure arms, clothing and equipment for Washington’s Army. In his final year in office, he had again to face the problem of possible British invasion of the State, and supplying the army. Johnson was succeeded on November 12, 1779 by Thomas Sim Lee, after which he retired to Frederick County where he had decided to make his home.

 

“Upon his retirement as governor, the General Assembly passed a resolution in appreciation of his public service. On November 17, 1779, the General Assembly expressed its thanks to Johnson by complimenting him upon the ‘prudence, assiduity, firmness and integrity, with which you have discharged, in times the most critical, the duties of your late important station.’ These, asserted the Assembly, ‘have a just claim to our warm acknowledgements and sincerest thanks.’ The Address went on to extoll him further: ‘While dissipation and avarice have too generally prevailed, your conduct, Sir, has afforded a conspicuous example of unwearied attention and close application to the public welfare, and of disinterestedness, in foregoing those profits your known industry, knowledge of business and of your profession, could not have failed of securing. We approve and admire that consistency of conduct and uniformity of character, which distinguish a life, devoted, from a very early period, to the true interests of your country, steadily and invariably pursued through a variety of important trusts; and relying on this your ruling passion, the love of your country, we have the best founded hope that you will not suffer to remain long inactive, in the retirement of private life, those abilities which have often been so serviceable to the state, and of which it never than at the present time stood in greater need.’

 

“To all this, Johnson modestly replied on March 28, 1780: ‘I cannot flatter myself but that in appointing me to some of the important trusts with which my country has honoured me, she has overrated my abilities; they have been faithfully exerted to their extent with a view of her good, nor am I conscious of having preferred, in any instance, a particular to the general interest: and I hope whether I remain in the calm walk of [p. 7] private life,—the most agreeable to my own inclination,—or should fill a public station, I shall continue to the last, to wish and endeavour to promote her happiness and prosperity.

 

“‘The favourable light in which you have been pleased to accept my endeavours for the public service is the most noble and pleasing reward you could bestow; and I return you my sincerest thanks for the very ample and honourable testimony you have given of my conduct as a man and a magistrate; it highly gratifies my ambition in handing me down as approved of by you and deserving well of posterity.’

 

“Johnson was not destined to remain long in retirement. Immediately after he had surrendered the governorship, he had left for Frederick where he had purchased ‘Richfield,’ and had erected a beautiful mansion. In December 1779, he was elected to represent Maryland in Congress, an honor he declined. In October of the following year, he was again offered a seat in Congress, which he again declined. Instead, he accepted a seat in the House of Delegates from Frederick County, taking his seat on December 2, 1780. It was through his urging that the deputies from Maryland were instructed to vote in favor of the Articles of Confederation, Maryland having first refused to join in the Confederation unless Virginia should agree to release all lands west of the Ohio River.

 

“Johnson declined re-election to the House of Delegates in 1781. Instead, during the years 1782 to 1786, he concentrated on his law practice as well as his business affairs. After the Treaty of Paris had been signed he helped his close friend, George Washington, to organize the ‘Potowmack Company,’ a group which attempted to build a canal to make the Potomac River navigable. Johnson was largely instrumental in 1785 in persuading the General Assembly to pass the articles of incorporation and was chosen as a member of the company’s Board of Directors. The project subsequently failed, not but because of its lack of ingenuity, but because of the unavailability of labor and other problems.

 

“In 1786 and 1787, Johnson again served as a member of the House of Delegates. Following his term of office as governor, and his attempted retirement, Johnson had been repeatedly urged to return to public life, but he refused most of these invitations. Finally, undoubtedly because of his interest in the ‘Potowmack Company,’ he accepted election to the House of Delegates. Once more, he used his influence to extend the life of the company’s charter.

 

“In 1787 and 1788, Johnson urged Maryland to adopt the new Federal Constitution and used his energies in its behalf. Frederick County, early in April 1788, elected him as one of its delegates to the State Convention of Maryland which assembled to ratify the document. Johnson, elected as a Federalist, favored prompt and unconditional ratification. Just as the Convention assembled, he received a letter from George Washington, warning that if the Maryland Convention failed to act promptly or attempted to adjourn, this action ‘will be tantamount to the rejection of [p. 8] the Constitution.’ Johnson, undoubtedly, did not need this reminder from Washington, and the Maryland Convention approved the Constitution by an overwhelming vote.

 

“As soon as ratification had been assured, Johnson threw his support to his close friend, George Washington, for the presidency. In the meantime, in November 1788, however, the General Assembly again chose Johnson to become governor, to succeed William Smallwood. Again he declined, probably because of preoccupation with his personal business, legal and ‘Potowmack Company’ affairs. He was considered as a presidential elector, but again his wishes for retirement from public life were respected.

 

‘In 1789, Washington asked him to serve as United States District Judge for Maryland. Again, he declined. On April 20, 1790, Governor John Eager Howard, appointed him Chief Judge of the General Court, which post Johnson for some unknown reason accepted. He served in that capacity until October 1791, when Washington appointed him to the United States Supreme Court. During his short tenure which lasted only until January 1793, he had to decide several cases which called for the interpretation of the Constitution of the United States. Several months previously, in January 1791, Washington appointed him as the head of the Board of Commissioners of the Federal City. With Daniel Carroll and Dr. David Stuart, the Commissioners agreed upon a site for the new national capital and named it ‘the City of Washington.’

 

“When Edmund Randolph resigned as Secretary of State in 1795, Washington turned to Johnson once more offering him that position. ‘The office of secretary of state is vacant,’ he wrote, ‘occasioned by the resignation of Mr. Randolph. Whill you accept it? You know my wishes of old to bring you into the Administration. Where, then, is the necessity of repeating them? . . . No time more than the present ever required the aid of your abilities. . . .’ Johnson declined the offer, stating that he felt . . .

 

‘real Concern that my Circumstances will not permit me to fill the important Office you propose to me. I am far from being out of Humor with the World on my own Account; it has done me more than Justice in estimating my Abilities, and more Justice than common in conjecturing my Motives. I feel nothing of fear either in hazarding again the little reputation I may have acquired for I am not conscious of having sought or despised applause. But, without Affectation, I do not think I could do credit to the Office of Secretary; I cannot persuade myself that I possess the necessary Qualifications for it and I am sure I am too old to expect Improvement. My Strength declines, and so too probably will my mental powers soon. My views in this world have been some time bounded chiefly to my children, they yet for a little while may have me to lean on, being constantly with them adds to their Happiness and makes my chief comfort.’

 

“Johnson spent his later years in retirement at his home in Frederick. [p. 9] His last public appearance was on February 22, 1800, when he delivered the funeral oration on the day of prayer and mourning in memory of George Washington. In this solemn panegyric he eulogized the first President and outlined his long career of public service. He concluded with these words: ‘Let our hearts, my hearers, glow with gratitude to the Supreme for the blessing bestowed on us in Washington: like this sound philosopher and practical Christian, let us refer the gift to the hand of Him whose governing Providence rules the fate of individuals and of nations: let us feel the weight of his advice, not disregard his exhortations to union.’

 

“At ‘Rose Hill,’ the home of his daughter Anne Jennings Grahame in Frederick, Governor Johnson died in his eighty-seventh year, on October 26, 1819. No more fitting comment on his life can be found than that recorded in his obituary notice in the Fredericktown Herald, as copied in the Maryland Gazette for November 11, 1819:

 

“‘Mr. Johnson was among the first in the Union to assert the just claims of his country against the tyranny and oppression of Great Britain, and was early in life honoured with the most important and arduous trusts which his countrymen could confer. He . . . enjoyed without solicitation, every honour which his native state could bestow . . . . His deeds are inscribed in the imperishable archives of his country; his wisdom, impartiality and integrity in the records of justice; his worth & virtues are preserved in the hearts of his countrymen; his kindness, affection and friendship in the memory of his family, relatives and friends; his trust for immortality rested in his Savior and God.’

 

“He was buried in the family vault in the Episcopal graveyard in Frederick, but in 1913 his body was removed to Mt. Olivet Cemetery where a monument was erected over his grave.”

Greater Manchester Police proudly welcomed 140 new officers to the force at an attestation ceremony at Bolton Town Hall on the evening of Wednesday 8 January 2020.

  

In the presence of family and friends, the new officers took the Police Oath in front of magistrate Stephen Paine. In the oath they swore to uphold the office of constable with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality.

  

The ceremony marks the official commencement of their police duties.

  

Chief Constable Ian Hopkins welcomed each new recruit to the force.

  

Mayor of Bolton, Councillor Hilary Fairclough, was in attendance as was Andy Burnham, Mayor of Greater Manchester.

  

For more information about Policing in Greater Manchester please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

  

To contact Greater Manchester Police for a less urgent matter or make a report online you can also visit www.gmp.police.uk.

  

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

  

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

  

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give evidence.

 

Greater Manchester Police proudly welcomed 140 new officers to the force at an attestation ceremony at Bolton Town Hall on the evening of Wednesday 8 January 2020.

  

In the presence of family and friends, the new officers took the Police Oath in front of magistrate Stephen Paine. In the oath they swore to uphold the office of constable with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality.

  

The ceremony marks the official commencement of their police duties.

  

Chief Constable Ian Hopkins welcomed each new recruit to the force.

  

Mayor of Bolton, Councillor Hilary Fairclough, was in attendance as was Andy Burnham, Mayor of Greater Manchester.

  

For more information about Policing in Greater Manchester please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

  

To contact Greater Manchester Police for a less urgent matter or make a report online you can also visit www.gmp.police.uk.

  

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

  

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

  

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give evidence.

 

Yesterday, Tuesday 22 January 2019, Greater Manchester Police welcomed 100 new recruits to the Force. The officers were officially sworn in at a formal ceremony attended by Chief Constable Ian Hopkins, senior officers and magistrate Stephen Paine.

 

The attestation ceremony was held at Stockport Town Hall.

 

The Mayor of Stockport, Councillor Walter Brett, was also on hand to welcome the new recruits.

 

Family and friends watched the new officers make their oath to uphold their role with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality throughout their time in post.

 

New recruits have to complete a two year probation period which includes classroom based learning and a year of active patrol. During their training they will have the same of level of authority as regular officers, including the power of arrest.

 

The new recruits are replacing those who have either retired or left the organisation and therefore helping GMP to maintain current officer numbers.

 

To find out more about Greater Manchester Police please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

 

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

 

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

 

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give a statement.

From the autumn 2016 trip to Vietnam:

 

If ever there were a good way to finish up a trip, this particular Sunday in October would be it. Before arriving in Hanoi, I honestly had exceptionally low expectations. A bit like Saigon, if you are to go online and try to look up a list of places to visit – basically a tourist’s stock photography checklist, as it may be – you don’t find much that’s appealing. Well…I didn’t, anyway, and as a result, I had pretty low expectations for Hanoi.

 

The charm and beauty of Hanoi, however, isn’t in any one particular place. It’s in the experience of the entire city. (I’d say the same for Saigon, but multiply that a few times for Hanoi.) On this day in the Old Quarter in particular, I kept finding myself thinking, “Oh, my God, I shouldn’t be this lucky as a photographer…” Today ended up being mostly about people, with a little food and historical locations mixed in.

 

As I mentioned in the last set of posting, today would start off a bit sad with Junebug leaving for China a day before I would. So, we were checked out of our room by 6:00 in the morning or so. The breakfast at the Art Trendy was wonderful. Buffet with a mix of made-to-order omelets mixed in. Strong work, Art Trendy, strong work…

 

When June left, I really had nothing to do since it was still six in the morning and I was temporarily homeless as I had to switch hotels. So…I sat around the lobby for about two hours (possibly slightly awkward for the poor girls working there, but oh, well; I had to sit somewhere).

 

Around 8:00, I finally dragged my old bones out of the hotel and walked the five to ten minutes down the street to the Aquarius, where I politely asked them to hold my non-camera bag until I come back around 1:00 in the afternoon to check in.

 

After that, I was finally off with my cameras to enjoy an early Sunday morning in the bustling Old Quarter. On the street where the hotel is situated are a number of restaurants where locals were jammed in to enjoy noodles, steamed buns, and the like. It was wonderful to be among that crowd (though someone tried to scold me ever so slightly for taking pictures of people eating).

 

Since this was right next to St. Joseph’s Cathedral – and it was Sunday morning – I found my way back into the church where we crashed the wedding the afternoon before and realized that I almost got locked into Sunday mass while walking around taking pictures. So…I stayed. I prayed. And my prayer was answered when I realized the side doors and even the back door were open. (Ok…I didn’t really think I was locked in a church, but it did feel like it a little bit.)

 

Upon exiting the church, a handful of frames under my belt, I walked along the lovely streets photographing shops and people. At Caphe, I piggybacked on someone else’s photo shoot – it looked like they were doing a promo for the place, or possibly just a personal shoot for five women, though I have a feeling it was the former. At any rate, I was quite pleased with that little set and am presenting quite a few of those here, even if they’re a little redundant.

 

My ultimate goal with this wandering was to find my way to the Hanoi Hilton. Now, I’m not taking about the hotel chain, of course, but rather the prison that U.S. prisoners of war sarcastically called the Hanoi Hilton during the Vietnam War. (This is the prison where Senator John McCain was interred while a POW, and there are one or two pictures to that effect here.)

 

This prison has a particularly interesting history (and morbid since…well…it’s a prison). It’s about a hundred years old and was founded by the French colonialists around the turn of the 20th century. During the first 50 years of its history, the French imprisoned Vietnamese insurgents and those who wanted independence. In the eyes of the French…renegades (hence the imprisonment). In the eyes of the Vietnamese – especially the current government – patriots and national heroes. If they were truly freedom fighters, then I would probably side with the current government on that one.

 

The French even had a guillotine installed here and overcrowding was a major problem. There were plenty of escape attempts, and more were successful than you may think, which is a little peculiar.

 

After the battle of Bien Dien Phu and the ejection of the French from the north (and before the U.S. got involved in the south), the prison changed hands and was under control of Ho Chi Minh. During the Vietnam War, it became one of the main prisons for U.S. POWs, as I alluded to above.

 

The propaganda claims that the Vietcong were absolutely humane and decent with U.S. prisoners, allowing them to observe their religious rites (Christmas celebrations, etc.), allowed prisoners to smoke and enjoy leisure (board games, basketball, etc.), and claimed they were well-fed.

 

This is certainly how it’s presented in the prison/museum currently. If you were to go online, though, and try to find a contrary report, you would find that this was all coerced and staged to make it appear as if things were on the up and up. (For anyone curious, per my Vietnamese friends, the general education in Vietnam today is how terrible the French and U.S. were for colonizing and torturing the country and keeping it from its independence.)

 

So, what’s the truth of what really happened? Who knows? Outside of firsthand accounts, it’s impossible to know for certain and even then, memory can be a tricky thing. I tend to like to say the truth is always somewhere between two opposing viewpoints, no matter what the topic may be.

 

From an impartial and purely photographic point of view, the prison, currently a museum/memorial, is an interesting place to spend an hour or two. Some of the exhibits seem a bit cheesy, but some are quite tasteful and well done. There’s also an informational video. You’ll have to see this with a bit of imagination (the prison, that is), as at least half of it has been leveled for high rise buildings. At least there’s some tangible piece of it left to visit, including the main gate (Maison Centrale).

 

After about two hours here at the Hanoi Hilton, I walked over towards the Opera House to get a few daytime shots but, really, to get lunch at El Gaucho. I was looking forward to a proper steak. The prices were astronomical (though justifiable based on what I ate), though I just opted for a steak salad. It was so good I contemplated going back for dinner, but had other plans.

 

With a happy stomach, I went back to finally check in at the Aquarius Hotel and got my workout huffing up six flights of stairs each time I went out. I relaxed here for a few hours until 4:00 when a dear friend of mine came to town to see me.

 

Ngan and I had an ice cream at Baskin Robbins right in front of St. Joe’s before heading over to the Temple of Literature. This is a temple dedicated to education and, bless my soul, it’s a place where university graduates come for graduation pictures.

 

On this particular day – a warm, sunny, late Sunday afternoon – it was packed with college students. And it was beautiful to see that many people happy, full of hopes and dreams, and dressed in either cap and gown or traditional Vietnamese clothes. In short…I had a field day shooting for an hour here.

 

Around 5:00, Ngan had to head back to school, and I went back to my hotel. I had one more meeting. Hoa, who traveled around Thailand & Cambodia with me in May, flew back to see me this evening. She picked me up at 6:00 on her scooter and rode me all around Hanoi by evening.

 

She started by taking me to Ho Chi Minh’s Mausoleum (which I consider a lot more photogenic in its setting than the Great Gangster’s Mausoleum on Tiananmen Square). This one, at least, was in a parklike setting. At evening, it’s well-lit and you can find people relaxing in the grass in front of it. During the day, you can visit and there are quite a few buildings behind the mausoleum that you can also see.

 

After a few minutes here, Hoa took me by West Lake – the largest lake in Hanoi, as I mentioned yesterday – and just drove me around for over an hour, it seemed. My impressions that Hanoi (even out of the Old Quarter) seemed to be a good place to live – though I’d be concerned about the air pollution – and people here seemed to be happy. Also…Vietnamese really love their coffee.

 

We finally returned to the Old Quarter for dinner at one of the famous restaurants she recommended and she treated me to a wonderful dinner. I can’t recall what we ate (the Vietnamese names of it, anyway), but it was nice.

 

After dinner, she drove me over towards the Opera House and then, finally, we stopped by Hoan Kiem Lake in the heart of the Quarter and walked around the lake. It was getting close to 10:00 by this time, and I wanted to get back to the hotel to get a few hours sleep before waking up for my early flight in the morning. Hoa came to the airport with me to see me off.

 

If ever there were a great way to finish a great trip, this was it. I absolutely loved Vietnam – honestly, a lot more than I imagined I would, even with every single person I know who’d ever come here saying what a fantastic country this is – and would gladly come back. This seems to be one of the kinds of countries that you would never get tired of or, if you did, it would sure take a long time. With that, I’ll bid goodbye to Vietnam for now with the hopes that I’ll someday return to this land of amazing food, landscapes, and people.

 

As always, thanks for dropping by and viewing these pictures. Please feel free to leave any questions or comments and I’ll answer as I have time.

Kamera: Nikon FM

Linse: Nikkor-N Auto 24mm f2.8 (1970)

Film: Rollei P&R 640 @ box speed

Kjemi: Rodinal (1:25 / 13:30 min. @ 20°C)

 

-Wednesday 21 February 2024: I was prevented from seeing the proceedings in the International Court of Justice in Den Haag yesterday. Having just seen the whole proceedings of today’s statements by Colombia, Cuba, United Arab Emirates, Egypt and the USA; I think it is of importance to note that USA hardly mentioned the legality of the occupation in itself.

 

Instead, USA mostly focused on the Israeli «need for security». What about the Palestinian need for security? This is what is in question here. Instead of saying anything about the legality of Israel’s occupation, USA wanted to emphasize the need for «negotiations» and «land for peace»!

 

USA’s statement was just talking beside the point and should therefore not be considered much by the court in this legal matter.

 

No, today it was the statements and powerful performances of the women that impressed me - certainly Andrea Jiménez Herrera (Colombia) and especially Jasmine Moussa (Egypt). Here I will therefore highlight the presentations of Colombia and Egypt.

 

These are words that matter.

  

International Court of Justice: Day 3 hearing on the legal consequences of Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories (publ. 21 February 2024) [Video]

  

International Court of Justice: Legal Consequences arising from the Policies and Practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem [Transcripts and Documents]

  

Ms JIMÉNEZ HERRERA: [COLOMBIA]

 

I. INTRODUCTION

 

1. Mr President, Members of the Court, it is a great honour for me to address the Court, on behalf of the Republic of Colombia, in these proceedings.

 

2. Our presence here today bears witness to Colombia’s tradition of respect for international law. But it also reflects Colombia’s deep concern about the incidents that regularly occur between the State of Palestine and the State of Israel, exacerbated after the horrific events taking place since 7 October 2023, which have unleashed a cycle of violence that has only worsened an already calamitous situation, causing the death of more than 27,000 civilians and thousands of wounded.

 

3. Colombia rejects any recourse to violence or unilateral acts that lead to a higher level of confrontation. We also believe that holding States accountable for violating international law,

especially when their actions bring about dire humanitarian consequences, is a sign of respect for the rule of law.

 

4. Colombia has expressed before and reiterates today that the occupation of the Palestinian

territory is a violation of international law and is contrary to the principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations.

 

5. Furthermore, as the Court itself stated in the Construction of a Wall Opinion, it is clear that both Israel and Palestine have the obligation to abide by international law, and to respect and ensure respect for international humanitarian law and human rights law within the Occupied Palestinian Territory. Both States also need to implement in good faith all relevant Security Council and General Assembly resolutions.

 

6. Additionally, Colombia fully shares the Court’s view in its Advisory Opinion on the Construction of a Wall, to the effect that the United Nations, and the General Assembly in particular, need to redouble efforts to encourage a negotiated solution to the outstanding problems, on the basis of international law, and with the purpose of the establishment of a fully viable Palestinian State, existing side by side with Israel and its neighbours, fostering peace and security in the region.

 

7. Nearly two decades after that landmark decision was issued, and in light of the gravity of the current situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, the advisory opinion to be rendered by the Court in these proceedings shall provide much needed guidance to the United Nations system and third States in order to continue supporting both States reaching a solution through dialogue and based on mutual respect.

 

8. Colombia thus considers that, through its advisory opinion, the Court can contribute to clarifying the law, especially the rules governing the consequences of violations to peremptory norms of international law — namely, rules of jus cogens and erga omnes obligations — and to specific legal régimes which are the concern of all of mankind.

 

II. JURISDICTION OF THE COURT

 

9. Mr President, I will begin by referring to the issue of the jurisdiction of the Court to render the requested advisory opinion.

 

10. By virtue of Article 65, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the Court, two requirements must be met for the Court to have jurisdiction to give an opinion: (i) there must be a formal request from a body duly authorized by the United Nations Charter, or in accordance to it, to make such a request, and (ii) the question put before the Court must be a legal question.

 

11. It is undisputed that the General Assembly is one of the bodies authorized to make such a request, in line with Article 96, paragraph 1, of the Charter and that the decision of the General Assembly to submit the questions contained in resolution 77/247 was adopted in accordance with its rules of procedure and by the required majority. A significant number of Member States — including Colombia — decided it was important for the General Assembly to receive guidance on the questions put to the Court. Therefore, the request observes the first requirement.

 

12. The second requirement, namely that the question put before the Court be a legal one, is also complied within the present case. Indeed, in your jurisprudence, particularly, for example, in the Nuclear Weapons Advisory Opinion, you have clarified that a question is a legal one when “the Court is asked to rule on the compatibility of the [request] with the relevant principles and rules of international law”. In other words, questions “framed in terms of law and rais[ing] problems of international law”, whereby the Court is asked to identify and apply principles and rules of international law, qualify as questions of a legal character.

 

13. Colombia considers that the questions raised in resolution 77/247 are indeed framed in legal terms, since they request the Court to determine the legal consequences arising from the policies and practices of the State of Israel, a Member State of the United Nations, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and to ascertain how those actions affect the legal status of the occupation. Those questions are to be answered through the application of rules of international law and therefore constitute legal questions which could form the basis of a request for an advisory opinion.

 

14. Thus, in the opinion of Colombia, the Court has jurisdiction to respond to the questions contained in resolution 77/247.

 

III. PROPRIETY

 

15. Mr President, I will now focus on the question of propriety. In this respect, while Article 65, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the Court, gives the Court discretionary power to give or not an advisory opinion that has been requested from it, in its case law the Court clarified certain important points, namely:

 

(i) that the Court may give an advisory opinion should be interpreted to mean that the Court has always a discretionary power to decline to give an advisory opinion, even if the conditions of jurisdiction are met; and

 

(ii) the Court is always mindful of the fact that its answer to a request for an advisory opinion represents its participation in the activities of the Organization, and, in principle, should not be refused.

 

16. While certain States have expressed opposition to the request by the General Assembly, the reasons argued are, for the most part, quite similar to those dismissed by the Court in its Advisory Opinion on the Construction of a Wall. In that case the Court decided to render the requested Opinion as, in its own words “[d]ifferences of views . . . on legal issues have existed in practically every advisory proceeding”. Colombia posits that the Court’s thorough reasoning then, soundly grounded on its long-standing jurisprudence, is directly applicable to the current request.

 

17. Consequently, Colombia considers that the Court should reach the same conclusion in the present proceedings, that is, that it can and will exercise jurisdiction, and that there are no compelling reasons for it to use its discretionary power not to render an opinion.

 

18. Hence, Colombia invites the Court to pronounce the law on the legal consequences arising out of serious breaches of peremptory norms of general international law and thus assist the General Assembly in the proper exercise of its functions; the United Nations in discharging its responsibilities in this matter, originating, as the Court recalled, in the Mandate and the Partition resolution concerning Palestine; and all States who possess an interest in the protection of erga omnes obligations.

 

19. Mr President, an additional important circumstance that should be factored in by the Court when deciding as to the propriety of rendering its advisory opinion is that the situation in the Palestinian occupied territory has changed drastically since the request was transmitted to the Court in January 2023.

 

20. On 7 October of the same year Israel was the victim of a horrifying attack by Hamas. We all know the scale and the magnitude of Israel’s reaction to the attack. The Court itself has already been confronted with the veritable map of horror and devastation which the Gaza Strip has become, as a result of the total war and scorched-earth policies unleashed by the Government of Israel.

 

21. Indeed, in several passages of its Order of 26 January concerning provisional measures in the case brought by South Africa against Israel on 29 December 2023, the Court took judicial notice of some details of this dire situation. To quote just one of such passages, in the Court’s own words:

 

“The Court considers that the civilian population in the Gaza Strip remains extremely vulnerable. It recalls that the military operation conducted by Israel after 7 October 2023 has resulted, inter alia, in tens of thousands of deaths and injuries and the destruction of homes, schools, medical facilities and other vital infrastructure, as well as displacement on a massive scale . . . The Court notes that the operation is ongoing and that the Prime Minister of Israel announced on 18 January 2024 that the war ‘will take many more long months’. At present, many Palestinians in the Gaza Strip have no access to the most basic foodstuffs, potable water, electricity, essential medicines or heating.”

 

22. Evidently, the factual matrix of that case and the background of these advisory proceedings are not identical and, in particular, the request by the General Assembly has a wider scope than South Africa’s Application in at least two respects:

 

(i) in that the requested advisory opinion refers to the policies and practices of Israel in the whole Palestinian Occupied Territory and not only in the Gaza Strip; and

 

(ii) in that it covers all actions that Israel carries out in such territory and not only the actions and omissions by State agents that, according to the Applicant in the contentious case, amount to genocide.

 

23. But the point remains that those policies and practices — which in Colombia’s view contravene essential norms of international law — have taken a turn for the worse as a result of Israel’s military campaign unfolding in Gaza, today a place of death and despair that, in the words of an impartial source, “has simply become uninhabitable”.

 

24. Colombia respectfully submits that the Court should not underestimate the fact that the situation in Gaza has become more deadly over the past months and, therefore, the legal

consequences of such actions must be even more serious today than in the world we were living before this bloodshed started.

 

25. Against that distressing background, and for all the reasons explained above, the Government of Colombia, in line with its policy of pursuing Total Peace both within and beyond its borders, calls upon the Court to avail itself of the opportunity to clarify legal aspects that may pave the way for the parties to resume a fruitful discussion and achieve peace, and support the General Assembly to better assist them in that purpose.

 

IV. VIOLATIONS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

 

26. Mr President, let me address now the questions submitted to the Court by the General Assembly. The questions relate to the legal consequences arising

 

(i) from Israel’s ongoing violation of the right of self-determination of the Palestinian people as a result of its prolonged occupation, settlement and annexation of the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, and

 

(ii) for all States and the United Nations from this ongoing occupation.

 

27. In order for the Court to rule on those questions, it must first determine

 

(i) whether Israel is violating the right of self-determination of the Palestinian people, and

 

(ii) whether Israel’s prolonged occupation, settlement and annexation of the Palestinian territory since 1967 is in violation of international law.

 

An answer in the affirmative to both questions will then enable the Court to address the ensuing legal consequences.

 

28. With regard to the first issue, as mentioned, in the Wall Advisory Opinion the Court stated that Israel is bound to comply with its obligation to respect the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and, in doing so, it is obliged to respect international humanitarian law and international human rights law. The General Assembly routinely reaffirms such right by means of an annual resolution on the matter.

 

29. Regarding the second point, Israel’s prolonged occupation and further annexation of the Palestinian territory is in manifest violation of the rule of international customary law which clearly prohibits the acquisition of territory by force. It also blatantly ignores the United Nations Charter and the findings of this Court in its Advisory Opinion on the Wall case.

 

30. An occupation that includes the annexation de facto of the occupied territory amounts, in Colombia’s view, to an illegal acquisition of territory by use or threat of force, and to a denial of the right of self-determination. Furthermore, the occupation violates peremptory norms of general international law. In addition, as the Court recalled in its 2004 Advisory Opinion, Israel’s policies and practices involving the establishment of settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory are contrary to the terms of Article 49, paragraph 6, of the Fourth Geneva Convention, to which Israel is a party.

 

31. Given that the Israeli occupation has since its onset been acquisitive in nature and, consequently, its policies and practices in furtherance of that occupation have resulted in imposed persecution, racial discrimination and apartheid over the Palestinian people, it can only be found to be in breach of various international legal obligations incumbent upon Israel.

 

V. LEGAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE VIOLATIONS

 

32. Mr President, with regard to the consequences of those violations, Colombia is of the view that Israel’s actions contrary to international law engage its responsibility and therefore entail distinct legal consequences.

 

33. First of all, Israel is obliged to cease its violations and to return to a situation of compliance with the obligations it has breached. Consequently, Israel is bound to put an end to the prolonged occupation, settlement and annexation of the Palestinian territory. It must do so unconditionally, immediately and completely. It must cease the continuing internationally wrongful acts, and should offer appropriate assurances and guarantees of non-repetition. Israel also must respect international humanitarian law and international human rights law vis-à-vis the Palestinian people.

 

34. Moreover, Israel must make reparations for the damage caused. The Court’s jurisprudence on the essential forms of reparation in customary law is clear. Israel likewise has an obligation to compensate, in accordance with the applicable rules of international law, all natural or legal persons having suffered any form of material or immaterial damage as a result of its occupation upon the Palestinian territory.

 

35. Israel has also violated erga omnes obligations, and as the Court indicated in the Barcelona Traction case, such obligations are by their very nature “the concern of all States” and “in view of the importance of the rights involved, all States can be held to have a legal interest in their protection”.

 

36. Given the character and the importance of the rights and obligations involved, it follows that all States are under an obligation not to recognize the illegal situation resulting from the

occupation of the Palestinian territory. They are also under an obligation not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by such occupation. As the Court has asserted, “it is also for all States, while respecting the United Nations Charter and international law, to see to it that any impediment to the exercise by the Palestinian people of its right to self-determination is brought to an end.”

 

37. Finally, Colombia believes that States must co-operate within the multilateral framework of the United Nations. In the present situation, the Organization, and especially the General Assembly and the Security Council, should consider what further and urgent action is required to bring to an end the illegal situation resulting, in the instant request, from Israel’s illegal occupation. The Court’s guidance is crucial for that purpose.

 

VI. CONCLUSION

 

38. Mr President, to conclude: Colombia respectfully calls upon the International Court of Justice to give the advisory opinion requested by the General Assembly. Ultimately, what is at stake here is ensuring the safety and, indeed, the very existence of the Palestinian people, bearing in mind the real and imminent risk of irreparable prejudice to the rights of Palestinians as a consequence of Israel’s occupation, as has been fully documented by international agencies, United Nations organs, and even recently recognized by the Court itself.

 

39. As the Court stated two decades ago, and one of its Members recently recalled, “the United Nations has a permanent responsibility towards the question of Palestine until the question is resolved in all its aspects in a satisfactory manner in accordance with international legitimacy”, and so does the Court, as the principal judicial organ of those United Nations.

 

Thank you, Mr President, Members of the Court. This concludes my presentation on behalf of the Republic of Colombia.

 

[...]

  

Ms MOUSSA: [EGYPT]

 

1. Mr President, distinguished Members of the Court, it is my great honour and privilege to appear on behalf of the Arab Republic of Egypt in this advisory opinion of historical importance in which the General Assembly is once again seeking the Court’s guidance in respect of the question of Palestine. This comes against the backdrop of a 75-year history of displacement, dispossession, collective punishment, and daily, indiscriminate and systematic violence and human suffering of untold proportions.

 

2. Mr President, as we speak, Israel’s brutal onslaught continues to rage in occupied Gaza, where 29,000 innocent civilians have been killed and almost 2.3 million people forcibly transferred and displaced, in violation of international law. Israel is deliberately and wantonly creating conditions of life that are intended to make like in Gaza impossible, imposing siege and starvation including by impeding humanitarian access and the distribution of relief through constant obstruction and bombardment. With the impending attack on Rafah, where 1.4 million people have sought refuge, Israel is continuing its policy of mass forcible expulsion of Palestinian civilians, all while the Security Council repeatedly fails to call for a ceasefire, in callous disregard for Palestinian life.

 

3. Simultaneously, Israel is continuing its illegal practices in the West Bank, scaling up attacks, access restrictions, punitive house demolitions and supporting settler violence that has displaced entire communities. Increased settlement activity continues to erode the basis for a two-State solution, dimming prospects for a lasting peace in the region.

 

4. These ongoing, grave violations of international law by Israel - the occupying Power - are part of a wider policy that seeks to dispossess the Palestinians of their land and assert Israeli sovereignty over it. This is manifestly illegal and renders the occupation, as a whole, unlawful.

 

5. It is shocking that, at this critical moment, some States would rather see this Court abscond its responsibility — as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations - by declining to render this advisory opinion. What message does this send about these States’ respect for international justice and the rule of law?

 

6. Mr President, I will focus my statement on four main points, namely:

 

(1) the Court’s jurisdiction and competence;

 

(2) the legal framework for assessing Israel’s prolonged and illegal occupation, which violates non-derogable principles of international law;

 

(3) the purported justifications of self-defence or military necessity; and

 

(4) finally, I will conclude on the legal consequences and a summary of each of the submissions.

 

7. First, on the matter of jurisdiction and competence, the small number of States objecting to the Court’s exercise of jurisdiction have variously argued that the request is politically motivated, instrumentalizes the Court, circumvents the consent of Israel, covers too vast a scope or will prejudice the peace process and negotiations between the parties.

 

8. Let me recall that the Court has repeatedly and consistently rejected such arguments. In the Kosovo Advisory Opinion, the Court did not concern itself with the motives which may have inspired the request or the political implications of its Opinion. Since the General Assembly is duly authorized under Article 96 (1) of the United Nations Charter, and brought forth its request through a validly adopted resolution, the request, in the Court’s own words, “in principle, should not be refused”. In the Nuclear Weapons and Chagos Advisory Opinions, the Court refused to second- guess the decision of the General Assembly, stating that it “has the right to decide for itself on the usefulness of an opinion in the light of its own needs”.

 

9. Distinguished Members of the Court, the General Assembly has turned to this august Court with what is manifestly a legal question, seeking a legal answer that would indisputably assist in discharging its functions. Allow me to recall that this very Court in the Wall Opinion affirmed the United Nations’ “permanent responsibility towards the question of Palestine” until such time as it may be “resolved in all its aspects in a satisfactory manner in accordance with international legitimacy”.

 

10. In the Wall Opinion, the Court found no merit in the proposition — echoed by some in these proceedings - that the ongoing negotiations constituted a compelling reason to decline its competence. It reached a similar conclusion in the Nuclear Weapons Advisory Opinion, after noting that its opinion would “have relevance for the continuing debate on the matter in the General Assembly and would present an additional element … on the matter“.

 

11. Indeed, rather than prejudicing the peace process, the present advisory opinion serves not just as an “additional” element but rather an “essential” one for the General Assembly to continue to carry out its role in relation to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. This is absolutely critical given the complete absence of any real prospect for a peaceful solution.

 

12. The Court could not possibly turn its back on this wealth of jurisprudence or disregard the many compelling reasons for it to honour the General Assembly’s request, as summarized so aptly by the representative of Palestine. The Middle East region yearns for peace and stability and a just, comprehensive and lasting resolution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, based on the principles of international law, and the establishment of a viable Palestinian State on the pre-1967 lines, with East Jerusalem as its capital. The legal determination by the Court in the present advisory opinion is indispensable to guide the General Assembly and the international community to achieve this objective.

 

13. Second, Mr President, I turn to the question of the ongoing violation by Israel of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, from its prolonged occupation, settlement and annexation of the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967.

 

14. Distinguished Members of the Court, Palestine has been subjected to the longest protracted state of occupation in modern history, as well as de facto and de jure annexation that confirm the unlawful nature of the occupation.

 

15. Israel’s persistent policy of implanting settlements in the West Bank and occupied Jerusalem for the purpose of creating facts on the ground and breaking up the territorial contiguity of the occupied territories, is a blatant disregard for international law. Twenty years ago, the representatives of the State of Palestine laid before this Court the facts of Israel’s intensive settlement and colonization policy, which had, at the time, transferred 400,000 illegal settlers to the occupied Palestinian territories. Today, that number stands at 750,000, deliberately and permanently altering the status of the occupied territories.

 

16. In addition to the policy of de facto annexation, Israel purported to annex East Jerusalem de jure through the Basic Law adopted by the Israeli Knesset in 1980, stipulating “Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel”.

 

17. The very limited number of States defending these policies advance two principal claims, namely that “the legal status of occupation” does not change if the occupation is prolonged or involves illegal violations of jus in bello and that under jus ad bellum, Israeli occupation is lawful since, inter alia, relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions did not declare otherwise.

 

18. Egypt submits that the proposition that occupation is, merely, a de facto situation whose legality cannot be called into question is seriously flawed. As highlighted by a number of participants, the legality of an occupation must be assessed by reference to the United Nations Charter and general international law.

 

19. In fact, Israel’s prolonged occupation violates a number of distinct legal régimes that exist and operate simultaneously and concurrently. These include:

 

(1) the law of occupation, part of the jus in bello, that is characterized by this Court as “intransgressible”;

 

(2) the jus ad bellum and the peremptory prohibition of the acquisition of territory through force;

 

(3) the principle of self-determination, also a peremptory norm of international law, described by this Court as erga omnes and “irreproachable” in the East Timor case; and

 

(4) the fundamental prohibition of racial discrimination, segregation and subjugation.

 

20. It is against this legal framework that the legality of Israel’s policies and practices in the occupied Palestinian territories must be assessed.

 

21. First, with respect to the jus in bello, it is a fundamental principle of international law that an occupying Power is prohibited from changing the status of the occupied territory, as well as its annexation, in whole or in part. It is only entitled to exercise limited powers, intended to be temporary in nature, with the aim of balancing between its own military needs and the protection of the local inhabitants. These are not rights bestowed on the occupying Power, but rather limitations on its authority.

 

22. It flows from this that belligerent occupation is governed by two key principles. First, it is a temporary régime and, second, it cannot transfer sovereignty to the occupying Power. Rather, it freezes the legal order of the occupied territory throughout the duration of the occupation. The occupying authority is merely a de facto administrator, a principle intended to protect both the inhabitants of the occupied territory, as well as “the separate existence of the State, its institutions and its laws”. This is reflected in Article 47 of the Fourth Geneva Convention and is precisely what “distinguishes occupation from annexation”.

 

23. The prohibition of permanently changing the occupied territory extends also to its demographic component. Article 49 of the Fourth Convention prohibits “individual or mass forcible transfer” of civilians outside the occupied territory; and the transfer by the occupying Power of “parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies”. According to the 1958 Commentary, this was intended “to prevent a practice adopted during the Second World War by certain Powers, which transferred portions of their own population to occupied territory for political and racial reasons or in order, as they claimed, to colonize those territories”.

 

24. As demonstrated in Palestine’s statement, there is overwhelming evidence that Israeli support for and maintenance of settlements is intended to permanently alter the demographic composition of the Occupied Palestinian Territory and extend Israeli sovereignty over it. This is coupled with Israel’s mass forcible transfer and forced displacement of the Palestinians in Gaza, through its illegal evacuation orders and indiscriminate use of force, which has been labelled by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory as “ethnic cleansing”.

 

25. It should be highlighted that Article 49 not only prohibits forced transfers, but also, in the Court’s own words, “any measures taken by an occupying Power in order to organize or encourage transfers of parts of its own population into the occupied territory”.

 

26. Numerous resolutions of the General Assembly and Security Council affirmed the illegality of Israel’s settlements, annexation and measures altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem - considering them invalid and a flagrant violation of the Fourth Convention, while requiring Israel to desist from such practices.

 

27. Security Council resolution 298 stated that “all legislative and administrative actions taken by Israel to change the status of the City of Jerusalem, including expropriation of land and properties, transfer of populations and legislation aimed at the incorporation of the occupied section, are totally invalid and cannot change that status”.

 

28. The Security Council also declared in relation to Jerusalem - in resolution 478 (1980) - that Israeli “legislative and administrative measures . . . are null and void . . . and must be rescinded forthwith”. Israel remains in defiance of these and subsequent resolutions, including resolution 2334 (2016) and numerous General Assembly resolutions in addition to the provisions of the Geneva Conventions previously described.

 

29. Israel’s prolonged military rule and its strategic settlement policy, considered a “national value” under Israeli legislation, is essentially a systemic “de-Palestinianization” of the occupied territory, including Jerusalem, intended to permanently change its demographic characteristics, and enhance its Jewish component, thereby achieving the de jure and de facto annexation of that territory. This leads to the conclusion that Israeli occupation is, in fact, an illegal annexation, conquest and de facto colonial endeavour.

 

30. Mr President, the second legal principle by which the legality of Israel’s occupation is to be assessed, is Article 2 (4) of the Charter of the United Nations, which prohibits the acquisition of territory through force; one of the most fundamental principles of the post-UN Charter era.

 

31. The vast majority of States participating in these proceedings submit that Israeli occupation - by virtue of its permanence, de jure and de facto annexation - manifestly violates the principle of inadmissibility of acquiring territory through force. Only one State has attempted to justify Israel’s actions, by contesting the Palestinians’ title to the occupied territories and justifying Israel’s territorial expansion as the product of a defensive war.

 

32. Egypt submits that these claims have no basis in fact or in law and seek to derail the Court by raising issues outside the temporal scope of this request. They are reminiscent of the archaic international law of the nineteenth century that justified territorial conquest through denying the sovereign status of colonized peoples, relegating them to the realm of terra nullius.

 

33. There is, also, no support for the proposition that Israel was acting defensively in 1967. International law recognizes neither pre-emptive nor preventive self-defence and the terms of the United Nations Charter on this matter are clear, requiring an armed attack to occur in order to trigger the right of self-defence. Israel’s attack in 1967 was, therefore, not a defensive but an aggressive war.

 

34. Even if the claim of self-defence were valid — which clearly is not the case — a decades-long occupation is not reconcilable with the customary international law conditions of necessity, immediacy and proportionality. In any event, the issue is a moot one, as it is universally recognized that a State may not gain title to territory through any use of force, regardless of its purported legitimacy.

 

35. These claims also find no basis in Security Council resolution 242, which unequivocally recognized the inadmissibility of acquiring territory through force, demanding Israel’s withdrawal from territories occupied in the recent conflict and emphasizing the duty of all States to act in accordance with Article 2 (4) of the Charter. Resolution 242 was reaffirmed by resolution 338, while the inadmissibility of territorial acquisition through force was confirmed in at least nine subsequent Security Council resolutions. In fact, resolution 471 clearly stated, as far back as 1980, the overriding necessity to end the prolonged occupation of the Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967 including Jerusalem.

 

36. In Egypt’s view, it is clear that under international law, the territorial status of the West Bank, including Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip cannot lawfully be altered through armed conflict. Israel’s protracted occupation, which is coupled with measures to permanently change the demographic characteristics of the occupied territory, and annex parts of the land de facto and de jure in violation of the cardinal principle of the prohibition of the acquisition of territory through force, is therefore, illegal per se and an ongoing violation of international law.

 

37. Distinguished Members of the Court, the third legal principle against which Israel’s

conduct must be assessed is self-determination. Egypt submits that Israel’s indefinite occupation amounts to a nullification and denial of the Palestinian people’s inalienable right to self-determination.

 

38. It is indisputable, that this right — enshrined in Article 1 (2) of the United Nations Charter and both human rights Covenants ÿ is a cardinal principle in modern international law. Its erga omnes character, confirmed by the Court in the East Timor case, entails that all States and international organizations have a legal interest and a duty in respecting and protecting this right.

 

39. This Court already affirmed in the Wall Advisory Opinion the applicability of this right to the “Palestinian people”.

 

40. Mr President, Israel’s indefinite occupation of the Palestinian territories is as a whole inconsistent with the principle of self-determination and breaches three salient aspects of this principle. First, it obstructs the Palestinian people from freely determining their political status, achieving independent statehood, sovereignty and the right of return.

 

41. Second, it deprives Palestinians of their right to pursue their economic, social and cultural development. In gross breach of international law, Israel restricts Palestinians’ access to Jerusalem’s Christian and Muslim holy sites, notably Al-Aqsa Mosque, wantonly depletes Palestinian natural resources, imposes access restrictions to “Area C” and obstructs the movement of goods and people between the West Bank and Gaza, stunting Palestine’s economy and impeding the geographical unity of the State of Palestine.

 

42. Third, the fragmentation and dismemberment of the occupied territories, through Israel’s settlements policy, the wall and measures of de facto and de jure annexation, are a blatant violation of the fundamental principle of the integrity of the self-determination unit. The territorial unit of Palestine includes both the West Bank, including the Holy City of Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip. Although Israel withdrew its forces from Gaza in 2005, it still retains effective control by, inter alia: exercising complete control over Gaza’s airspace and territorial waters; the flow of people and goods in and out of Gaza; the Palestinian population registry; and the tax policy and transfer of tax revenues. Israel’s continuing military incursions into Gaza, including the ongoing brutal assault, indicate

Israel’s continuing authority over the territory. Together, the West Bank and Gaza constitute a single territorial unit. This has been confirmed by numerous Security Council resolutions which refer to Gaza as an integral part of the territory occupied in 1967 and of the Palestinian State under the two-State solution.

 

43. Egypt firmly denounces the ongoing obstruction of the Palestinian people’s inalienable, permanent and unqualified right to self-determination, a violation - as argued by Palestine - that is an “essential feature” of Israel’s prolonged occupation.

 

44. One only needs to look at Israel’s vicious, wholesale destruction of Gaza today, after years of imposing the medieval methods of siege and blockade, to realize the extent of Israel’s transgression of this principle. Israel’s prolonged occupation is therefore illegal, per se, and is an ongoing, internationally wrongful act that must be immediately brought to an end by Israel, by immediately ending the occupation.

 

45. The fourth legal principle against which Israel’s conduct must be assessed is the fundamental prohibition of racial discrimination, segregation and subjugation.

 

46. On a daily basis, under occupation, Palestinians face institutionalized discrimination and segregation under a dual legal system, applying different laws to Palestinians and Israelis. Israeli military orders in the occupied territories entrench racial discrimination between Palestinians and Israeli settlers. Israel also implements de facto and de jure measures of racial discrimination, including in the areas of detention, criminal justice, housing, land confiscations and house demolitions. How can such practices - which have been described by a number of participants as “crimes against humanity” - how can they be consistent with any notion of human rights and human dignity in the 21st century?

 

47. Israel is under an obligation to repeal all such legislation that maintains its systematic, oppressive and institutionalized policy of racial discrimination and segregation against the Palestinian people, and to cease all discriminatory policies and practices.

 

48. I now turn to whether self-defence or military necessity may justify Israel’s prolonged occupation.

 

49. The argument that a State may exercise self-defence against a territory under its own military occupation and effective control is counter-intuitive, particularly since the occupying State has the authority and even the obligation to “ensure public order and safety” in the occupied territory.

 

50. In the Wall Advisory Opinion, this Court found that Article 51 of the Charter, which recognizes the inherent right of self-defence, had no relevance, as the acts invoked by Israel were acts arising out of the occupied Palestinian territory, which is under Israeli effective control and not imputable to another State. Egypt finds no reason for the Court to depart from this considered Opinion in the current proceedings.

 

51. The Court also rejected the justification of military necessity. The modern conception of military necessity is strictly limited to the contexts in which it is expressly recognized. It is thus already considered in the formulation of the obligations set out in humanitarian conventions, some of which “expressly exclude reliance on military necessity”.

 

52. For example, no military necessity qualification is permitted under Article 49 (6) of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits the transfer of any part of the occupying Power’s civilian population into an occupied territory. This cannot be justified as a safety measure taken by Israel in the exercise of its prerogatives as an occupying Power.

 

53. According to the legal maxim ex injuria jus non oritur, one should not be able to profit from one’s own wrongdoing. Israel thus cannot invoke self-defence to maintain a situation created by its own illegal conduct, or to justify violations of peremptory norms of international law.

 

54. Distinguished Members of the Court, for how much longer do the Palestinian people need to wait before they are able to exercise their legitimate rights under international law? For how much longer will the United Nations continue to manage the humanitarian impacts of Israeli violations, without addressing their root cause? History will judge us for how we respond today.

 

55. Egypt respectfully submits that the Court should advise the General Assembly that:

 

(1) the prolonged Israeli occupation is, per se, a continuing violation of international law for its breach of: (i) the jus in bello; (ii) the prohibition of the acquisition of territory through force; (iii) the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people; and (iv) the prohibition of racial discrimination, segregation and subjugation.

 

(2) Israel — as the wrongdoing State - is obliged to make full reparation through restitution, compensation and satisfaction, either singly or in combination, by ceasing immediately and unconditionally its unlawful occupation of Palestinian territory, and rescinding the associated unlawful policies and practices of annexation, settlements and discriminatory legislation.

 

(3) All States have a duty not to recognize the illegal situation created by Israel’s ongoing violation, resulting from its prolonged occupation, settlement and annexation of the occupied territory, and not to render aid or assistance in maintaining that situation.

 

56. Mr President, the consequences of Israel’s prolonged occupation are clear, and there can be no peace, no security, no stability, no prosperity in the Middle East, without upholding justice and the rule of law for the Palestinian people. I thank you.

 

The PRESIDENT: I thank the delegation of Egypt for its presentation. Before I invite the next delegation to make its oral statement, the Court will observe a break for 10 minutes. The sitting is suspended.

 

The Court adjourned from 11.25 a.m. to 11.40 a.m.

From the 07.29.11 edition of my hometown newspaper, the Rapid City Journal.

 

rapidcityjournal.com/

 

The Journal has always been pretty impartial/live-and-let-liv​e in its editorial stance. The "letters to the editor" column can be pretty entertaining, though. Rapid City's cohort of people that go to church has skewed Pentecostal in the past decade or so; there are several Big Box churches on the highway to Mount Rushmore that weren't there before. Concurrently there's been an influx of professionals and retirees from CA and the Midwest who are typically more moderate in their outlook. The first auto-responds to any cultural or political piece, and the second scolds them. :)

Greater Manchester Police proudly welcomed 140 new officers to the force at an attestation ceremony at Bolton Town Hall on the evening of Wednesday 8 January 2020.

  

In the presence of family and friends, the new officers took the Police Oath in front of magistrate Stephen Paine. In the oath they swore to uphold the office of constable with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality.

  

The ceremony marks the official commencement of their police duties.

  

Chief Constable Ian Hopkins welcomed each new recruit to the force.

  

Mayor of Bolton, Councillor Hilary Fairclough, was in attendance as was Andy Burnham, Mayor of Greater Manchester.

  

For more information about Policing in Greater Manchester please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

  

To contact Greater Manchester Police for a less urgent matter or make a report online you can also visit www.gmp.police.uk.

  

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

  

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

  

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give evidence.

 

Greater Manchester Police proudly welcomed 140 new officers to the force at an attestation ceremony at Bolton Town Hall on the evening of Wednesday 8 January 2020.

  

In the presence of family and friends, the new officers took the Police Oath in front of magistrate Stephen Paine. In the oath they swore to uphold the office of constable with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality.

  

The ceremony marks the official commencement of their police duties.

  

Chief Constable Ian Hopkins welcomed each new recruit to the force.

  

Mayor of Bolton, Councillor Hilary Fairclough, was in attendance as was Andy Burnham, Mayor of Greater Manchester.

  

For more information about Policing in Greater Manchester please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

  

To contact Greater Manchester Police for a less urgent matter or make a report online you can also visit www.gmp.police.uk.

  

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

  

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

  

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give evidence.

 

Yesterday, Tuesday 22 January 2019, Greater Manchester Police welcomed 100 new recruits to the Force. The officers were officially sworn in at a formal ceremony attended by Chief Constable Ian Hopkins, senior officers and magistrate Stephen Paine.

 

The attestation ceremony was held at Stockport Town Hall.

 

The Mayor of Stockport, Councillor Walter Brett, was also on hand to welcome the new recruits.

 

Family and friends watched the new officers make their oath to uphold their role with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality throughout their time in post.

 

New recruits have to complete a two year probation period which includes classroom based learning and a year of active patrol. During their training they will have the same of level of authority as regular officers, including the power of arrest.

 

The new recruits are replacing those who have either retired or left the organisation and therefore helping GMP to maintain current officer numbers.

 

To find out more about Greater Manchester Police please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

 

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

 

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

 

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give a statement.

Yesterday, Tuesday 22 January 2019, Greater Manchester Police welcomed 100 new recruits to the Force. The officers were officially sworn in at a formal ceremony attended by Chief Constable Ian Hopkins, senior officers and magistrate Stephen Paine.

 

The attestation ceremony was held at Stockport Town Hall.

 

The Mayor of Stockport, Councillor Walter Brett, was also on hand to welcome the new recruits.

 

Family and friends watched the new officers make their oath to uphold their role with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality throughout their time in post.

 

New recruits have to complete a two year probation period which includes classroom based learning and a year of active patrol. During their training they will have the same of level of authority as regular officers, including the power of arrest.

 

The new recruits are replacing those who have either retired or left the organisation and therefore helping GMP to maintain current officer numbers.

 

To find out more about Greater Manchester Police please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

 

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

 

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

 

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give a statement.

Greater Manchester Police proudly welcomed 152 new officers in the force's largest attestation ceremony to date on the evening of Tuesday 22nd October 2019, at Stockport Town Hall.

 

In front of family and friends, all officers partook in the Police Oath which is their promise to the Queen in front of a magistrate to uphold the office of constable with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality.

 

The ceremony marks the official start of the officers commencing their duties, and is a milestone to be celebrated.

 

Chief Constable Ian Hopkins was in attendance to welcome each and every new recruit to the force.

 

Also in attendance were Greater Manchester’s Deputy Mayor, Baroness Beverley Hughes and the Mayor of Stockport, Councillor Laura Booth.

 

For more information about Policing in Greater Manchester please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

 

To contact Greater Manchester Police for a less urgent matter or make a report online you can also visit www.gmp.police.uk.

 

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

 

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

 

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give evidence.

 

Greater Manchester Police proudly welcomed 152 new officers in the force's largest attestation ceremony to date on the evening of Tuesday 22nd October 2019, at Stockport Town Hall.

 

In front of family and friends, all officers partook in the Police Oath which is their promise to the Queen in front of a magistrate to uphold the office of constable with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality.

 

The ceremony marks the official start of the officers commencing their duties, and is a milestone to be celebrated.

 

Chief Constable Ian Hopkins was in attendance to welcome each and every new recruit to the force.

 

Also in attendance were Greater Manchester’s Deputy Mayor, Baroness Beverley Hughes and the Mayor of Stockport, Councillor Laura Booth.

 

For more information about Policing in Greater Manchester please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

 

To contact Greater Manchester Police for a less urgent matter or make a report online you can also visit www.gmp.police.uk.

 

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

 

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

 

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give evidence.

 

Greater Manchester Police proudly welcomed 152 new officers in the force's largest attestation ceremony to date on the evening of Tuesday 22nd October 2019, at Stockport Town Hall.

 

In front of family and friends, all officers partook in the Police Oath which is their promise to the Queen in front of a magistrate to uphold the office of constable with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality.

 

The ceremony marks the official start of the officers commencing their duties, and is a milestone to be celebrated.

 

Chief Constable Ian Hopkins was in attendance to welcome each and every new recruit to the force.

 

Also in attendance were Greater Manchester’s Deputy Mayor, Baroness Beverley Hughes and the Mayor of Stockport, Councillor Laura Booth.

 

For more information about Policing in Greater Manchester please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

 

To contact Greater Manchester Police for a less urgent matter or make a report online you can also visit www.gmp.police.uk.

 

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

 

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

 

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give evidence.

 

Greater Manchester Police (GMP) has welcomed 100 new police officers to the ranks.

 

The 23-year old from Sale who has previously climbed Mount Kilimanjaro for charity said: “I always wanted a job that would give me the chance to be out and about speaking to people and I think the role of a police officer gives you that opportunity.

 

“For me this job isn’t just about arresting people, it’s about making a difference to people’s lives. I hope to have a long and successful career where I can make use of my masters in counter terrorism.”

 

The new recruits were sworn in at an attestation ceremony at Harrop Fold School last night, 14 June 2017 in the presence of Chief Constable Ian Hopkins and Deputy Chief Constable Ian Pilling and over 200 guests.

 

Magistrates Mike Phillips and Stephen Paine were in attendance to witness the swearing of the oath.

 

Family and friends of the new officers watched on proudly as each of them made an oath to uphold the office of constable with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality.

 

To find out more about Greater Manchester Police please visit our website. www.gmp.police.uk

 

You should call 101, the national non-emergency number, to report crime and other concerns that do not require an emergency response.

 

Always call 999 in an emergency, such as when a crime is in progress, violence is being used or threatened or where there is danger to life.

 

You can also call anonymously with information about crime to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. Crimestoppers is an independent charity who will not want your name, just your information. Your call will not be traced or recorded and you do not have to go to court or give a statement.

The trial of Jane Wenham is important because she was the last person to be condemned to death in England for witchcraft. The sentence was never carried out. Sir John Powell, the judge at the trial, obtained a royal pardon for her.

 

Bragge, Francis, b. 1690. A full and impartial account of the discovery of sorcery and witchcraft, practis’d by Jane Wenham of Walkerne in Hertfordshire. The second edition. London, for E. Curll, 1712; octavo (Sp Coll Ferguson Ag-d.27)

 

Declaration of 4,000 MPs, including majorities of 30 parliaments

Moreover, a deceleration by over 4,000 MPs from 40 countries across the globe in support of the Iranian Resistance and especially Ashraf residents was unveiled at the gathering. The MPs, including the majority of the European Parliament, the majority of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and majorities of 28 national parliaments, called for the urgent protection of Ashraf by the UN, U.S. and EU, the immediate lifting of the siege on Ashraf – especially ensuring free access to medical services – and an impartial, comprehensive and independent investigation into the crimes committed on April 8th in Ashraf

In a large and exhilarating gathering held in the Villepinte Auditorium near Paris on Saturday afternoon, 18 June 2011, Iranians called for the immediate protection of Ashraf by the UN with assistance provided by the U.S. and EU. They also condemned any kind of displacement of Ashraf residents inside Iraq, and declared their support for Europe’s peaceful long-term solution for Ashraf. The participants described maintaining the terrorist tag against the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK) by the US State Department as an illegal measure and tantamount to participating in the repression of the Iranian people and Resistance. The attendees called on the U.S. government to comply with last July's verdict of the U.S. Court of Appeals in D.C. and immediately revoke the PMOI's terrorist designation.

 

Hundreds of prominent politicians and MPs representing a broad range of political views from countries in five continents of the globe also took part in the largest gathering of its kind by Iranian exiles. In addition to expressing their support for the Iranian Resistance and defending Ashraf’s rights, the high-profile dignitaries also called for the recognition of the National Council of Resistance by the international community

 

Rudolph Giuliani, former New York City Mayor and Presidential Candidate (2008); US Congressman Bob Filner; Rita Sussmouth, former Speaker of the German Parliament (1988-1998); Judge Michael Mukasey, former US Attorney General (2007-2009); Ambassador John Bruton, former Prime Minister of Ireland (1994-1997) and EU ambassador to the US (2004-2005); Jean-Pierre Brard, Member of French National Assembly; Andrew Card, White House Chief of Staff of President George Bush (2001-2006); Tom Ridge, first US Secretary of Homeland Security (2003-2005); Alejo Vidal Quadras, European Parliament Vice President; Geir Haarde, former Prime Minister of Iceland (2006-2009); Lord Corbett of Castle Vale, Head of the Labour Peers group in the House of Lords; Nariman al-Rousan, Member of Jordanian Parliament; Aude de Thuin, author and founder of the Women Forum; Sid Ahmed Ghozali, former Prime Minister of Algeria; Robert Torricelli, former U.S. Senator; Carlo Ciccioli, Member of the Italian Parliament; Jean-Charles Rielle, Member of the Swiss Federal Parliament; and Henry Leclerc, Honorary President of the Human Rights League of France.

A number of French mayors, including Jean-Pierre Béquet, Mayor of Auvers-sur-Oise; Nelly Rolland, Mayor of Villepinte; and Maurice Boscavert, Mayor of Taverny, delivered speeches and declared the support of 5,000 French mayors for the Iranian Resistance.

The ceremony was held on the eve of June 20th, the Day of Martyrs and Political Prisoners in Iran. The master of ceremony for the first part of the event was Congressman Patrick Kennedy, Member of US House of Representatives until 2011. David Amess, Member of British Parliament from the Conservative Party, took over the event for the second part.

 

While being accompanied by Mrs. Rezaii (the mother of 7 martyrs), Mahin Saremi and a number of French MPs, Mrs. Maryam Rajavi honored the memory of 120,000 martyrs of the Iranian people, who have fallen during the three decade struggle against the clerical dictatorship, including the martyrs of the past two years and those who lost their lives as a result of the recent criminal attack against Ashraf.

Mrs. Mahin Saremi, the wife of PMOI supporter Ali Saremi, also took part in the gathering. Ali Saremi was Iran’s most prominent political prisoner and was hanged last year by the Iranian regime after enduring 24 years of imprisonment and torture. Mrs. Saremi, who herself was arrested and imprisoned several times since the 1980s, was recently condemned to 10 years of imprisonment but managed to flee from the Iranian regime and reach Paris. Akbar, the son of Ali and Mahin Saremi, is among the residents of Ashraf.