by Amy Brooke

Softly softly catchee monkey — the alphabet community’s grab for our children. 

This article on link to The Spectator below contains some highly relevant comments from Christchurch residents overwhelmingly rejecting the proposal for a rainbow crossing to be established in the city.  

Their comments make interesting reading.  And as The Spectator allows non-subscribers access to three links before subscriptions are needed, I hope that as many of you as possible will read this article. If not, a subscription to The Spectator, which highlights issues our mainstream media either refuses to acknowledge –  or gets spectacularly wrong – is well worth considering.

The thoughtful and sensible sentiments expressed by those who reject the ongoing activist moves by the LGBT community to gain more and more opportunities to centre-stage themselves in the name of “diversity”,  to persuade councils to finance rainbow pedestrians crossings, to insert themselves into our schools and children’s libraries,  aiming  to propagandize them (why else are they there?)  is a concern to many who are by no means homophobic, but are now too intimidated to speak, out lest they be accused of homophobia.

In other words, many New Zealanders now feel they’re being bullied. When accusations of homophobia get deliberately targeted at an individual or a group- who,  while by no means  condemnatory of actual individuals, are nevertheless perturbed at sexual behaviour they may regard as deviant being praised, as even somehow superior – as with the Gay Pride sloganizing – then the attack on free speech has become a subversive tool.

It’s deplorable that even the police can use extravagant accusations such as “hate speech” for actions which can be described as vandalism, but which some citizens are very possibly going to imitate, given the growing concern  among New Zealanders that they are being compelled to tolerate actions and behaviour which are thoroughly undemocratic. As one correspondent says, “Why should anyone use our public carriageways and public spaces as a billboard to promote their specific interests?” And far from indulging in homophobia, a majority of New Zealanders would certainly identify with, “I don’t care what people are, or nor who they identify with, and neither do I need to know if it doesn’t affect me or my life…People can do what they like,  as long as it is within the law,  as far as I’m concerned. Just don’t keep pushing it on me, or seeking attention.”

 In fact there will be quite a few New Zealanders who have friends or acquaintances who for some reason or another have found themselves — or have become — homosexual but who are themselves basically private individuals and who strongly disapprove of the demand for special rights by LGBT groups.

 New Zealanders are undoubtedly a tolerant people, but they do not like the feeling that they are now being  virtually bullied by aggressive activists demanding special treatment. Pushing  for the “right” to target children in libraries, and demanding a special right above all other activists group to have rainbow crossings, courtesy of ratepayers, repainted under the banner of  Gay Pride  (what exactly this pride consists of is not defined) goes against the important principles of any democracy .

Granting such special rights to various aggressive sectors of the community – including small groups of activist part-Maori  – apparently as a policy of appeasement- inevitably contributes to social divisiveness and resentment. Allowing LGBT groups to virtually hijack our roads to advertise their cause is not only undemocratic – it is foolish – and the majority of New Zealanders will undoubtedly not be supportive of this grab for attention.

Other power grabs for special treatment by the very small  minority of activist part-Maori –  above all our other ethnic groups – are by no means supported by the majority of all part-Maori – include the replacing of the English names for all our government departments and institutions, with te Reo names. Why? The majority of  the latter were never Maori names at all, but are simply made-up “Maori.  Where in the genuine Maori language were the words for Ministry of Social Welfare, or The Ministry of Housing and Urban development,  or Inland Revenue, or Accident and Emergency Department, etc?

To claim these are genuine Maori could well be regarded as fundamentally fraudulent, as with much of the supposed Maori language now inflicted upon children and teachers in schools and required of people being interviewed for particular jobs. Not only is it another form of bullying -– cultural bullying — but the coalition government pledged to restore the English names to all government departments and institutions, so that New Zealanders could understand what they stood for

There is no excuse for that not having happened by now, and Christopher Bishop’s apparent refusal to restore the English name to Kainga Ora is completely unacceptable. He should resign if he has difficulty respecting the coalition agreement.

 Prime Minister Christopher Luxon seems not to have taken on board the fact that not only is he personally unpopular for good reason, but that National would not now he back in government were it not for New Zealand First, and ACT — hence his propensity to rebuke the leaders of these two political parties when they are actually right, and he is wrong. Why has a directive not being given to all government departments and institutions to immediately restore the English names so that the country understands their role is more easily able to scrutinize them?

This is not happening, and it is something that Winston should be following up.

And when, with urgency, is the Marine and Coastal Areas Act going to be revoked and is effects reversed?  Meanwhile an apparently activist judiciary  is granting more Maori claimants (whose claims are, shockingly,  financed by the taxpayer (so they lose nothing by advancing them) proprietary rights over our seabeds and coastal areas – which should belong to all New Zealanders ? Luxon is dragging the chain on this one. Nor is he perceived to be wedded to democratic principles, basically endorsing co-governance when it relates to local Maori being authorized to  power-share control over lakes and waterways. He is apparently also oblivious to the fact that the word indigenous cannot possibly apply to Maori, as they themselves emigrated to this country. And what about the overdue dismantling of the Waitangi Tribunal, established  by Labour’s activist Geoffrey Palmer, and formerly described by the late well-respected  media commentator Brian Priestley as “a Star Chamber”,  adding that he had never seen an institution less well-designed to get to the truth of things. Some of its recommendations have been ridiculous,  let  alone thoroughly anti-democratic, and it serves to advance the interests of Maori activist only activists only, not of all New Zealanders.  

Luxon, in fact, is regarded as the weakest link in the coalition government, although that  is apparently not his self-assessment. And unfortunately, given the nature of today’s party political system, National Party MPs who surely must be far more aware of what is happening to this country are remaining tight lipped, controlled by an individual who is acting as if he is still in charge of a large corporation and  apparently imposing his will on his  party. Some New Zealanders would undoubtedly equate this to simple moral cowardice – not fronting up to a leader who is not taking the country in some of the urgent areas that need addressing. These  include repudiating the proven misinformation about the whole supposed climate change emergency – one of the most outrageous scams targeted against the West, but being used as pretext for  increasing taxation and control  of our lives.

While Net Zero is being hastily abandoned overseas because of the damage it causing to countries’ economies, New Zealand’s folly, fanned by the  scientifically illiterate Green Party, has  our intellectually under-powered government endorsing this – as well as the push to  prioritise EVs and phase out petrol-driven vehicles, although the increasingly recognized  disadvantages of these – let alone the horrific fire risk from their batteries  – has them being now being rejected overseas, and their production being cancelled.

Stupid is as stupid does. And there is little doubt that most New Zealanders,  looking at  the disastrous record of Labour and the Greens combined, now feel caught between a rock and a hard place, looking at the lamentable leadership of a National Party with a highly restricted focus on what  needs to be done to try to restore prosperity and democratic practices to this country.

But of course, those who simply complain have only themselves to thank. Writing to and emailing MPs, as well as ringing Parliament, requesting to be put through to the office of the relevant leader or MP to make your views known  (04 817 9999)  are not difficult ways to be involved in what should be a participatory government – by the people, for the people.

 And in the long term, even more valuable, would be the support for the  100 Days — Claiming back New Zealand, so that it  would be we New Zealanders ourselves who, like the  highly intelligent Swiss, would make the decisions as to which way our country should go,  rather than being afflicted with what is constantly enforced on us, from the top down.

Anzac commemorations suited political purposes right from 1916 when the first Anzac Day marches was held in London, Australia and New Zealand, which were very much around trying to get more people to sign up to the war in 1916–1918. –Australian historian Martin Crotty

By Roger Childs

The first day of remembrance

The first Anzac Day was on 25 April 1916. This was exactly one year after New Zealand and Australian troops landed on the Gallipoli Peninsula in Turkey in a joint Anglo-French invasion designed to capture Constantinople and take the Ottoman Empire out of the First World War, The first service in New Zealand, and the World, was held in the small Wairarapa town of Tinui where patriotic citizens dragged a large cross to the top of a local hill to remember the fallen.

In the early years of Anzac commemorations, the men who had died at Gallipoli, the Western Front and other Great War battle fields were honoured. Morale on the home front is always vital in wartime, and back in New Zealand the Massey Government decided in 1916 to set aside April 25 to remember the fallen and salvage something positive from the disastrous Gallipoli campaign. Across the Tasman Sea, Australia did the same.

Who we remember on 25 April in the 21^st century 

We honour those who gave their lives in overseas wars and those who served and survived —

• men in the Navy, Army, Air Force, and Merchant Marine 
• women and civilian casualties
• animals such as horses, donkeys and dogs
• those who served in more than 40 Peace Missions in places such as Timor Leste, Somalia, Bosnia.

Some also remember conscientious objectors.

As regards participation in conflicts before the Great War it is appropriate to remember New Zealanders who fought in the Crimean War — most of these originally came from Ireland and England and later settled in our country. 

In the Boer War (South African War) from 1899 to 1902, the government sent 6500 soldiers, as well as some doctors, nurses and women teachers, to support the British Empire’s defence of the colonies at the Cape and in Natal, against the Afrikaner republics in southern Africa. But they did not fight as a separate New Zealand force. 230 died – most from disease. This conflict was eventually won by the imperial forces in 1902.

What about those who died in wars in New Zealand?

The inter-tribal wars (Musket Wars) from the 1800s to the 1840s killed more people – at least 40,000 – than all others wars involving New Zealanders put together. There is a strong case to be made to remember the Native women, men and children who perished in these horrific internecine conflicts.

A plaque to commemorate those who died and served in the 19^th century New Zealand Wars was dedicated in September 2019 in Parliament’s debating chamber, alongside plaques remembering the fallen in other wars. The Speaker Trevor Mallard observed at the time Many New Zealanders will have ancestors who were involved in the Wars. Our Parliament’s debating chamber has long acknowledged those who served overseas, it is only right that we show the same respect to those who made the ultimate sacrifice on our own shores. 

Laws affecting Anzac Day

The first NZ public holiday on 25 April was in 1920, and in 1921 across the Tasman in Australia. Until 1949 the commemorations were just for remembering those who had died –  similar to America’s Memorial Day. 

Over the years there was legislation about who should be remembered and how the day should be observed.

• Anzac Day Amendment Act 1921 stated that no commercial activities could take place, meaning the day was to be observed as if Anzac Day was a Sunday.
• Anzac Day Act 1949  outlined the “In memoriam” function – commemorations were expanded to cover all New Zealanders who took part (not just died) in World Wars I and II, and the South African Wars. Extraordinarily for the first time women were mentioned explicitly in Anzac Day legislation! It should have happened earlier. Back in the Great War 10 nurses had been drowned when the troop ship SS Marquette was sunk in October 2015 in the Mediterranean Sea. 
• The Anzac Day Act 1966 eased up on what could be done on the day. 25 April remained a public holiday but became ‘half-day observance’, meaning activities were allowed after 1pm. Furthermore the scope of the commemorations were further broadened to remember those who, at any time, have given their lives for New Zealand and the British Empire or Commonwealth of Nations.

Finally the Holidays Amendment Act 2013  “Mondayised” the day. If Anzac Day (or Waitangi Day) fell on a Saturday or Sunday, the following Monday was to be treated as a public holiday. The Rules stated that Shops including dairies, service stations, take away bars, restaurants cafes, souvenir stores can open with conditions limiting the goods they can sell based on the type of store they are. 

Poppies – Red Purple and White

In Flanders fields the poppies blow

Between the crosses, row on row,

    That mark our place; and in the sky

    The larks, still bravely singing, fly

Scarce heard amid the guns below.

Canadian Lieutenant-Colonel John McCrae

In 1920 John McCrae’s evocative poem inspired Frenchwoman Madame Anna Guerin to distribute red poppies to raise money for veteran organizations in northern France. New Zealand picked up the idea and put in a large order to Mme. Guerin’s French Children’s League for 1922.

 24 April 1922 was the first Poppy Day in New Zealand and over 260,000 were sold, earning £13,166 ($1.4 million in today’s terms). Some of the money was sent to war-ravaged areas in northern France and the rest to unemployed Kiwi returned soldiers and their families. It wasn’t until 1931 that New Zealand began to produce its own poppies.  

Purple poppies were later sold to remember the contribution of animals and 24 February became Purple Poppy Day. On that day in 2018 a Memorial to the animals who had served in wars overseas was dedicated outside the Waiouru Army Museum. 

The white poppy was promoted to widen the concept of who should be remembered on Anzac Day. Two of the promoters were Kapiti’s Shirley and John Murray. Shirley described the white poppy as an international symbol of remembrance of all the casualties of war…. 

Wars of the middle and late 20^th century

These conflicts cost New Zealand thousands more lives and added to the numbers of Veterans who marched in Anzac parades and were remembered on the day. World War Two, the Malayan Emergency, the Korea War and the Vietnam War saw tens of thousands serve overseas.

However, the Vietnam conflict was unpopular with the New Zealand public as it was felt that the Americans were pressurising our government into defending corrupt South Vietnamese regimes in the fight against communism in Southeast Asia.  Large numbers marched in the streets in protest and James K, Baxter wrote a poem about why New Zealand supported the US in Vietnam. It was called “A bucket of blood for a dollar”.

There was no official welcome home for the forces who had served. Vietnam Vets were not welcome in RSAs and it wasn’t until 1987 that they were allowed to march on Anzac Day. Eventually in 2006 there was a formal government apology and two years later on Queen’s Birthday there was a “welcome parade”.

Shirley Murray kicks up a storm

Honour the brave whose conscience was their call,
answered no bugle, went against the wall,
suffered in prisons of contempt and shame,
branded as cowards, in our country’s name.

World renowned hymn writer Shirley Murray’s Anzac Hymn brought protests from throughout New Zealand and overseas, especially because of her third verse, shown above. She dared to include conscientious objectors in the people we should honour on 25 April each year.

“I wrote my hymn in 2005 with the firm intention of honouring the Day and paying tribute to my two uncles who at the ages of 21 and 20 volunteered for the Otago Mounted Regiment and survived Gallipoli.

I also wrote with the firm intention of commemorating the tremendous courage of those who refused to kill or wear a uniform. Ormond Burton, whom I had met in my student days, was my hero. 

I thought of him as I wrote the central verse which was deemed so suspect that the Kapiti Coast District Council, having used it once, banned the hymn thereafter.”

Keeping the memories alive in the 21^st century

Over the years many stamps were issued to remember the wars New Zealanders had served in, but in the late 20^th century attendances at Anzac Day service dropped away, but over the last 25 years there has been renewed interest.

The descendants of family members who had served in New Zealand forces overseas were encouraged to wear their medals at Anzac Day services on the right hand side. In many centres war memorials have been spruced up and in Wellington there have been two important developments.

• In 2004 an unidentified body came from France and on Armistices Day, 11 November, after a service in the Anglican Cathedral Service – Kapiti’s Commander John Granville marched behind the coffin to the War Memorial where “the soldier” was interred in the grave of the “unknown warrior”.
• In front of the old war memorial a new National War Memorial Park was developed in 2015 -Pukeahu – and impressive exhibits were provided by the governments of Australia, the United Kingdom, the United States, Belgium, France, Turkey and the Pacific Islands. 

Late last year in the Eastern French town of Le Quesnoy a New Zealand museum was opened. The town was liberated by Kiwi soldiers in one on the last actions of World War One. Many of the exhibits in the museum were developed by Weta Workshops.

Anzac Day 2024

Another Anzac Day is coming. We’ll have the traditional dawn parades and other gatherings around the war memorials of the nation: the veterans will march, wreaths will be laid, flags will be lowered and raised, the speeches will be delivered and the Last Post and Reveille will be played on the bugle. We will also have also had the reminders: Lest we forget and We will remember them. 

Some children and other will wear their forebears’ medals and all present will have their own thoughts and memories. 

Only one in eight?

from GB News

The English flag is “racist and divisive and should not be displayed”, according to one in eight Labour voters.

A new poll found that nearly three-quarters of voters say the flag is “a symbol to represent England and no-one should be offended by it”.

Ahead of St George’s Day tomorrow, the data revealed that Labour voters were 13 times more likely than Conservative supporters to describe England’s flag as “racist and divisive”.

Read more

Just as the policies of the Jacinda regime made homelessness in NZ much worse, those of the Democrats in California have made homeless a big problem there.

from the L.A. Times

• Bakersfield eliminated functional homelessness. But only for a moment.
• California’s encampment policy will be impacted by a homelessness case the Supreme Court is divided on.
• Los Angeles County faces $12.5 billion in climate costs through 2040, a study says.
• And here’s today’s e-newspaper

Inside Bakersfield’s short-lived success

City leaders across California have struggled to prove they can move the needle on homelessness. For a moment, Bakersfield and Kern County were an exception. A brief, fleeting, pre-pandemic moment.

Officials there focused their efforts on a specific goal: Reaching functional zero for chronic homelessness.

Before we dive in further, let’s define those terms:

Chronic homelessness applies to people who experience homelessness for at least a year, or off-and-on over three years, and have been diagnosed with conditions including substance use disorder and serious mental or chronic illnesses, according to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Functional zero is when the number of people leaving chronic homelessness and finding permanent housing is equal to or greater than people still in homelessness.

The metric is a response to an unfortunate fact about the homelessness crisis: The system meant to respond to homelessness isn’t capable of keeping up with the crisis in a way that ensures it’s a rare and brief event in people’s lives. That’s according to Beth Sandor, who leads the Built for Zero program for the nonprofit Community Solutions.

“There are excellent programs providing excellent services that people need,” Sandor told me last year. “The question is: Is all of that work adding up to fewer people experiencing homelessness this month than last month?”

Bakersfield is one of only five communities that reached functional zero homelessness

Bakersfield and Kern County adopted functional zero as a goal in 2015 and by January 2020, it was one of only five communities across the U.S. to hit the mark, according to Community Solutions, which published a case study back in 2021.

In terms of raw numbers, it’s a small figure — the county housed about 70 people, mostly in Bakersfield.

How Bakersfield made it happen

The city and county’s homelessness response system kept track of each individual person identified as chronically homeless.

That access to quality data was key, according to Rick Ramos, interim executive director for the Bakersfield-Kern Regional Homeless Collaborative, because “at any single time, we know every single individual within that subpopulation that is experiencing homelessness.”

“That way, we can really concentrate our efforts on getting them either connected to the resources they need, or exited into a permanent housing destination,” he said.

Bakersfield’s achievement proves “it’s possible to build a system of support that ensures their most vulnerable neighbors can leave homelessness behind,” the case study reads. “This does not mean that no one will ever experience homelessness again, but rather that the community has proven homelessness does not need to become inescapable or a way of life for a group of their most vulnerable neighbors.”

Both Sandor and Ramos pointed to a few key characteristics that made meaningful progress on homelessness:

• Dynamic, real-time data that allow government agencies to understand the fluctuation in people experiencing homelessness.
• Cooperation and unity among agencies and service providers working toward a well-defined, common goal
• Responsive leaders “with the capacity to be looking across the whole system” who can solve problems and prepare for future challenges
• Strong engagement from the healthcare systems and a powerful political advocacy

It’s important to note that Bakersfield and Kern County weren’t just finding temporary shelter for people. A “positive exit” from homelessness means having an actual home with “the same kind of rights to tenancy that you have when you have signed a lease or, buying a home,” Sandor said.

Compare that to the metrics of progress touted late last year by Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, who announced that “more than 21,000 unhoused Angelenos have come inside” in 2023.

Those numbers refer to Angelenos placed in interim housing, including motel and hotel rooms, congregate shelters and tiny homes. From the federal and L.A. County perspective, they are still considered unhoused — just sheltered as opposed to unsheltered. Times columnist Erika D. Smith noted that those temporary stays are likely to drag on.

The 2023 Greater Los Angeles Homeless Count showed chronic homelessness jumped 18% from the previous year, and an even higher share of those Angelenos were living outdoors.

Bakersfield ultimately could not sustain functional zero homelessness

Sandor said one key issue has been securing “last mile” access to affordable units, a challenge playing out throughout the state. Another factor: Key city leaders were considered so successful they were promoted into other roles, Sandor said.

Then there was the historic pandemic, Ramos noted.

“A lot of the work that we were doing prior to reaching functional zero for chronic homelessness… was being done in person,” he said.

The organizations tasked with addressing homelessness have also struggled to maintain their data-monitoring capacity. Sandor said Community Solutions has been helping them build that back up.

“We have a high degree of confidence they’ll get there again,” she said.

It’s all about housing

Margot Kushel, a professor of medicine and director of the Benioff Homelessness and Housing Initiative at UC San Francisco, told me it’s impressive when any community can reach functional zero, especially in California.

But delivering results like Kern County was able to achieve pre-COVID relies on much more than homeless service systems are able to control, she explained. Even if those systems were functioning perfectly (which they don’t, she noted), they’re treating the symptoms — not the root causes that continue to push people into homelessness.

“If you put all of your resources into the emergency solutions [such as] shelters, you remove the problem from the public eye,” Kushel said. “You maybe — on a very modest level — improve outcomes.” But to make real progress? She had one foolproof solution:

“The rates of homelessness and the ability for people to exit homelessness really has everything to do with the availability and affordability of housing for low-income folks.”

If you missed the first installment of the series, you can read it here.

As regular readers know, the Globalist World Health Organisation has been working on a treaty which would threaten free speech and national sovereignty.

by Peter Immanuelsen

If the Treaty went through, it would essentially mean among other things, that they could censor speech that the WHO deemed to be misinformation and force countries to ‘vaccinate’ people as well as implement ‘vaccine’ passports.

But now there is good news

In the latest draft of the WHO pandemic treaty, they appear to be BACKING DOWN, removing some of the most draconian rules. This doesn’t mean that everything is all good, but this is definitely a good start and a massive victory for freedom.

First of all, they are making the treaty non-binding. This means that countries will keep their national sovereignty instead of having to hand it over to a bunch of unelected elites at the WHO.

The big issue was Article 13A in the pandemic treaty. It was originally proposed to say the following:

“1. States Parties recognize WHO as the guidance and coordinating authority of international public health response during public health Emergency of International Concern and undertake to follow WHO’s recommendations in their international public health response.”

This text would have meant that countries would be forced to follow the rules and recommendations as decided by the unelected elites at the WHO.

But this entire article has in fact now been REMOVED from the latest draft of the pandemic treaty, meaning that countries do no longer have to obey the WHO. This is a massive win for national sovereignty.

Last year I held a speech outside the UN headquarters in Geneva in protest of the pandemic treaty. I warned about how this was all connected to the Agenda 2030, you can see my article on that here.

WATCH: My speech outside UN exposing Agenda 2030

by Roger Childs

Whether in light comedies, tragedies or histories, Shakespeare focused on human hopes, dreams, absurdities, cruelties, kindnesses, doubts: the inwardness of lives. –Libby Purves, The Times

The huge influence of William Shakespeare

It is 460 years since the Bard shuffled off this mortal coil: to coin one of his phrases. Hands up if you studied any of his plays in school and can still quote a few lines?

Feel free to pick up on one or more of these cues:

 ~ Friends, Romans, countrymen…

 ~ To be or not to be ….

 ~ Is this a dagger which I see …

 ~ All the world’s a stage …

 ~ Now is the winter of our discontent …

No-one in the history of World literature has had a greater lasting influence. As well as his many plays and poems, he had left us hundreds of phrases and images which we use without knowing or thinking about their origin. 

Shakespeare and his plays have also been the subject of scores of books and films, as well as a fair share of controversy and conspiracy theories. 

Were they written by someone else, like Edward de Vere, Earl of Oxford or Christopher Marlowe or William Stanley or Sir Francis Bacon? The jury is still out.

A wonderful recorder of the human condition

Shakespeare’s plays have lasted so well and so long, because they cover people from all levels of society and economic circumstances. It is very easy to identify with the range of characters and the incredibly diverse situations.

There are 

• kings and queens
• nobles and servants
• friends and enemies
• conspirators and allies
• fools and fine fellows
• witches and jesters
• young lovers and old friends
• cross dressers and fairies
• tradesmen and money lenders.

Throughout the 37 plays, every imaginable aspect of human relationships is covered. There is also the full range of genres and emotions: comedy, tragedy, history, fantasy, humour, drama, intimacy, tension, friendship and betrayal. He also wrote about 160 poems most of them sonnets.

But above all, there is his amazing use of language and an ability to paint word pictures and describe places and situations with extraordinary skill and inventiveness. 

Take his description of his homeland from Richard II.

This royal throne of kings, this sceptered isle,

This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars,

This other Eden, demi-paradise,

This fortress built by Nature for her self

Against infection and the hand of war,

This happy breed of men, this little world,

This precious stone set in a silver sea

Which serves it in the office of a wall

Or as a moat defensive to a house,

Against the envy of less happier lands,

This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England.

To coin a phrase …

No one has provided the language with so many new words, images and phrases as William Shakespeare.

Thereby hangs a tale. I went on a wild-goose chase to find a dish fit for the gods. My friend was a tower of strength with a heart of gold and a spotless reputation. As good luck would have it we were soon enjoying some salad days. The short and long of it is that it beggared all description. It was such stuff as dreams are made of and we were soon as merry as the day is long. All’s well the ends well.

A man for all seasons

He was not of an age but for all time. –Ben Johnson

The work and influence of William Shakespeare has lasted for more than four and a half centuries and shows no sign of diminishing. His appealing stories of the human condition; the fascinating takes on history and society; the wonderful descriptions of places and situations; the drama, tension, humour and humanity will continue to endear the Bard to generations to come. 

To misquote a well known source This was the noblest Briton of them all.

Thanks Will!