Is a man guilty if he loses his mind? What are the ethical views of a society towards such a man; a society who recruited him, trained him, armed him and sent him out into a workplace – an arena of war, where he lost his mind. Does that society have a duty of care to this soldier? Is it really likely that such a person would be a mass killer in other circumstance? Lost his self regulation, forgot his empathy for his fellow man and took away their right to life.

This incident in not unique – just over two years ago, a middle ranking Officer and a senior professional (a US Army Major, serving as a psychiatrist), shot dead 13 people and injured 29 others, in the worst single act to take place on a secure American military base. How bad can things be, when the professional employed by the Army to address and resolve mental health issues in the soldiers for whom he has responsibility, himself loses his mind and instead of caring for and counselling his charge, he kills them.

On the latest figures we found (for 2010), US Army suicides were up 80%, from 2004, following the invasion of Iraq – to a total of 160 personnel. Previously suicide rates were far lower than amongst the civilian population. This was for a host of well documented reasons: camaraderie; purposeful occupation; role of physical exercise in mental well being; the importance of “joint purpose”. For this situation to have so catastrophically switched around is devastating to the lives of the serving soldiers, their families, the broader Army ethos and not least for their victims.

In a war that is operationally winding down – and all parties know this, its outcome will be measured by hostile actions of the Taliban in Afghanistan, within two years of US withdrawal, and the civil disorder still prevalent in Iraq. For the ISAF soldier, this outcome will more tangibly be measured by the mental health state they are left managing as they retire from the military and return to civilian life, along with the rest of us.

However, the recent racist tauntings of a visiting Oldham player, reveal that for all its claims to have modernised, football can all too easily resort to the provincial, parochial and small minded behaviour that tainted it for several generations. In the nineties, Liverpool had the elegance and talent of John Barnes to call on. Yet Barnes, a black Briton, would frequently walk on the pitch to bananas being thrown by racist fans – and many of these were home Liverpool fans!

For all its multiculturalism, Britain still suffers from huge regional differences, in relation to diversity and acceptance of differences – both cultural and racial. Our northern cities still have some way to go, to recognise that we are now one of the most racially diverse, and actually harmonious with it, countries on Earth. These differences emphasise that most of the “ethnic population” of the UK, lies in the south, and that for our small size, there still remains great intolerance and ignorance, particularly amongst the working classes of the north.

LFC authorities and the police (who themselves have much to learn), should pursue this case and not allow fans to think that this behaviour is acceptable. It isn’t.

This movement was soon adopted by the Egyptians, Jordanians, Palestinians and Syrians, to a greater or lesser degree of earnest application, and repressive crackdown. Syria is ongoing; Libya spawned a Conflict all of its own, involving a myriad of Nato forces – though, no manpower on the ground. So. we heralded the “Arab Spring”…the US, for once impressive in its restraint, adopted  a “wait and see” policy – one it still maintains.

The year moves on: Mubarak finally resigns (“finally” in this context should be qualified: after a 30 year reign, to take a couple of months to oust, is no mean feat.) Libya, however, entrenches – Colonel Gaddafi isn’t going anywhere…months of violence ensue, cities are bombed, thousands displaced, hundreds killed. The western countries follow an aerial bombing campaign, a war of attrition from the sky begins and formal alliances with the rebels are established. The bombing begins to co-ordinate with rebel movement on the ground; Gaddafi flees. He is later captured, physically violated and killed by those he has ruled for 40 years, those who he swore would die to protect him…

Meanwhile, back in Europe, things are not looking quite so rosy either. We enter the fourth year of either recessionary or significantly below trend growth. The countries of the Eurozone experience further problems in their fiscal positions. Europe, in the main (Italy always being the exception), has a recent history typified by stable government. The problems of the Euro and unsustainable debt begin to take their toll – as does almost 40% youth unemployment in areas of some member countries. Individual nations begin circling around that great spiral known as “Default”. The prospect of an ignominious exit from the greatest project of European unity, now seems an all too certain outcome. Greece is likely to be the first taker. Ireland, once the doyen of the Euro enthusiasts, now is littered with entire apartment blocks nobody wants to buy, and heartbreakingly, a new exodus of its’ talents…the first mass emigration out of the western European nation’s…

So…what do we conclude? Simply, that few things are knowable, that history itself  is speeding up and our path uncertain. That mass media and technology act as both a catalyst and spur, and moreover – witness. We are all participants, we are all stakeholders and some of us get to be drivers…which direction shall we head in 2012?

Today we hear that the Greek government, on whose behalf the Prime Minister had accepted the deal, may itself be close to failure. Apparently, the Greek Finance Minister has now changed his position on the suggested referendum, recently put forward by the Prime Minister. This referendum was proposed, one feels, as a matter of conscience on the part of the PM, in light of the austerity it would continue to impose on the Greek people.

Given that inevitably that question has to boil down to one of principle: should Greece be in the Euro or not? The PM is, at time of writing, looking like he may not survive the vote on whether to proceed with the referendum. The leaders of the Eurozone, notably France and Germany are stating that the first tranche of bail out funds will now not be paid, leading to effective default on the part of Greece, increasingly unable to pay its debts.

Some thinkers have now begun to rationalise what many of us have been saying all along – that the Eurozone will be little worse off without the Greeks. No bail out fund until a decision on the referendum, and if the answer is the wrong one, then no bail out fund period: Greece will default more legitimately than this slow strangulation, and return to the Drachma.

With the loss of its weakest member, the Eurozone could consolidate and strengthen…or unwind completely. We are at the end of the beginning, but of exactly what, remains to be seen…

There are a number of outstanding questions:

• There effectively become two classes of debt: those provided by official sources such as the ECB, and the private sector bondholders. The 50 % “haircut” is expected to come out of the private bondholders’ debt. How sustainable is this, given the expectation of future default, in the possibility of raising additional credit in the markets?
• In a decade’s time, Greece’s debt will remain at 120% of GDP. Again – how much of a forward move is this, given it leaves no room for manoeuvre and future shocks the country may face.
• What is the legal status of the new bonds? Under which law will they be governed? Are there not implications for non-Eurozone EU member states in restraints on the scope of the EU budget, as it rightly affects them?
• How will the EFSF bond insurance scheme work? Will the EFSF have its own CDS?

Then of course, the insufficiently spelled out: the consequential considerations of fiscal deepening across the EU member states…the very presence of this deal strengthens the hands of those who would will greater integration on the rest of us – despite the fact that the necessity for it in the first place is sufficient evidence to the contrary.

So we default to behaviour that has stood us in good stead for a long time: decorum, decency, privacy and sensitivity. In these times of instant media (which is almost wholly a good development), images can race around the planet in literally seconds – and can be broadcast, taken from an individual’s ownership, on national media only seconds later. This does not make it right.

There is a privacy in the death of another that we would do well to remember, whatever their crime. Are we not haunted enough by the images of Ceauşescu and his wife, seconds after their execution by firing squad? Did no stirrings of humanity reveal themselves in us, as we witnessed Saddam’s medical examination, knowing full well he was heading to a State Trial from which he would not return. Perhaps the latter was justified…The images of the killing of Gaddafi are amongst the most brutal and shocking ever shown on western media. Their publication has not been without controversy: both the BBC and the UK national press have had bulletin boards with hundreds of complaints. There is a widespread feeling of uncertainty: we wanted him removed, we sanctioned our representatives to achieve this end – we didn’t expect to see the result broadcast around the world, of a terrified, ashen old man covered in blood, seconds before his death. In the internet world of instant publicity, let us not abandon our ability to be shocked, even from those who deserve no pity from us.

We now commence day 4 for generalised service failure, across its network of users. This was all RIM could say yesterday, in response to a now worldwide outage: “BlackBerry subscribers in the Americas may be experiencing intermittent service delays this morning”

In a world where mobile computing is now the standard, users have demanded, and expected, reliability. BB had indeed differentiated itself, on the basis of offering this reliability. One of its key selling points for business, was the fact that it has its own network of servers, and so is less reliant on the technology of the mobile providers whose platforms essentially act as a co-host.

Losing the perception of this security and stability, could not be more crucial for RIM – not least as it happens at a time when Apple is launching its own iPhone 4S, with a bundled iMessage, a rival to the lauded BBM.

Ian Fogg, a mobile industry analyst at Forrester, said RIM had built its reputation on reliability.

“RIM is in danger of becoming its own worst enemy if it is unable to reliably operate the communication services that have differentiated it,” he said on his blog.

“BBM is the reason many young consumers stay with BlackBerry. If it doesn’t work, they will leave RIM.”

After a recent vote the German parliament has passed (by 523 to 85) a vote to bolster the € 440bn eurozone rescue fund, the European financial stability facility (EFSF). As the FT says, the vote

“would strengthen the hand of the government, and revive confidence in Angela Merkel’s ruling centre-right coalition. They said it should alsosend a strong signal to eurozone partners that Germany was “ready to resume its responsibility” in the eurozone crisis….“Within the coalition, it is a very strong and comforting signal,” said a senior adviser. “But we are under no illusions that the next steps are just ahead, and they are going to be every bit as difficult.” “

The EFSF could easily become the most powerful tool available to the EU. It needs ratifying, and all decisions require unanimity. This is both a strength and a weakness: the market needs assurance that any action will be sufficient and responsive. Weeks of political negotiations will not be acceptable, the market will make its own decision.

Greece has to decide if, in addition to it’s fiscal retrenchment, that it wants private creditors to increase the haircut they have presently accepted, by taking a bigger writedown on the value of their bonds.

It is certain that even at € 440bn, the EFSF is not large enough to deal with a new bout of market speculation. By investing the facility with institutional powers, and giving it the power of leverage, this problem could be solved. Even with a small leverage ratio, the EFSF would remain a desirable investment. With the US recently losing it’s triple A status (and the world not ending), even if EFSF didn’t attract a triple A, it would still be cheap at the price to stop a run on Spanish or Italian debt.

Social media has been critical in this. Never before have people been able to organise and assemble with such speed and ease. More critically, and interestingly, has been the role of “closed” social networks – the Blackberry Messenger application. These messages are not open to outside inspection, and effectively provide a secure medium of communication between the rioters. Something meant for the privacy and business efficiency of its users (hosting it’s own servers, Blackberry can argue it is less subject to the whims of external comms system failures). Instead it has proved as secure as the Police’s radio network itself.

Meanwhile, the twittersphere, and Facebook are overwhelmed with comment, mostly shocked, from people outraged at the theft of their city. Yet serious discussion is to the fore. Critical sociological justification on the one side – and more ruthless “hang ‘em and flog ‘em” on the other. We lie somewhere in the middle. Rights are countered – always – with responsibilities. Expectation is tempered by the need for participation. Here is an example of an exchange we saw on Facebook….Good will out.

“Some very interesting comments overnight – Richard, I think most governments around the world would, if cornered, be pretty envious of Singapore’s fiscal position: large tax take and specific, investment focused, spending, with a strong history of government involvement in society…

@friend1 – these kids are British. They may be second generation (typically third), but they have no stake in society, and see little to be invested in. They are wrong, but it is we who put them there – we need to lead on showing them that they have a future, for, better or worse, they represent a part of all our futures.

@friend2, I disagree with your view on Capitalism, but, as you know, I respect it. By destroying small, local businesses, these young people are most seriously damaging their prospects of ever securing the stake that they demand. It is the small business that is the main employer and creator of new jobs – not the large corporation…

‎@friend3, I fear you may be right, but again, there are many women out there who struggle to do right by their children, and for whom their shame at the knowledge of their child’s involvement in this mayhem, is no less keenly felt because they are single parents.