“When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that it’s desolation is near” (Luke 21:20).
Special Dispatch No. 7328
Pro-Hizbullah Lebanese Website: “Hizbullah Has 70,000 Iranian Missiles Across Syria Ready To Launch Into Israel; In A Year It Will Have 500,000” (MEMRI, 2/12)
Iran has 10 military bases in Syria, two near Israel border — analyst
Up to 20,000 fighters trained by Tehran are in country, now focused on Israel, after neutralizing IS threat, NY Times reports Times of Israel * 19 Feb 2018
Iran operates 10 military bases in Syria and is training militias loyal to President Bashar Assad’s regime for a possible battle with Israel, with two key facilities located near the border with Israel, an analyst for an American think tank said in an article published Monday. Up to 20,000 fighters from various militias throughout the war-torn country have been trained by Iranian military personnel, giving Tehran its “true muscle” in Syria, according to the Monday report in The New York Times. Israel has been warning for years that Iran is seeking to entrench itself militarily in Syria. According to Israeli political and military assessments, Tehran, which has shored up Assad in the Syrian civil war, has been working to create air and naval bases in Syria, from which it can arm the Lebanon-based terror organization Hezbollah and other Shiite groups, as well as carry out attacks of its own against the Jewish state. Monday’s report said hundreds or thousands of Iranian military officials are in Syria and that about 6,000 of the Iran-trained combatants in the country are members of Hezbollah, with the rest coming from Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and other countries. Most of them view the battle against non-Shiite Muslims and against non-Muslims in the region in religious terms, the report added.
DW remains an excellent source of European news. The German news program is shown on PBS on weekday evenings.
On Monday it reported the appointment of Chancellor Merkel’s “heir apparent”, Annegret Kram-Karrenbauer, as General Secretary of the conservative Christian Democrats. This is a role that Mrs. Merkel had before becoming Chancellor – the same development could happen again. Already, the media has dubbed her “Mini-Merkel”.
On the same evening news program, it was reported that the latest polls show support for the left-wing Social Democrats is plummeting. At the same time, the “extreme right wing party, AfD, continues to rise dramatically. DW’s Oliver Sallet commented that “this is unheard of. It has never happened before in (the Federal Republic of) Germany. The general trend continues, which is the rise of the Right in Germany.”
RENEW LAUNCHED IN UK
Prior to the above news item, the program reported the launch of a new party in the United Kingdom. “Renew” is dedicated to reversing the Brexit decision.
Britain remains very divided on whether the country should restore its independence, or further immerse itself in the German dominated European Union.
It’s also reported that the American billionaire George Soros has donated 600,000 pounds to try to ensure Britain does not go ahead with Brexit; at the same time, the CEO of Bank of America is speaking out against it. Neither of these men is British. In the US, the nightly news frequently brings up Russian interference in the last US election. It’s time the British government condemned outside interference in Brexit. This is a British matter for the British people to decide.
TRADE WAR GETTING WORSE
Chart du jour: Donald Trump, look away now
The EU’s trade surplus with the US jumped in 2017 and Donald Trump won’t be happy about it. Having already dubbed Germany a potential “currency exploiter,” the White House will be wincing at new figures which show EU exports to the States jumped 3 per cent last year to €375bn. Bloomberg reckons the figures could further strain trans-Atlantic trade ties between the two economic giants. (FT 2/16)
RECOMMENDED FAMILY SHOW
Friends recommended “When Calls the Heart,” which is available on Netflix. The show is now in its fifth season on Hallmark.
It centers on the development of a small town “the other side of the Rockies” and the relationship between a Canadian Mountie and an adventurous school teacher from a wealthy family. It’s a very good family show.
Prior to watching it, I was saying to my wife that we have watched good programs from the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand and the USA, but nothing from Canada. Now, finally, here’s a series set in Canada. That’s not the same as being “Canadian.” Hallmark, a US based channel, has left its prints all over it. Even the Mountie is an import from Australia!
King Edward VII conferred the title “Royal” on the Mounties in 1904, six years before the series is set. At the time, all outposts of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) would have displayed a photo of the King in their office. Schools would, too, as any reader of “Anne of Green Gables” knows. (Perhaps, we can overlook this as the school in the series meets in a saloon!) The government is referred to as “the federal government,” whereas Canadians refer to the government in Ottawa as the “Government of Canada.” Additionally, the only time any political subject has come up in the series, it’s been about US presidents. Also, New York, San Francisco and Hollywood have received special mention, as if they are a part of the same province.
In other words, a very uplifting series is slightly marred by historical error, which could have been avoided. Hallmark missed an opportunity to teach Americans about their bigger neighbor to the North.
It’s not very often that Philippians 4:8 comes to mind when watching a television series. But it did with this one:
Philippians 4:8 NKJV – “Finally, brethren, whatever things are true, whatever things are noble, whatever things are just, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are of good report, if there is any virtue and if there is anything praiseworthy – meditate on these things.”
There is no bad language in this series, no sex and minimal violence. My wife and I recommend it as good family viewing, suitable for our grandchildren.
One final comment: famously, Mounties always get their man, but the Mountie in this series is taking a very long time to get his woman! It’s sometimes painful watching what must be one of the slowest courtships in dramatic history. It’s good, though, for teens today to see how people used to court the opposite sex.
Whereas Germany is having difficulty putting together a coalition government, Austria’s youthful Chancellor, the youngest head of government in the world, has been successful. Sebastian Kurz, 31, leads the Austrian People’s Party. His party is now in coalition with the “extreme right” Freedom Party, led by Heinz-Christian Strache. The latter party is often compared to the Nazis, whose leader, Adolf Hitler, was from Austria. This is an exaggeration, to say the least.
Both leaders and their supporters, are concerned about the invasion of their country by Muslims and encroaching Islamization. They announced the formation of their government on Kahlenberg Mountain outside of Vienna, the same hill where Islamic Turks were defeated on 9-11 (& 12), 1683, ending the Muslim threat to western Europe. The new government joins Hungary, the Czech Republic, Poland and Slovakia in turning against the tide of immigrants welcomed by Germany’s Chancellor, Angela Merkel. Interestingly, all five of these countries were parts of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, which collapsed after World War One.
One thing is certain – Austria has become the first western nation with a genuine conservative government.
“The new coalition was agreed on Friday (15th December) by the conservative People’s Party (ÖVP) and the Freedom Party (FPÖ), pledging to stop illegal immigration, cut taxes and resist EU centralization.
It will be led by Chancellor Sebastian Kurz, who took over the ÖVP in May and yanked it to the right, securing his party first place in October elections. At 31, Kurz will be the world’s youngest leader.
At his side for the investiture by Austria’s (figurehead) president in the Hapsburg dynasty’s imperial palace in Vienna was FPÖ chief Heinz-Christian Strache, 48, now vice-chancellor, and FPÖ general secretary Herbert Kickl, the new interior minister.
“Strache has said Islam “has no place in Europe” and last year called German Chancellor Angela Merkel “the most dangerous woman in Europe” for her open-door refugee policy.
On Sunday, Strache trumpeted to his 750,000 followers on Facebook that the new government would slash social benefits for asylum-seekers.
“It will no longer happen that migrants who have never worked here a single day or paid anything into the social system will get thousands of euros in welfare!” he said in a post that has gained 9,000 “likes.”
(“European far-right jubilant as Austria’s new government is sworn in.” The Local, December 18th)
Coincidentally, at the same time the Austrian government was agreeing a coalition, my wife and I were watching the “Sisi” trilogy on Turner Classic Movies. These three films, made over 50 years ago in Austria (with English sub-titles), portrayed the Austrian Empress Elizabeth, wife of the Emperor Franz Josef, who reigned from 1848-1916. Elizabeth came from Bavaria. She was sympathetic to the aspirations of Hungarian nationalists and was influential in the historic agreement that united Austria and Hungary in the Austro-Hungarian Empire (in 1867). Her life was rather tragic – her only son, the Crown Prince Rudolf, committed suicide and she herself was assassinated a few years later, while visiting Geneva.
It was an interesting time in the Austro-Hungarian Empire. A great deal of liberalization took place under Franz Josef as Austrians tried to keep their multiethnic empire together. Often overlooked is the fact that this major empire gave a home to eleven different nationalities, all united under the Hapsburgs. Today, each ethnic group has its own sovereign state, each one weaker than the old empire.
“The great Czech historian Frantisek Palacky once said that if the Hapsburg Empire had not existed, it would have been necessary to invent it” (The Emperors, by Gareth Russell, 2014, pages 40-41). The European Union is no replacement as it is German dominated.
Some of the former Austrian nationalities are again marching together. Austria, Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia are all opposed to further Muslim immigration, wanting to protect and preserve Catholic Europe. These five countries are set to form the Eastern leg of the biblically prophesied revived Roman Empire.
Following the fall of the Roman Empire in the West in the fifth century, there have been a number of attempts to revive it – most recently, in 1922 Mussolini announced a revival of the Roman Empire; in 1957 European leaders signed the Treaty of Rome, forming what is now the European Union, another attempt at uniting Europe. Perhaps out of the rubble of the EU will come the final European Union, led by Germany.
“Whereas you saw the feet and toes, partly of potter’s clay and partly of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; yet the strength of the iron shall be in it, just as you saw the iron mixed with ceramic clay. And as the toes of the feet were partly of iron and partly of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong and partly fragile. As you saw iron mixed with ceramic clay, they will mingle with the seed of men; but they will not adhere to one another, just as iron does not mix with clay. And in the days of these kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people; it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever.” (Daniel 2:41-44)
ANNUAL MESSAGES FROM HEADS OF STATE
Every year, the British monarch speaks to the Commonwealth on Christmas Day. This is a tradition that began with her grandfather, King George V, in 1932. At the time Britain was a global superpower, ruling over a quarter of the world’s people. With the introduction of radio in the previous decade, the king could now address all his subjects around the world.
In 1957 the annual radio broadcast began to be televised. By this time, the empire was fundamentally changing. Indeed, in 1957’s broadcast, the Queen welcomed Ghana and Malaysia into the Commonwealth, as both nations had become independent that year. The 52-nation Commonwealth continues to this day, with the Queen as its Head.
For some years now, the queen’s message has embraced multiculturalism. The Commonwealth is multicultural in itself, composed of nations that have different religions and a great deal of ethnic diversity. This year, she took a different approach to her speech. Instead of emphasizing multiculturalism, she praised the citizens of London and Manchester who suffered terrorist attacks last year; and the heroism of Emergency Responders who helped save lives.
Sadly, it is, of course, multiculturalism which has led directly to terrorism, not just in the United Kingdom but in other countries in Europe.
The queen is a deeply religious woman, never more so than at Christmas. In her speech this year she talked of how Jesus Christ “suffered rejection, hardship and persecution.” Having experienced all three in recent years, I was encouraged by her words, which prompted a Bible Study from this angle.
Queen Elizabeth is not the only Head of State who gives an annual Christmas speech. President Steinmeier of Germany addressed the German people on the same day. The German president, like the British monarch, is a figurehead, playing an important role in unifying the nation at a difficult time. The German president devoted his speech to reassuring the German people, who still do not have a government over three months after the election. This is the longest period in the Federal Republic’s history and, for some, brings back memories of the rather unstable Weimar Republic. Today’s German republic is more resilient and Germany should soon have a new coalition government, made up of two or more parties.
The Pope also gave a Christmas speech. Whereas the British monarch and the German president were careful not to advocate more immigrants, the pope called upon nations to open their doors wider to receive more refugees. Ironically, on the same day, ISIS in Somalia called for the assassination of the pope and for attacks on more western cities, like Manchester and London.
And so it goes on. The West has lost its way and does not know how to respond to radical Islam’s assault upon it. It won’t, until its religious roots are revived. Most people in the West still give lip-service to Christianity, but few think deeply about their traditional religions, both Catholic and Protestant.
Acts 4:12 says of Jesus Christ: “Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.” Muslims deny Jesus Christ is the Son of God. Therefore, to equate Islam with Christianity, makes no sense and endangers Christians, who are ill-prepared for the assault that is taking place upon them today.
The British monarch is the titular Head of the Anglican Community. The Pope is the Head of the Catholic Church.
They need to wake up to what is happening and to see clearly the threat to traditional Christianity.
The Pope, in his annual speech, focused on Jerusalem, calling for an independent Palestinian state, the “two state solution” that has been official policy of most countries in recent years. What the pope is calling for pits him (and the Church) against the US Administration, which is recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.
“Pope Francis has used his traditional Christmas Day message to call for “peace for Jerusalem” and dialogue between Israelis and Palestinians. Acknowledging “growing tensions” between them, he urged a “negotiated solution . . . . that would allow the peaceful co-existence of two states.” US President Donald Trump recently announced that America recognised Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. The hugely controversial move drew condemnation across the Muslim world. The Roman Catholic leader gave his Urbi et Orbi speech, which in Latin means “To the city and world,” in Saint Peter’s Square.” http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-42477274
REVISIONIST HISTORY – CHECK THE FACTS!
I’ve taken to looking up just about everything depicted in historical movies and television programs. As we watch a series, I keep my laptop on my lap and google the “facts” depicted by Hollywood and others who make movies. The “facts” are rarely factual. Note the following:
1) The new “History” channel series “Knightfall” depicts the Knights Templar around the year 1300. In the first episode of the series, the Catholic soldiers saved the Jews who were expelled from Paris by King Philip the Fair in 1306. According to the series, the Jews were saved by the Knights Templar.
This is a total fabrication. Note the following from the BBC’s Religion section:
“During the first half of the 13th century the attitude of the Church towards Jews hardened from disapproval to loathing. On 22 July, 1306 King Philip IV of France expelled all Jews from his kingdom.”
2) The second season of “The Crown” (Netflix) implies that Prince Philip cheated on his wife in the 1950’s and early 60’s. There is no evidence for this. It may be true – it may not be true. But people watching the otherwise excellent series will no doubt believe everything they see.
3) “A United Kingdom” was an otherwise good movie, telling the story of Seretse Khama and his wife Ruth Williams. Sir Seretse led Botswana to independence in 1966. He met his wife while studying in London. They were a bi-racial couple in southern Africa, not very common in those days and forbidden in neighboring South Africa, the regional powerhouse. In 1947 the movie referred to the presidents of four neighboring countries, not one of which had a president at the time, as they were all a part of the British Commonwealth.
4) This is the worst one! ‘The Viceroy’s House” is a recent movie set in India at the time of independence and partition, in 1947.
Everything in the movie was good until somebody opened a drawer and pulled out a two-year-old highly secretive British government paper advocating partition of the country into India and (Muslim) Pakistan. So what, you may ask?
Well, this file changed history. Instead of Earl Mountbatten being responsible for partition, the file “revealed” it was war-time leader Winston Churchill. As the anti-colonial Guardian reviewer put it – it was the equivalent of somebody in Germany opening a drawer and finding that the Holocaust was first proposed, not by Hitler, but by Mussolini.
Why can’t the entertainment industry ever get it right? As far more people will watch the movie than read any book on the subject, Churchill will now be blamed for one of the greatest disasters of the twentieth century.
One very good series we’ve seen was on the National Geographic Channel. It was a biography of Albert Einstein. One of the most brilliant minds in history, he was absolutely hopeless at personal relationships.
I thought you might appreciate the following quote from the great physicist himself: “The universe is so extraordinary that only God could have created it. My job is to figure out how He did it.” (Einstein)
The two greatest scientists of all time were Sir Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein. Many people today see science and religion as opposites — these men did not. They both believed in God. Be sure to share that fact with others.
Diane and I spent Saturday night and too much of Sunday afternoon watching “War and Peace”, the BBC adaptation of Leo Tolstoy’s 1869 novel that has been described as the greatest novel ever written.
It’s set during the period of the Napoleonic Wars, concentrating on the years between 1805 and 1812 when France turned its attentions to Russia, arguably Napoleon’s biggest mistake.
It isn’t just about the military and endless battles. There’s the usual romantic entanglements that make a good novel, which keep you enthralled until the end.
The television series lasts eight hours. According to a website I checked, it takes 32 hours and 40 minutes for the average person to read the book. So you can save yourselves almost 25 hours by watching the series, even if you do feel guilty about “wasting” a Sunday afternoon binge watching.
Warning: once you start, you won’t want to stop!!!
(It’s even led to me starting to read the 3 volume set that has been on my bookshelf for fifty years.)
NETFLIX: THE CROWN
We also binge-watched “The Crown” over Thanksgiving when our eldest daughter, her husband and children were with us. This is the most expensive online production ever, showing on Netflix. They reportedly spent over 100 million pounds on it (approx. $125 million). As it’s the first of four seasons, they will be spending a good $500 million before it’s over. One newspaper said that Netflix is hoping to bury cable with this and other upcoming productions.
“The Crown” tells the story of Queen Elizabeth II, from her marriage to Prince Philip in 1947, up till the present time. As flashbacks go back to the Abdication in 1936, it effectively covers her life from the moment she learned she would become Queen when her uncle abdicated, until the present day. The first series ends in 1955, when Sir Winston Churchill resigned as Prime Minister. Coincidentally, with the recent deaths of the King of Thailand and Fidel Castro, she is now the only political figure who was around in the 1950’s.
Although many of the conversations that take place in the series are pure conjecture, the production is remarkably accurate in its portrayal of the 1940’s and 50’s and its attention to detail. The deep spiritual and historical meaning of the coronation is brilliantly conveyed to audiences that are unfamiliar with the biblical significance of the ceremony, which has its origins in the coronation of Israel’s King Solomon and his anointing by Zadok, the priest.
Politically, the series will help people to understand constitutional monarchy. 43 countries around the world are monarchies, not all of them constitutional. Queen Elizabeth II is Head of State of 16 of those countries. Each country chose to remain a constitutional monarchy at the time of independence.
All four of us recommend the series and look forward to the following three seasons.
Footnotes: In one scene Prince Philip says something negative about visiting Australia; in a later episode, he is asked to go there alone for the opening of the Olympic Games in 1956 and, again, expresses a complaint. I question the series’ interpretation of events here. Mark Steyn, a Canadian of decidedly conservative views who now lives in New Hampshire, wrote an article some years ago about a dinner he had with others at Buckingham Palace, where he was hosted by the Queen and Prince Philip. In the article he recounted a private conversation with the Prince in which they both compared and discussed the Canadian and Australian constitutions. It didn’t seem as if the Prince was not interested in the two countries. The trips were undoubtedly a challenge as they went by sea and were away from their children for months at a time. This fact is alluded to in the later episode.
Personal footnote: Our son was helping his eldest daughter, Paris, prepping her for a test on Canada the following day in her fifth grade exam. One question was “What kind of government does Canada have?” Kurt told her Canada is a constitutional monarchy. It turned out to be the wrong answer. What the teacher wanted was: “Canada has its own government.” Even teachers don’t seem to understand “constitutional monarchy,” which has a very good track record of preserving democracy.
A third series we’ve started binge-watching (well, every Sunday evening for a couple of hours) is “The Hollow Crown,” adaptations of Shakespeare’s historical plays. The series is showing in the Sunday night “Masterpiece Theater” slot on PBS. It stars some of the world’s greatest actors. Somehow, we missed the first series, which we’ve now requested through our public library system. But we’ve started the second series, which begins in 1422 with the death of Henry V and the ascension to power of his son, Henry VI. Actually, it was not that simple – the new king was only nine months old, the youngest monarch in English history. In view of his age, there had to be a regency – and that was the start of his problems. Out of this came the War of the Roses, a civil war that lasted over thirty years.
“Britain’s oldest manufacturing firm put its business up for sale. Based in East London, Whitechapel Bell Foundry was established in 1570 and cast the original Liberty Bell in Philadelphia as well as Big Ben and bells for St Paul’s Cathedral. Fewer churches mean fewer orders for large bells. But the success of “Downton Abbey” has wrought a new market: for handbells to ring for tea.” (The Economist, December 10th.)
It’s hard to imagine that the British drunkards, fornicators and adulterers on “Indian Summers” could have run an empire, but that’s what the latest offering on PBS’s Masterpiece Theater is having us believe.
I’m sure that some of that went on, as it has done in every nation, but surely not everybody? Even the resident missionary in Simla has had an extramarital relationship.
Sunday’s episode went so far as to suggest that there was one law for the Brits and one for the natives, that innocent until proven guilty did not apply to Indians. Indian writer Dinesh d’Souza once wrote that one of the greatest gifts the British gave India was the legal system, including this very point. Equality before the law is a basic principle of English common law, thanks to the Magna Carta, which is being remembered this year, 800 years after its signing.
I’ve written before of how in the last days of colonial Rhodesia, a young white male who murdered a black taxi driver was hanged for his crime. The fact that he was white was no excuse.
“Indian Summers” also gives the impression that the British oppressed the Indians. Difficult when the Indians outnumbered them 1,200 to 1.
And if the Indians hated the British so much, why have so many moved to England since independence?
A more accurate portrayal of British history can be found on the BBC World News channel. “The Birth of Empire” is a documentary series on the British East India Company, the biggest commercial enterprise in the history of the world. It started as a trading company in 1600, during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I, and was so successful it ended up running the sub-continent.
Eventually, the British government took over the responsibility of administering the Indian empire.
Note the following quote from Indian writer Dinesh D’Souza:
“Despite their suspect motives and bad behavior, however, the British needed a certain amount of infrastructure to effectively govern India. So they built roads, shipping docks, railway tracks, irrigation systems, and government buildings. Then they realized that they needed courts of law to adjudicate disputes that went beyond local systems of dispensing justice. And so the British legal system was introduced, with all its procedural novelties, like “innocent until proven guilty.” The British also had to educate the Indians, in order to communicate with them and to train them to be civil servants in the empire. Thus Indian children were exposed to Shakespeare, Dickens, Hobbes, and Locke. In that way the Indians began to encounter words and ideas that were unmentioned in their ancestral culture: “liberty,” “sovereignty,” “rights,” and so on.
“That brings me to the greatest benefit that the British provided to the Indians: They taught them the language of freedom. Once again, it was not the objective of the colonial rulers to encourage rebellion. But by exposing Indians to the ideas of the West, they did. The Indian leaders were the product of Western civilization. Gandhi studied in England and South Africa; Nehru was a product of Harrow and Cambridge. That exposure was not entirely to the good; Nehru, for example, who became India’s first prime minister after independence, was highly influenced by Fabian socialism through the teachings of Harold Laski. The result was that India had a mismanaged socialist economy for a generation. But my broader point is that the champions of Indian independence acquired the principles, the language, and even the strategies of liberation from the civilization of their oppressors. This was true not just of India but also of other Asian and African countries that broke free of the European yoke.
“My conclusion is that against their intentions, the colonialists brought things to India that have immeasurably enriched the lives of the descendants of colonialism. It is doubtful that non-Western countries would have acquired those good things by themselves. It was the British who, applying a universal notion of human rights, in the early 19th century abolished the ancient Indian institution of suttee — the custom of tossing widows on their husbands’ funeral pyres. There is no reason to believe that the Indians, who had practiced suttee for centuries, would have reached such a conclusion on their own. Imagine an African or Indian king encountering the works of Locke or Madison and saying, “You know, I think those fellows have a good point. I should relinquish my power and let my people decide whether they want me or someone else to rule.” Somehow, I don’t see that as likely.
“Colonialism was the transmission belt that brought to Asia, Africa, and South America the blessings of Western civilization. Many of those cultures continue to have serious problems of tyranny, tribal and religious conflict, poverty, and underdevelopment, but that is not due to an excess of Western influence; rather, it is due to the fact that those countries are insufficiently Westernized. Sub-Saharan Africa, which is probably in the worst position, has been described by U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan as “a cocktail of disasters.” That is not because colonialism in Africa lasted so long, but because it lasted a mere half-century. It was too short a time to permit Western institutions to take firm root. Consequently, after their independence, most African nations have retreated into a kind of tribal barbarism that can be remedied only with more Western influence, not less. Africa needs more Western capital, more technology, more rule of law, and more individual freedom.” (“Two Cheers For Colonialism,” Dinesh d’Souza, 5/8/2002).
A more accurate Masterpiece Theater presentation is the series “Home Fires” which has been showing immediately prior to “Indian Summers.” This series, which ended its first season last night, is set in an English village during World War II. The program revolves around the Women’s Institute and its efforts to help the war effort locally by growing and canning food, knitting and sewing, and raising funds to buy ambulances.
With many of the men in their lives fighting on the front lines around the world, the ladies are faced with a whole series of difficult challenges, including food rationing and the preparation for bombing raids.
The series ended with hundreds of planes of the Royal Air Force flying overhead on their way to fight the Battle of Britain. The villagers are contemplating the reality of a Nazi invasion with all the changes that would bring.
It’s well worth watching and is available on DVD and Netflix.
"Once in a while you will stumble upon the truth but most of us manage to pick ourselves up and hurry along as if nothing had happened." — Sir Winston Churchill