Peter Rhodes: May the "fore!" be with you

NEW research suggests there was some truth in that old British marching song, to the tune of Colonel Bogey. Records from before the war reveal that Hitler had one undescended testicle. Then what of Himmler? Was he, as the same song suggests, very similar? And was Goebbels entirely lacking?

I WROTE last week about how moon landings were routine in the 20th century. A reader reminds me that on one Apollo mission in 1971, having run out of sensible things to do on the moon, astronaut Alan Shepard smuggled his golf kit on the mission and drove a golf ball, as

he put it, "for miles and miles and miles." May the "fore!" be with you.

WE Brits are a bit shy about our national identity. We don't put our nation's name on postage stamps. We don't know all the words to our national anthem. And we certainly don't have a national dress. Or so I thought until Miss Great Britain, confusingly called Nena France, popped up at the Miss Universe contest in Las Vegas wearing what we are assured is British national dress. It consists of a bejewelled red, white and blue basque, fishnet tights, thonged sandals and enormous showgirl feathers towering over one's head. I've ordered mine already.

THE architect of white rule in Rhodesia, Ian Smith, once dismissed the possibility of democracy in Africa with the scathing description: "One man, one vote – once." Half a century, on the people of Rwanda have voted overwhelmingly for a constitutional amendment which could allow President Paul Kagame to remain in power until 2034. It's as though they have voted not to vote. Anyone see that coming?

MEANWHILE, the founder of Ian Smith's homeland is out of favour in Oxford. Students are urging Oriel College to remove a plaque and statue to Cecil Rhodes, the Victorian empire-builder who donated vast sums to the college. In a statement Oriel declares: "The College does not share Cecil Rhodes's values or condone his racist views or actions." Well, of course it doesn't. It would be bizarre if it did. How many people living in the 19th century held views which 21st century folk would applaud? Yesterday's beliefs, attitudes and language have all changed for the better. And if you rip down statues and plaques commemorating Cecil Rhodes (no relation, incidentally), how can you possible not rip down statues of Queen Victoria (imperialist), Boadicea (war criminal), Winston Churchill (Gallipoli, and all that) or any other national hero? If we are going to be so holier-than-thou that we mark the existence only of unblemished people, we will end up with statues of Winnie the Pooh and Lenny Henry, and that's about it. And I'm not entirely sure about Winnie.

HERE'S a lovely Xmas present for Prince Charles and his wife, a full-page feature in the Daily Mail headlined: "We could do a lot worse that Camilla as our Queen." And in the Sunday Times, another headline: "Admit it: We've come to love Camilla." Expect more of the same. It is part of the softening-up process to persuade the nation, after the Queen's death, to accept Camilla not as queen consort, as the Palace has always promised, but as Queen Camilla.

THE truth is that the queen-consort ruse was nothing more than a temporary measure to placate the Diana fan club. I bet Camilla's queenly crown has already been ordered.