Which power bloc of humanity does the most killings?

Many thanks, John.  Sorry for this length - I just love to crystalise my thoughts in writing!

Which power bloc of humanity does the most killings - the Christian capitalist West or the Communists and Muslim extremists in the East?

I particularly liked 'Drop Medicines, not Bombs'.  Not just medicines but, for Afghanistan and Iraq from the War of Terrorism started on 7 October 2001, we would have been better off dropping 'bikes' not bombs!  By bikes I mean everything but handing out death and injury.  Parachute humanitarian aid in to these poor countries and never death dealing devices, unless authorised by the Security Council and never Congress and the US President.

My Christian discipleship also means doing what Paul advised, "Think of others as better than yourselves."  Hence, I am very unpatriotic in mischievously delighting to point out how it appears that the Christian West, down too many centuries (not just the 20th) has been the worst offender in killing other humans.  Death by all kinds of horrendous means that the West got to do first. From, just 1945:- use of WMD, Korea, the Kenyan atrocities in the 1950s, the West's wars against the Communists in many countries of SE Asia, extra judicial killings but, good news, we do seem to refrain from suicide bombing (I wonder why?  Of course, no need to when we have drones to keep us safe when killing!)

It seems, that it was not the Arab Muslims or the Communists who did the most killings (even when remembering but, never verified, Stalin's millions that he killed*).  For me, this is because of the European nation's responsibility for rounds one and two of the industrialised scale slaughter.  Known, by me, as the wild West's World War 1914 to 1945, with the interlude between 1918 and 1939.  20 million godless Communist Russians were slaughtered to help the Christian West defeat Nazism.  Nazism that came out of a Christian country, too!

I think it is unlikely that the Nazis would have risen to power if the West had not started the 1914 war.  The victors saw to it that vanquished Germany was treated without Churchill's much vaunted magnanimity.  German reparations meant that they had their noses rubbed in the dirt.  It was all a breeding ground for very angry, very patriotic, right wing, National Socialism.  Thus, the sequel in 1939.

We persist in thinking that the violent Communists and the violent Islamists are worse than ourselves because, quite naturally, we more carefully keep a record of their killings of us than that of our own of them - and, we never really like violence, of course; it is forced upon us!  In the last century, the 'Christian' Europeans even got their colonies to help in the slaughter to defend their mighty empires in the (so worthy) West's World War.

Hence, my boring and constant theme:- that I would like - shock horror - to hear, occasionally, a Christian preacher exhorting their flock to avoid arms manufacturing and the armed forces when it comes to a job.  Actually, I did hear Tony Campolo (on Friday 6 Sept at B'ham Christian Centre) do just that in the context of President Obama wanting to punish Syria for using chemical weapons in August.  Praise the Lord - and pass the ammunition!**

NOTES *"Ralph Miliband was a supporter of Marxist ideology that was being used to run governments in other parts of the continent and other parts of Europe which was responsible for an awful lot of terrible things, including millions and millions of deaths."  (Jon Steafel, Dep Editor of Daily Mail, on 'Newsnight', BBC2 on 1 October 2013)

** Christians might only vote for political parties that try non-violence or, at least, non-aggression and who abide by Security Council wishes or UN resolutions.  That means, for me, voting for none of the major three war parties.  Therefore, abstaining. 

So much in common but the differences dominate!

Jews, Christians and Muslims are so similar but so different.  So much in common, yet are not only so divided but have been so full of hatred, enmity and killing of each other from time to time through the centuries and today.  Far too much at each others throats when it comes to nations with one of these religions predominating - the Christian West, the Jewish Israel and the Arab Muslims.  This is madness, this is tragic, this is scandalous.

What unites them all:

• All children of Abraham.  All have the same father!
• The Christians scriptures are Jewish and include their Torah!
• The Muslims regard Jesus Christ as a great and important prophet, second only to their own Mohammed.
• Jesus was a Jew, as were the first Christians. 
• Disgust at homosexuality is common to them all.
• Sexual immorality is more important, a far greater sin, than violence.

"Jesus wants to save Christians" - book review

"JESUS WANTS TO SAVE CHRISTIANS" - FROM BEING EXILED by Rob Bell

To be like Jesus is a tall order but not so impossible if Rob Bell could have been a little more outspoken about us all renouncing the attacks, the occupations, the aggressions, the sheer violence of our descendants and, now, ourselves - on other nations.  The Church in exile is the church wrapped in the devil's arms of violence; it should be noted for its non-violence.

Jesus wants to save Christians to be more like Him in the way He renounced empire building in His first temptation.  Rob omits to remind his readers that the Christian West has been at the forefront of taking and taking over countries to be all their own - called colonialism.  Now the religious, God fearing, USA is the largest empire on earth.  The Church in exile is the church in unholy empire of being on the take; of being in domination.  Not quite what Jesus intended!

"Man shall not live by bread alone".  Yet, the Church has done just that in grabbing what and who it can while the going was good.  Not just land and fossil fuels but slaves to make us rich beyond what humanity has ever seen before.  We are now turning, transforming, the stones of rare minerals and a host of other finite resources to live it up to bring today's comfort and riches.  But bread for the poor and future generations is overlooked, ignored, forgotten.  Including the stones of fossil fuels and all finite raw materials.

Is this not what Jesus also wants to save Christians from in order to be more like the Man God who rejected what we never, ever reject?

Rob - You have more to include in the next edition, please!

Syrian War fuelled by all sides, including us!

I am bothered about all the weapons our people produce in the UK and that get sold on to keep the civil war going in Syria.

We need to accept that our side was the first to use WMD in the Great (foolish) War, in the second round of the slaughter (on Japan in 1945) and, once more in Vietnam in that 16 years war. Our side - NATO and Israel - hardly occupy the moral high ground.  In fact, we have set Syria a very bad example to follow.

Now, on the 'Today' programme, 12 September 2013, I have heard Frank Gardner (BBC Security Correspondent) say, "Britain used chemical weapons (poisonous gas) soon after the First World War against rebels in Iraq and Afghanistan before they were outlawed by the Geneva Protocol of 1925."

Brrr ... or, Ugh!! ?

No fracking;
no nukes;
no wind turbines;
no CO2 from dirty coal;
no pylons.  Brrr ...
Live it up now and to hell with the future;
live infinitely on a finite planet;
What we buy today we throw away tomorrow;
what we take today we don't have tomorrow.  Ugh!!

DO SOLAR and be a humanitarian, a philanthropist!

I've had a short chat this evening with Mike, my father in law.  He's against investing in solar panels because it takes far too long to get the investment back.  Certainly, that is true for him at 86 but I see solar renewables as avoiding fossil fuels that are finite and limited and, all enhance the natural greenhouse effect.  Why think only of putting your money where it will make the most money in the shortest possible time?  Can we not think of future generations and their energy needs?  Can we not think of slowing the exhaustion of non-renewable resources?  Of slowing climate change.  How about investing in solar for humanitarian reasons?  Not for self advancement but to play one's own very small part but, essential part, in improving the prospects for humanity.  Do it for others!

As you said Becky (Roseff), every single roof should have solar panels.  New builds should have them on the roof pitch that is south facing.  I will now make enquiries over the feasibility of E/W facing pitches having solar.  Both those pitches get the sun for half the day each if they are not shaded by trees or higher buildings.  Will any company do it for me?  I will see.

"Jesus wants to save Christians - a manifesto for the Church in exile"

Hi Mike - and copied to Jon

Thanks for lending me the book that Jon had done sometime ago but I had not read it.  When you were pushing pedals across France and Switzerland, I got down to reading it and tried to finish it before you got back but, it was not to be.  I now need your address to return it to you - please.

Presumably, the title of the book referred to Christians no longer living in exile as punishment for departing God's ways.  Christ said, "My Kingdom is not of this world".  For me, His Kingdom is not about living richly or living violently or having an empire.  Yet, the nation with highest proportion of Bible believing Christians is the only superpower and has the only empire.  The USA is the most devout and religious nation on earth.  Therefore, Christians certainly need saving, from what I see.  But their exile is most comfortable and pleasant - with the highest standard of living in the world!

Billy Graham and the Vietnam War

The book is fine, as far as it goes, in my opinion. I suppose Rob Bell can hardly go further or he would not sell many copies.  I always want our Christian leaders to be much more outspoken.  I approve of people like Jim Wallis and Tony Campolo who have been - certainly more so than the telly evangelists and Billy Graham.  Billy wasn't even able to condemn the Vietnam War but went out twice, to give succour, comfort and support to the occupying troops.  Troops who were using chemical weapons, too, to help kill an unknown number of Vietnamese but numbering anything between one and three million, I have read.  The population having WMD used on them, killed 58,000 Americans in a most unequal exchange.  Attacking Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos for 16 years was an act of aggression.  The vast majority of Christian believers saw no need to boycott the war.  And the Christian West was finally and ignominiously defeated, too, in 1975!

Only the sex industry is shunned!
For years, I have been horrified by Christians shunning the sex industry but rarely the arms industry and armed forces at times when we have been doing the invasion, bombing and occupation of 23 nations since 1945, according to two sources I have quoted in the attached file, 'Scotland's Independence push' (see this blog).

My fresh interpretation of Christ's first temptation

Rob Bell says its a 'manifesto for the Church in exile'.  I feel the Church is in the world, of the world and thoroughly conformed to the world.  I know that I am only any better by at least writing and protesting at our wars of aggression and refusing to vote for the war parties.  However, I have conformed to the world, the flesh and the devil by failing to reject the first temptation - by turning stones into bread.  For me, this means taming nature and enjoying the very comfortable and materially rich life that has resulted.  But, it is not sustainable or, eternal or, everlasting that is the only kind of eternity for heaving humanity I am at all interested in these days!

Pilgrims or claimants?
Humanity lives poorly and extends its life span on the planet, as the native Americans, Maoris and Aborigines did.  Or, as we are doing, we live richly and have a correspondingly shorter time span.  Our sojourn should be as pilgrims not as righteous claimants of all that we can lay our hands on as quickly possible and as much as possible, in the name of economic growth or, economic prosperity.  This is my very alternative and eccentric interpretation of the first temptation!

Absolutely fabulous

I raise my hands in unholy horror at what I read of Israel's history in the Old Testament.  Repeated, in very small part over the last 65 years of happy homeland but persistent insecurity and loss of friendship from the surrounding nations.  For me, this makes Israel a failed state, even though it is part of the almighty, all powerful West.  And, Israel has its enormous arsenals of WMD and conventional weaponry, too.  " 'Not by might, nor by power but by My Spirit', says the Lord."  Christians, Messianic Jews and orthodox Jews may say that but, the opposite is done.  True peace (prisons empty of Palestinians, friendship, harmony, peaceful co-existence) for Israel is as far away as ever.  And the righteous in the Lord don't go for compromise or want peace talks, either.  Absolutely fabulous - I don't think!!

The Christian West; not the Muslim Arabs

The best part of the book was the revelation contained in Endnotes pages 209 to 210 that even General Eisenhower believed "that dropping the Bomb (on Japan) was completely unnecessary ... "  But, my own cynical view:- very necessary for the politicians, of course, to try it in the field and in anger!  And, Eisenhower was not a politician in 1945.  In addition, we can't blame the Muslim Arabs for the 20th century being the most evil - simply from the sheer number of humans slaughtered by the Christian West and part Christian/part Communist Russia/USSR - in the history of humanity.

Give up your coat and get a sword, all you true believers!

While I'm on the subject of Christians so actively engaged in violence or, enthusiastically voting for the war parties in US, UK and Israel, my Bible has a footnote in explanation of Luke 22 v 36.  "The sword apparently meant to Jesus a preparation to live by one's own resources against hostility.  The natural meaning of v 38 is that the disciples supposed he spoke of an actual sword, only to learn that two swords were sufficient for the whole enterprise, ie. were not to be used at all."  For me, it looks as though the disciples took Jesus literally with their literal and over-enthusiastic interpretation that if Jesus wants them to have one sword, they will be so obedient that they will do even better and double up whatever military weaponry Jesus allows them - exactly as we do, today!  But Christ says, "It is enough." (v 38) Or, in weary despair, 'You don't get it.  That's enough of that nonsense.'

'Machine Gun Preacher'
The book and film, 'Machine Gun Preacher' is an oxymoron.  Yet, all too true of the last 1700 years of Christian practice and behaviour in too gladly following the Lord's irony in 'commanding' to 'swap your coat for a gun.'

God's special, Chosen Nation

So there you have my honest to God thoughts at my 65 years of living for as long as dear Israel who, thankfully will outlast me into eternity as the one and only Chosen Nation out of 193!

All the best

Tim/Dad

The new Sovereign is commanded to keep to the royal Law contained in the Bible

From Wikipedia:

At the Coronation, for a thousand years, there is included this part:

"Once the taking of the oath concludes, an ecclesiastic presents a Bible to the Sovereign, saying 'Here is Wisdom; This is the royal Law; These are the lively Oracles of God.'^[24]"

What a pity the Monarchs, down the centuries, have not been more zealous in keeping to God's Law contained in the Bible.

Or, perhaps they have, with this Book of books containing the most bloodthirsty chapters of murder and genocide, including Rules for Waging Holy War in Deuteronomy 20 v 1-20.  We have God commanding the most extraordinary episodes of aggression against other nations that is unique among the world's religious Scriptures.

 

Down the centuries, English/UK and European monarchs have certainly enthusiastically embraced these unholy examples of God's work.  Hence, those centuries of European warfare, culminated in the two world wars.  Actually, wars about empire, domination and defending the parts of the planet under our ownership against other European nations.  The exact opposite of temptation no 3 that Jesus Christ rejected but, not our monarchs and rulers and our masters who, of course, always know better.

Charity Begins at Home with ME and only me, Land

Would anyone like to comment on the 100 years behind the times and very rude, "Bongo, Bongo Land" jibe from the racist, colonist and ignorant Godfrey Bloom, UKIP MEP?

Africa could call us,
"Military Aid not Overseas Aid Land" or,
"Colonial Power Land" or, 
"The white man knows what is best for you Land" or,
"Do what we say, not do as we do Land" (our unethical and hypocritical foreign policy);
"Attack first, ask questions later, Land";
Attack with shock and awe before the summer heat or the UN weapons inspectors spoil our fun and put the kibosh on our aggression, Land;
"Charity begins at home, military expenditure begins and ends at home and all over everywhere else, Land".

COMMENT received:
An African once said, "When the white man came to Africa he had the bible and we had the land, now we have the bible and he has the land"

Regards

Tony Verduyn

The oh, so righteous of the Lord

The righteous of the Lord have a blind spot or, they slide over the little matter of declining to participate in armed conflicts around the world.  In other words, our aggression on, and domination of, other weak countries that won't hit back never figures in their list of unrighteous deeds.  The righteous of the Lord shun the sex industry but not the arms industry and the armed forces - and all this warfare has been on the other nations' holy soil who simply wanted to be left well alone!  The righteous of the Lord taking part in such unrighteous activities is hypocritical and sinful.

Bible believing believers are reluctant to endorse peace talks between Israel and Palestine.  They say that peace can only come when Jesus returns - and we have all been waiting for that to happen for 2,000 years.  Or, if everyone were to believe on the Lord Jesus and be saved.  A reluctance to enter into peace talks to get a just resolution after 65 years of intermittent killing is boosted by their interpretation of Scripture and simply means continuing injustice and periodic violence.  It invites the charge of complacency and an attitude of care-lessness.

Exactly, as does the oft repeated refrain, from those made right by God and who are now on God's side, that He is in control and we have nothing to fear and nothing to do.  Some of the rest of poor humanity, on the devil's side, insist that Nature is in control and, if we don't get our numbers and our activities in harmony with the powers of the earth to support life, then collapsing life support systems will do the job for us - as we get our inevitable and, rightful, come uppance.  I know which side I charge with being complacent, dangerous and very foolish!

Valiant attempts to justify our Fourth Anglo-Afghan War

Comments I heard on the 'Today' programme in June 2013.

What it was all for:-

£40bn spent and 444 soldiers killed.  Commander of the Task Force in Helmand gave the following comments.  It was in Britain's interests to fight.  All the armed forces have shown sacrifice and courage in fighting this war to improve national security in the UK.  We are proud of the soldiers' courage, of our achievements and the differences we have made made.

£40 billion is much less than building HS2 (over £50 bn).  444 soldiers killed is considerably less than the losses suffered by our great friend and ally in the Vietnam War to protect Western freedom and security.  That was 58,000 soldiers.  A masssive difference even if you count in the so noble and heroic sacrifice of the other Western soldiers killing and killed in Afghanistan.

We are certainly getting better at suffering fewer losses when we fight our wars against these pesky foreigners.  Thanks to drones that keep up the killing without us suffering anymore.  Just how it should be, of course.

Just too many people and far too many of the wrong type of personal transport!

"the Toll Road has totally failed to divert traffic".  This is untrue.  The large bulk of the 34,000 vehicles using it each day would otherwise be on the M6.  From my calculation, at 7 miles traveled for a litre of fuel (or, 4 litres used to motor along the M6 Toll), the toll charge is similar to what most motorists are paying in fuel for the 27 miles and the £11 charge for HGVs must be much less than their fuel used in the 27 miles.  Therefore, the charge is well worth paying for the fast diversion of the congested and often stop/start M6.

On the other hand, much of the road that runs parallel to the M6 Toll is restricted to 50 mph.  For cars, 55 mph in top gear is the optimum speed for maximum fuel saving and lowest carbon emissions.  But, stop start congestion on the M6 is not!

If a car's running costs are 44p per mile, the £5.50 toll is 48% of the running costs for the 27 miles.

34,000 motorists, I think, are very sensible in paying it.  I am one motorist who would not want to discourage them from doing so!  The M6 Toll is a great success for the 34,000 using it every day and they can easily afford to pay the toll when you take into account all the other costs in buying and using a car that are many times greater.  We all, somehow, manage to find the money to swan around in our cars but cannot, so easily, find the money for parking fees and tolls!

MEL, the owners are heavily in debt from the construction of the road.  They are also committed to paying £100m towards the construction of the link road to the M54.

Make love not war, you war mongering Brits!

"I love you", he said.

"I'm sorry", she replied before he went back down to his prison cell for five years.

A young, "exemplary Maths teacher" fell in love with a pupil who fully returned that love.  Everything was consensual, including the few months of under-age sex and the running away to France for seven days.  Yet, he was branded a paedophile, as having groomed the young 15 year old woman and, as having abducted her for his own evil ends.  He got a sentence of 5.5 years in prison (actually, for telling the truth over the five times they had sex) and can never again work with children, even in a voluntary capacity.  He was labelled a sex offender for the rest of his life.  All this, when the pair are likely to stay in touch while he is in prison.  What a waste of an excellent and promising young teacher who loved and loved deeply for a young woman, now 16, who seems to have felt exactly the same for him.

From a similar case with one of my daughter's teachers who was also respected and well liked by staff and pupils, Jeremy Forrest will end up marrying the woman when he comes out of prison.  Has society really acted responsibly and proportionally and sensibly?

In shocking contrast, all the main political parties, on both sides of the Atlantic, have waged what will be a 13 year war of terrorism, invasion and occupation of two defenceless Muslim nations in the Middle East.  This war crime has gone unpunished and has been widely accepted as being a necessary evil to bring democracy and freedom to all in Iraq and Afghanistan and, education for girls.  With over a decade of aggression and killings by the rich and powerful West to, supposedly, prevent terrorism in the US and the UK , there has been no widespread protest by Christians who vote, en masse for the war parties.  What truly warped thinking.  What truly immoral and illegal behaviour for two supposedly advanced and civilised nations.   And, nations founded on the Bible, too.  Perhaps, that explains it (from the violent history of Israel in the Old Testament)!

In my daughter's class, I thought the young teacher was an excellent prospect for my own daughter!  There was nothing wrong with the young man but he was sentenced to twelve months in prison as a lesson to others, the judge said.  It was such an effective lesson that Jeremy Forrest had never heard of what happened to my daughter's teacher.  Forrest had no idea that society took that kind of thing more seriously than our society's invasion, occupation and slaughter in defenceless Muslim lands for twelve years and rising.

What a truly punitive, condemnatory, revengeful and sick society I  live in.  "Make love not war"  John Lennon.

Armed Forces Day to show reverent respect

How would you like it if the armed forces of another country occupied Halesowen for twelve years to change the way we do things, really quite radically?  One radical change was to bring in voting that, surprise, surprise brought in a compliant government wholly in agreement with the armed forces coercing or forcing the changes the foreign government wanted to see in Halesowen?

In other words, bringing democracy down the barrel of a gun, exactly what we didn't like, one little bit when another world leader (China in the 1950s, 60s, 70s) wanted his way of doing things forced down the throats of the people, via the barrel of a gun.

Remember, democracy only means voting every five years to bring in a very similar government (but with a different name, admittedly) to the previous one.

In addition, our so sincere and well-meaning armed forces have so stirred things up in these foreign lands that many tens of thousands of their men, women and children have been killed in the War of Terrorism.  WE, in the West, are directly and indirectly responsible for these crimes against humanity.  But, we certainly don't think so.  Rather than feeling some discomfort at cutting the lives of foreigners short, we rejoice at what our armed forces have done - calling them heroes and having a special day of commemoration and celebration for the fine things they have done on our behalf.

We cannot even have the honesty to graciously admit that we have lost this fourth Anglo-Afghan war and lost it years before we finally pull out in 2014.  The Vietnam War all over again.  When will we ever learn?

By the way, this makes for four losses in a row, our armed forces are so incompetent.  Every war was fully supported by the main democratic political parties of their time, too.  What a disgrace!  Therefore, is it really worth imposing democracy down the barrel of a gun in foreign lands far from our shores that we never go on holiday to, anyway because of the mess we have left them in?

What a truly sick society we live in.

My serene, royal-like escort of the Swiss bound Triumvirate - was not!

Jon asked me if I would like to escort Mike, Joe and him on the safer/best cycle route to New Street Sta for the 8.5 miles from Halesowen to the city centre.  I jumped at the chance, without even modifying the invitation by saying that it all depended on it being dry - it was not!

The showers were the least of our troubles.  Things went awry from the outset.  We left at 1230 instead of 1200 for the 1350 train to Euston.  Next, my bypassing of a huge deep puddle on my cycle/footway route, unexpectedly for me, led us to a kerb that was not dropped to a smooth ramp back to the road.  Mike said, "Roads, for my bike, Tim."

I managed to lose my party going down a hill, signalling left but none of the three saw it.  As I hastily cycled back up the slope, I saw them flash past me.  I caught them and we quickly had to cycle the wrong way down a one way residential road to get back on route.

Again in Harborne, we were delayed by Mike's chain coming off the big front wheel and jamming between the very bottom of the frame and the chainwheel.  Joseph then Mike managed to free it without the much needed screwdriver.  At that stop we noticed that Mike's rear tyre was soft.  Joe quickly pumped it up.  We had more stops for the re-inflation and my losing the others again until, just under a mile from the station further pumping was pointless.  Jon quickly cycled ahead to get the tickets while I walked with Mike and Joe to the station - in the nick of time.  Jon texted from the train that due to them loading the bikes on, it delayed the departure by one minute.  In London they soon found a Halfords that fixed the problem.  He texted, "This is turning into quite a challenge just getting through the UK!"

Terrorists = Enemies

Isn't it funny how we use words to downplay our feelings of guilt; to put ourselves in the best possible light?  Hence, if foreign troops were in our country thinking that they can put us right and much improve the way we do things, we would call our men of violence fighting the enemy, resistance fighters.  We call the equivalent men of violence fighting our best intentioned armed forces in Afghanistan, the resurgence.

The West now calls its enemies 'terrorists' to help justify the West's war crimes of aggression.  For me, NATO's armed forces are also the men of violence, killing and maiming (but not in my name) to stupidly think they can defeat terrorism and bring voting to all (democracy) down the barrel of a gun!  How immoral.

Bishop Tutu called 9/11 an act of terrorism, not an act of war.  The surviving perpetrators needed to be brought to justice in a court of law.  Instead, the West had hundreds of thousands more innocents slaughtered since their commencement of their War of Terrorism on 10/7 (7 October 2001).  Except, they were foreigners in far off lands, so that was OK.  How despicable!

All the main Western political parties think they can get rid of terrorism by doing it better; defeating evil by doing evil in a bigger and grander and more successful way in the war of terrorism!  How foolish!

To stop more Woolwich killings ...

... stop voting for the war parties, with their men of violence ready to unthinkingly obey their political masters and their policies to invade and occupy Muslim lands without the majority support of the UN Security Council.  We are the USA's biggest ally, supporter and most enthusiastic disciple of bringing freedom and democracy down the barrel of a gun.

It is universally accepted as being socially good behaviour for our young people to make a career in the armed services using violence as our country's official foreign policy in countries that have always left us alone and have never expressed a wish to invade and occupy us, as we have done with them.

Our men of violence must learn to restrain themselves and to be a better and more moral example to those of us who not in uniform.

Vote for the minority peaceful parties even if they have no hope of gaining power.  Support the peaceful men like the Austrian Foreign Minister who is stopping the EU arming the rebels in Syria as the UK and France want.  He said that "the European Union should remain a peace community."

Scotland's independence might just cut England down to size - but I doubt it!!

Scotland: Stop subsidising England's excesses.  Get your independence, Scotland!

I know that, from the opinion polls, Scotland distancing itself further from England seems a hopeless cause.  However, for what it's worth, these are my:  interesting/alternative/tendentious/horrifying/warped (delete as you wish)
thoughts on why I think Scotland would be sensible to separate from England and be its own sovereign nation within the EU and UN instead of the UK.

The big-hearted Scots* are subsidising London as the hub of the UK with continuing plans for Heathrow expansion, the very expensive Cross Rail and Thames Link project that opens in 2019 and, last year's London Olympics.

After more than one hundred years of an "essentially a Victorian rail network" (Chief Executive of Network Rail, Sir David Higgins on 8 January 2013 on the 'Today' programme), England has decided, rather late in the day, to modernise it, with the Scottish taxpayer helping to foot the bill.  Does Scotland have even one Victorian signal box?  England has 500 dating back to Queen Victoria and 300 are 1960s vintage! (same interview)

The Scots subsidised HS1 and, now, they generously help us out with HS2 that, again, gets nowhere near Scotland, even when fully completed.

Scotland should be most upset at subsidising England's armed conflicts on 23 nations since 1945 (Radio 4's 'Thought for the Day' slot in the 'Today' programme.  Repeated, on another occasion, without disagreement from the other team members, by the Green Party panellist on Radio 4's 'Any Questions').**

No doubt, there are some in the English Defence League calling for pre-emptive, unmanned drone attacks of self defence on the Muslim militant extremists before they kill another of our brave soldier heroes.  Heroes home in barracks, on leave from protecting the people of Afghanistan from the real killers.  Scotland should disassociate itself from this barbarity by no longer funding England's unappreciated occupation of, and drone attacks on, foreign lands (a total of thirteen years, in punishment for 9/11, when we finally leave Afghanistan in 2014).

Scotland provides a most convenient haven for England's submarines carrying its independent nuclear deterrent. The Clyde Trident workers might be redeployed in future proofing your nation from the accelerating, enhanced greenhouse effect and the exhaustion of the planet's oil and gas reserves. The subs and nuclear missiles might be sent off to Barrow to give employment to the English, who will be left with digging a little deeper into their pockets with the Scottish taxpayer no longer bailing them out.

With independence, Scotland would no longer be contributing to the very many billions of pounds for the replacement for the Trident subs. Preliminary work on the replacement began when either Tony Blair or Gordon Brown was PM.

Scotland's power from water, wind and sun could be used just for themselves or sold to the English at great expense! A golden chance for you Scots to become Great Scot - instead of the phrase being used simply as an exclamation! Great Britain, minus Scotland, would be just a little less 'Great' and a little less able to act, in tandem with the US, as the continuing great power and policeman around the world to get its way.

We English, have such an over-inflated view of our importance to the nations of the world, that we cannot possibly do without Scotland to enhance our prestige and weight! Without Scotland, how can we possibly continue to punch above our weight in the world?  Even more crucially, the US might not regard us quite so highly with only little Wales and littler N Ireland in tow.  Our special relationship might be that little less special without Scotland.

For us English, all this independence malarkey is diminishing our size and greatness. Great Scot, it might even threaten our place as a permanent member of the Security Council. We certainly can't have that!

Let Scotland raise its own taxation for its own spending - that is all independence is - like the fifty other countries that have gained their independence from London since 1945 "and not one has expressed an interest in coming back under London's control." Alex Salmond on 21 May 2013 on 'Today'.

I think, Scotland's taxation is essential for England to continue to fund her excesses; it also makes her also responsible for the UK's most unfortunate, aggressive, domineering and provocative foreign policy in Muslim lands.  That certainly is an excess, to put it mildly!

Tim Weller

* "Over the last thirty years, in every single one of these last thirty years, Scotland per head contributed more in taxation than the UK average.  So that does indicate the financial and the potential financial strength goes over a long period of time."  Alex Salmond interview on the 'Today' programme, 21 May 2013.

** "Since 1946, the UK has engaged in more armed conflict than any other country with a total of 23 if you include Libya.  Do we conclude from this that we are a nation of warmongers or, a country that values peace and justice?"  Rhiddian Brook on Thought for the Day on 25 March 2011.

V serious contradictions and flaws in our national life

Without even a second thought, we have for centuries gone to other lands around the world. We occupied, fortified and even killed the native populations to ensure our domination of such lands. We dragged our feet over giving them independence and, at times fought wars to maintain our domination and governance over those lands. And, never with even a hint of conscience operating in our minds!

With the USA, we fought tooth and nail to try and maintain our rule and ownership and say so over them. What is wrong with us? Why are we so aggressive and dominating and violent? Even when, over these same centuries we have had the Bible and Christian teaching and practice at the heart of our national life - the Bible (well, actually, the New Testament) completely contradicting these behaviours!

We even had two openly, God believing, talking to God men, Christian leaders indeed - in George Bush Jnr and in Tony Blair who were both anxious to do what God wanted them to do over first Afghanistan and then Iraq. However, it led to both waging a united war on both nations in a brutal and cowardly over-reaction to what another Christian leader, Bishop Desmond Tutu called an act of terrorism, not an act of war, on 9/11 (2001).  Which Christian leader was nearest to the mind of Christ?

CARDINAL KEITH O’BRIEN

CARDINAL KEITH O’BRIEN – response on CrazyRev blog, Rev Brian Ross

Thanks for these excellent thoughts on the need for repentance by us all.  My own less worthy thoughts follow!

Are you not missing the point, Brian, that although his own sexual orientation appears to be gay, he was speaking out, very vigorously in recent years and months, against homosexual activity and orientation.  Therefore, the charge of hypocrisy remains and his repentance - if it ever happened and you are only hoping it did to help salvage your position(!) - was not genuine.

Cardinal Keith O'Brien remains in a very strong state of discrimination and prejudice from his outspoken comments, something that the Lord Jesus Christ never did.  In fact, He embraced gladly the outcast minorities of His day - women, lepers, tax collectors and sinners.  And you must know who the sinners were (while telling them not to do it again, I know!).  But the good Lord was really rather namby-pamby on such issues of sex, according to Dr Luke.  He was much stronger on preaching non-violence.  He was, too, dead against empire building, according to temptation no 3 - something that we Christian Brits have been particularly good at down the centuries, along with the accompanying violence.

Did you also oppose the decriminalisation of homosexuality in 1967, Brian?  Do you, now wish the law to be repealed?