Boycotts are better than drones and extra judicial assassinations

Ari Lesser's Powerful music video begs the question:
"Why is there such a strong call to Boycott Israel by various college organizations and professors when the majority of countries around the world are committing verifiable atrocities that are all but ignored?"

MY ANSWER:
Boycotts are all about hurting and disadvantaging ourselves or, at least, inconveniencing ourselves to bring about a wider good - peace with justice for Israel and Palestine.

Since 1948, Israel has been strongly supported and funded by the Christian West, especially by that devout nation, the USA.  Any American president, even Obama would never dream of even slightly reducing its gifts and/or sales of every kind of armaments to Israel - as has happened with Obama's announcement on Thursday over Egypt getting a small reduction in its arms from the US because of the Egyptian military overthrowing a fairly elected Muslim government.  Egypt remains a major ally of the West and is holding to its peace treaty with Israel.

A very small, indeed a tiny minority of people in the West remain upset that after 65 years there is still no justice, still no land, still no State for the Palestinians to bring peace with justice, and thus security, for Israel, also.  These may be the very same people who boycotted South Africa until there was justice for the majority blacks whose descendants had been there for some years before the dominant, white settlers arrived.  Those few who are boycotting Israel may be the same people who disapproved of the discrimination of the minority population by the Protestant, Loyalist, Unionist people in Northern Ireland.  Things are now very much better for the Catholic, nationalist, republican minority.  S Africa sorted; N Ireland sorted; what about Israel/Palestine?

Atrocities around the world are committed by those in absolute power in government.  Especially, I am afraid to say, by the USA/NATO since 1945.  Our side has killed millions in our many wars fighting Communism around the world and, now, fighting Islamist extremists who have learnt from the West's very bad example of violence throughout the last century and now this, too.  Even the most committed, Bible believing Christians have been very happy to serve in the armed forces or to work in careers that involve manufacturing armaments to kill Communists and Islamists.   Israel condemns boycotts.  However,  boycotts are non-violent actions by so few people, it seems, that no-one is affected in Israel.  Non-violent boycotts are very different from the violence of Israel and the West against people who happened to be born into a country with a Communist government or born on holy Muslim soil or were born in Judea and Samaria as Palestinians.  This is also called the West Bank that the UN insist Israel should not be allowing settlers to build homes in.  But, of course, Israel takes no notice of the UN and all its resolutions over the decades.

Atrocities are committed daily by Barak Obama and David Cameron with their escalating drone attacks on Muslim militants.  No fair trial.  No judge and jury.  No proportionate sentence if the defendant is found guilty.  Oh no.  Just a death dealing missile from out of the air.  Our side needs no suicide bombers thanks to digital killing from Kansas or England that, thank the Lord, keep our soldiers out of harms way.

Secondly:
"Why is Israel under the magnifying glass when it is one tiny state (the size of New Jersey) surrounded by 22 Muslim Middle East countries that commit endless crimes of murder and torture of their own women and children in the name of religion?"
Most of you just want to do the right thing. The right thing requires thinking for yourself.
It's time to do your own digging.
(Do not use Wikipedia. Their entries can be updated by just about anyone!)
Here Is Israel!

Here O Israel, MY ANSWER:
Israel's biggest problem is being a modern, affluent Western country in the heart of the Arab Middle East.  Just like its greatest friend and ally, the USA, its people are generous and hospitable.  However, it is the unofficial 52nd state of the USA.  The UK is the 51st state.  This is Israel's undoing and it is ours, too.  Being so closely identified with the West and the USA is a terrible stigma.  It is a burden that could begin to be shed.  It is like having the mark of the beast, in the eyes of some Arabs.  This is because of the West's violent and dominating ways in, first some Communist countries and, now in some Muslim lands.  For some Arabs, very regrettably, the US is seen as "the great Satan" - simply because of its interfering, we know best for you, we must have what we want, behaviour in the Middle East.

As someone who loves Israel, I would implore its people and government to compromise, to give up land for peace with justice.  I would beseech them to turn their enemies that surround them into friends for life.  That is real peace and security.  Now, that IS being a truly successful country.  "Love your God and love your neighbour, O Israel"

" 'Not by might, nor by power but by my spirit', says the Lord."  Zechariah 4 v 6.

How can anyone quarrel with Putin's article in the New York Times?

MOSCOW — RECENT events surrounding Syria have prompted me to speak directly to the American people and their political leaders. It is important to do so at a time of insufficient communication between our societies.

Relations between us have passed through different stages. We stood against each other during the cold war. But we were also allies once, and defeated the Nazis together. The universal international organization — the United Nations — was then established to prevent such devastation from ever happening again.

The United Nations’ founders understood that decisions affecting war and peace should happen only by consensus, and with America’s consent the veto by Security Council permanent members was enshrined in the United Nations Charter. The profound wisdom of this has underpinned the stability of international relations for decades.

No one wants the United Nations to suffer the fate of the League of Nations, which collapsed because it lacked real leverage. This is possible if influential countries bypass the United Nations and take military action without Security Council authorization.

The potential strike by the United States against Syria, despite strong opposition from many countries and major political and religious leaders, including the pope, will result in more innocent victims and escalation, potentially spreading the conflict far beyond Syria’s borders. A strike would increase violence and unleash a new wave of terrorism. It could undermine multilateral efforts to resolve the Iranian nuclear problem and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and further destabilize the Middle East and North Africa. It could throw the entire system of international law and order out of balance.

Syria is not witnessing a battle for democracy, but an armed conflict between government and opposition in a multireligious country. There are few champions of democracy in Syria. But there are more than enough Qaeda fighters and extremists of all stripes battling the government. The United States State Department has designated Al Nusra Front and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, fighting with the opposition, as terrorist organizations. This internal conflict, fueled by foreign weapons supplied to the opposition, is one of the bloodiest in the world.

Mercenaries from Arab countries fighting there, and hundreds of militants from Western countries and even Russia, are an issue of our deep concern. Might they not return to our countries with experience acquired in Syria? After all, after fighting in Libya, extremists moved on to Mali. This threatens us all.
From the outset, Russia has advocated peaceful dialogue enabling Syrians to develop a compromise plan for their own future.

We are not protecting the Syrian government, but international law. We need to use the United Nations Security Council and believe that preserving law and order in today’s complex and turbulent world is one of the few ways to keep international relations from sliding into chaos. The law is still the law, and we must follow it whether we like it or not.

Under current international law, force is permitted only in self-defense or by the decision of the Security Council. Anything else is unacceptable under the United Nations Charter and would constitute an act of aggression.

No one doubts that poison gas was used in Syria. But there is every reason to believe it was used not by the Syrian Army, but by opposition forces, to provoke intervention by their powerful foreign patrons, who would be siding with the fundamentalists. Reports that militants are preparing another attack — this time against Israel — cannot be ignored.

It is alarming that military intervention in internal conflicts in foreign countries has become commonplace for the United States. Is it in America’s long-term interest? I doubt it. Millions around the world increasingly see America not as a model of democracy but as relying solely on brute force, cobbling coalitions together under the slogan “you’re either with us or against us.”

But force has proved ineffective and pointless. Afghanistan is reeling, and no one can say what will happen after international forces withdraw. Libya is divided into tribes and clans. In Iraq the civil war continues, with dozens killed each day. In the United States, many draw an analogy between Iraq and Syria, and ask why their government would want to repeat recent mistakes.
No matter how targeted the strikes or how sophisticated the weapons, civilian casualties are inevitable, including the elderly and children, whom the strikes are meant to protect.

The world reacts by asking: if you cannot count on international law, then you must find other ways to ensure your security. Thus a growing number of countries seek to acquire weapons of mass destruction. This is logical: if you have the bomb, no one will touch you. We are left with talk of the need to strengthen non-proliferation, when in reality this is being eroded.

We must stop using the language of force and return to the path of civilized diplomatic and political settlement.

A new opportunity to avoid military action has emerged in the past few days. The United States, Russia and all members of the international community must take advantage of the Syrian government’s willingness to place its chemical arsenal under international control for subsequent destruction. Judging by the statements of President Obama, the United States sees this as an alternative to military action.

My working and personal relationship with President Obama is marked by growing trust. I appreciate this. I carefully studied his address to the nation on Tuesday. And I would rather disagree with a case he made on American exceptionalism, stating that the United States’ policy is “what makes America different. It’s what makes us exceptional.” It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation.

There are big countries and small countries, rich and poor, those with long democratic traditions and those still finding their way to democracy. Their policies differ, too. We are all different, but when we ask for the Lord’s blessings, we must not forget that God created us equal.

• John C.
• Central Valley California

NYT Pick

Aside from the obviously specious claim that it was the rebels who used the gas, much of this post is thought provoking and has a tone of reasonableness that I find disturbing to my prejudices. What a crazy world we are living in when Russia sounds more sane and responsible than our own government on a serious international crisis. It's as if I have blundered into some bizarre parallel universe.

Any moment now Rod Serling is going to walk into my living room and announce that I have just crossed over into the Twilight Zone.

• jfx
• Chicago

NYT Pick

Well written. I appreciate hearing Putin's thoughts directly, and hopefully his open letter to the US can be reciprocated, allowing Obama to directly address the Russian people on important topics.

Putin's claim that the originators of the gas attack likely were Syrian rebels requires the same evidence of proof as Obama's claim the attack was made by the Syrian government. "Trust me, I know" isn't sufficient. However, if he is right, that may increase the chance of US military action, because if the Syrian government has lost control of their enormous chemical weapons stockpile that arguably is a direct threat to US national security.

• Jordan
• Long Island

NYT Pick

International diplomacy is certainly preferable to military intervention. I applaud President Putin for bringing the conversation to a higher level. Additionally, the proposed solution is far more likely to yield real results that any limited military strike would. If the real objective in this situation is Chemical Weapon Stockpiles, then certainly it is more sensible to dismantle and destroy the stockpiles under the scrutiny of organized international verification, then to vainly attempt to deter and degrade the Syrian Government's military capability with the vague hope that "they won't do it again."

Again, Bravo President Putin.

• Mike
• Carlsbad, CA

NYT Pick

"Under current international law, force is permitted only in self-defense or by the decision of the Security Council. Anything else is unacceptable under the United Nations Charter and would constitute an act of aggression."

This statement alone makes me ignore this opinion piece. Isn't this from the same country that unilaterally decided to invade the independent country of Georgia? Is your advice "Do as I say, not as I do?", Mr. Putin?

• Sarah
• Arlington, VA

NYT Pick

Finally a powerful foreign leader has the guts to point out the hubris of a country that constantly not only calls itself 'exceptional', but is populated by a majority never having set foot in another country in their life considering it 'the greatest country in the world'.

Except for the statement of Mr. Putin still blaming the so-called rebels for the chemical attack on Syrian civilians, his op-ed reveals a deep understanding of the decades old conflicts in the middle east, and the fact that those very conflicts can not and never will be resolved by brute force from afar.

• Chris McMorrow
• Waltham, Mass.

NYT Pick

I wish I could feel that Mr. Putin was being sincere here. If nothing else, he has a fabulous writer.

But at my age, having grown up during the Cold War and witnessed all sorts of tricks, lies, distortions, and manipulations by the old Soviet Regime, I just have some doubts. As an ex-KBG agent, Mr. Putin may not be my age, but he was trained in the old Soviet culture.

I think the main thing that really strikes me here is how myopic the US can be to its image around the world. We pay lip service to the idea that certain actions will "surely win us more enmity around the world," but we usually go on our merry way trying to get our way.

So, the benefit of Mr. Putin's assessment here--even if contrived, manipulative, and written to lecture this country, in and of itself a pretty arrogant act--is how based in realpolitik it is.

But--and this is a very big but--I'm not sure that Russia is in any position to lecture anyone right now, given its long history of isolationism, paranoia, and curbs on basic freedoms inside its borders.

I think it will be interesting for all of us to save this article, and our posts, and see how they stack up against events as they unfold over the next 6 months. We will either be pleasantly surprised, or just surprised as how gullible we really were.

• George
• San Jose, CA

NYT Pick

Mr Putin makes many points, some I disagree, some I agree. But all are perfectly valid concerns. I commend Mr Putin for contributing to the discussion.

Mr Putin's main concern is the issue of who's responsible for the recent chemical attack. Mr Obama admits the issue remains in dispute, but believes there is substantial evidence the Syrian government is responsible. Mr Putin believes it may in fact be the Rebels who are responsible. It would be hard to disagree that this is the key issue and deserves full "due process" resolution.

US constitutional law might offer some help here. It requires in a dispute such as this, where a crime may have been committed, for the accuser (Mr Obama in this case) to provide all evidence pertinent to the crime be made available to the accused (Mr Assad, presumably in this case represented by Mr Putin). "All evidence" , meaning that which supports the accuser's claims, and also that which supports the accused claims -- the so-called exculpatory evidence. Mr Obama should immediately provide this evidence to Mr Putin.

US law rules of evidence also require that testimony or claims be of first person origin. No third person testimony -- so-called "hearsay" evidence -- is allowed. Mr Obama should comply, and offer evidence only which can be supported by first person testimony. With names attached.

• Bill in Tennessee
• Knoxvillle TN

NYT Pick

With all due respect to Mr. Putin (and I am saddened to say that my respect for Putin exceeds that of my respect for Obama right now), what the phrase "American exceptionalism" means is not that our people are special and exceptional...not at all. Our founders knew that men are not angels... thus they instituted a Constitution and a way of self-governance that was unlike any other on earth at that time, a representative republic that had no king, no caste system, no aristocracy, but all men equal under the law and having natural rights granted, not by government, but by our creator. Such rights, not coming from government but being endowed by our creator, were therefor "inalienable"... they could not be rescinded by government because they do not come from government. This, in my opinion, is the source of American exceptionalism; not that our people are superior but that our way of self-governance and equality under the law is superior.

Nations that choose to model themselves after the American experiment also are exceptional, the relationship between the governed and those who govern has now been raised to a new, exceptional level. Mr. Putin, I hope your own nation can one day rise to the level of self-governance that was put forth in Philadelphia, July 4, 1776. Future generations will then speak of Russian exceptionalism.

• J Young
• Seattle

NYT Pick

Am I the only one who finds it strange that Putin asserts the rebels were responsible for the chemical attacks at the same time he suggests that the Syrian government turn over its chemical weapons arsenal? Kind of a head-scratcher. As is the fact that so many commenters express gratitude for his counsel and seem utterly unaware of the hypocrisy entailed in his lecturing the US on equality and the rule of international law.

Are we completely post-history these days? Even recent history? For goodness' sake, this man represses his own people and arms international conflicts on a regular basis, apparently without compunctions. To take his words at face value is inane. He is clearly playing (and preying) on American fears and on our vast naivete regarding world affairs. Make no mistake, this solution serves his ends. The fact that it may serve ours as well does not make him a friend.

• Dylan Morrissey
• CA

NYT Pick

While not all of Putin's reasoning is null, the abhorrent hypocrisy of several of his statements completely destroy any of the validity of his attempt at appealing to the American people.

I do not believe that the limited military strikes that have been called for are the right course of action for the US to take (the situation in Syria is much too complicated for that simplicity), yet in criticizing Obama, Putin completely disregards the fact that his actions have done nothing better to uphold the integrity of the UN as a body to uphold international peace and security. Whether Putin wants to admit it or not, Syria has grossly violated a core piece of the 1925 Geneva Protocol--be careful in questioning the US on wanting to uphold international peacekeeping principles when you have armed the Assad regime and ignored its obvious use of chemical weapons. Furthermore, Putin feebly ends his argument with words "we must not forget that God created us equal." In all aspects, this statement is ridiculous. "We?" Can Putin really refer to himself and Americans collectively as "we" when he bars Americans from adopting Russian children? Does he truly believe that "God created us equal" when he actively promotes the persecution of gays?

Yes, the article is well-written and some reasons he presents should be considered in the debate, but don't criticize the US on principles you yourself violate excruciatingly. As an American, I feel no greater trust in Russia.

• David Voss
• Richmond, VA

NYT Pick

I'm sickened by the fact that we live in a time when a foreign leader has the ear of the American people. Our President is so weak that the American people would actually consider reading an Op-Ed from Putin and take it for face value. In the absence of leadership, someone will fill the void. Putin is trying to do just that. The sad thing is, the really said thing, is that many Americans will agree with his final paragraph. That we are not exceptional - we are just equal to everyone else. This is exactly what Obama has been trying to instill in us since Day 1. For us not to be outraged is a sign that our society now believes there is nothing great about the United States. This is our lot on 9/11/13 just 12 years after we were attacked.
For those of you who have not given up on the United States, I stand with you. We are the greatest country in the world because of people like you and I who will not give up on God, country, family, and the opportunity to create something with our lives that transcends our existence. Stay strong brothers and sisters! We will win this war.

• Dmitry Mikheyev
• Moscow, Russia

NYT Pick

In full disclosure, I am Russian American, who has no reason to love the KGB and has all reasons to love America. I spent 6 years in GULAG and then was granted political asylum in America. But to me, this ’s stance on Syria makes more sense that anything else I heard from American political-military-industrial-media elite. I admit meeting very smart KGB guys even when they were interrogating me. Putin is obviously one of the most gifted and intelligent world leaders of our time. But of course great brain power can be very dangerous in the wrong hands, right? So what motives him?
Having lived in Moscow for 15 years I am confident that after decades of Communism Russia is obsessed with catching up with the West in technology and living standards. So Russia needs peaceful and stable international environment.
In contrast, the US is a crusading whose global ambition is to "civilize and modernize” the world according to its own image. Putin captured the fundamental paradox of American democracy: Can liberty, democracy and happiness be imposed on others by bombs and destruction?
America should help Russia facilitate solution to the Syrian crisis through negotiations and compromises. America has to learn to live with complexities of the real world. The black-and-white thinking leads to endless wars with others. Such policy will inevitably result in self-destruction.

• September1940
• Stamford CT

NYT Pick

I am shocked that, after reading President Putin's opinion, I feel that he is correct. The Russian President, an ex-KGB agent, a man who has led his county on some of their own missions of destruction, suddenly delivers a message which strikes a chord in me. Why, I wonder, am I reacting this way?

I think it is because, despite the hypocrisies in President Putin's writing, he makes sense - simple, common sense. He appears to cut through all the fog and word-spinning we are used to hearing from politicians - certainly from our own President - and gets to the kernel of the matter.

Force has, indeed, proven pointless. Where are we after the optimism of the so-called "Arab spring?" We still are confronting lunatic fringe elements who are propelling their societies into chaos, in the name of religion. We are constantly at war and finding it too easy to take international law into our own hands; acting unilaterally and, unfortunately, being perceived as the world's bully.

I pray that our President finds the same portion of common sense and manages to get himself under control - his bellicose and nonsensical speeches notwithstanding.

Thousands of people in Syria have been killed prior to the alleged chemical attack. Why did we/the world not respond to their deaths? A dead person is a dead person.

It doesn't matter who offers the olive branch or what it looks like - we must accept President Putin's well-reasoned approach to fending off a rush to military action.

MYSELF:  "By their fruits ye shall know them."  Western Christianity, Western democracy, the American Constitution of self-governance and equality under the law that makes the US so exceptional, are all so very nice in theory but the centuries of violence and aggression, the imperialist ways and continuing hegemony, lets all three down so very, very badly.  Be less coercive, boastful and fervent in furthering these 'exceptional' ideas as you call them and you may make fewer enemies in the lands you invade/intervene in.  You may even be content to help people more than to wage war on them.

The Western track record around the world, in recent centuries is, actually, one of being anti-Christian and anti-human.  I am ashamed of my religion, my culture and my nation's history.  The all powerful West, with its only true faith, its only true system of governance and its only true capitalism, has been failing humanity for centuries.  Its monarchs and priests (Church and State); its explorers and entrepreneurs; and its missionaries and traders have let the side down.

Peloton of two pushed hard but, fell apart, dramatically!

Yesterday's ride ended in disappointment for Jon and I although Gareth did really well on his hybrid bike and zig-zagged up the 'Wall' like Corinne did last year.

Things were going really well until we got to the Elan valley.  Jon and I had been taking it in turns to push the pace in a peloton of the two of us.  We overtook a number of riders - as many as double figures.  Then I punctured, broke a plastic tyre lever while I was getting the tyre off and, then, the remaining two levers snapped trying to put the tyre back on!  They must have been the ones I bought from Wilkinson.  The marshall on the motorbike was a great help with folding pliers in his penknife set.  He also had a Lidl track pump that was not so good but got the tyre pumped up.  In the struggle to get the tyre back on with the pliers I badly scratched the rim of the back tyre but it is still safe.  I lost nearly an hour, with also struggling to get the nasty thorn out of the tyre without my tweezers that I had forgotten - along with my padded pants, so I was feeling it by the end!

Within a few minutes of my breakdown, Jon broke down when his right hand gear lever and cable to the rear gears so malfunctioned that he had to abandon the race/ride!  In the process, he also lost his cycle computer.  He went back but could not find it.  Later in the afternoon, he overtook me but by sitting in the car that had rescued his bike and him from the roadside!

I ended up with the other old bods at the end of the ride but managed to overtake three of them.  One was a 72 year old who, at 68 had cycled, with his son, from Lands End to John o'Groats in only nine days.  An amazing achievement!

Are our intelligence services as intelligent and as essential and as useful as they want us to think?

Dear Prof Richard

I was the guy who asked the question on Sunday morning, "Were we unnecessarily paranoid about Soviet Russia in the decades of MAD.  Why all the fuss and nonsense from our spies when it was MAD that just about prevented a nuclear holocaust?"

Please could you check, clarify and comment on my report, below of what you said on Sunday.  Ignore my rather jaundiced, unpatriotic, despairing and dissident interpretation over the usefulness of our secret services!

Very many thanks, if you are able to oblige.

Tim

Richard Aldrich replied and confirmed the facts as being correct.

​The offering, below is after his sub editing and that he called "a fiesty piece !!!!" The facts and annual costs of £2/3 billions are his; the conclusions I have drawn are mine:-​

​At the Wigtown Book Festival on Sunday, I heard Richard Aldrich, Professor of International Security at the University of Warwick, speak about his book about GCHQ.  From what I heard, our top ranking intelligent intelligence officers (probably mostly from Oxbridge) got things wrong over Saddam Hussein's chemical weapons at the time of the Gulf War in 1990/91.  They told the politicians that he did not have any WMD but, it seems that he did have them all the time, and lots of them!  So in 2002/3 there was not only political pressure on them "to bend the intelligence" towards invasion but, also a fear of getting it wrong a second time. Ironically, this led them to over-correct and, again to get things wrong, by telling Blair and Bush that this time they were fairly sure he had them.  Therefore, twice they have been mistaken in the case of only one country.  Aldrich said that "Saddam Hussein was deliberately ambiguous over his WMD" in order to keep his enemies, like Iran, guessing.

Therefore, are the 

​two or three ​

billions of pounds spent every year on GCHQ, MI5 and MI6 worth all the money?  They all work so closely  with America's National Security Agency, too that there must be much duplication of wasted effort of finite resources and much hot air - of dangerous greenhouse gases.

It seems that all kinds of weird and wonderful shenanigans went  on over bugs in embassies during the Cold War that was all a complete waste of everyone's time and money.  Time and again, our intelligence officers were taken by surprise at what was known by the Russians despite exhaustive efforts to keep it all secret!  I can only conclude that it was mutually assured destruction (MAD) - and mutual destruction very many times over, too - that prevented nuclear annihilation.

Aldrich asserted in one slide that 'The Cold War was HOT!'  He explained that some of the submarines and aircraft used to collect intelligence near Soviet bases became involved in actual fighting.  Some of our submarines were depth-charged by the Russians while working on behalf of GCHQ. I noted down that he said, "GCHQ failed in its main mission to crack top level Soviet cyphers."

​

Aldrich gave so many examples of wasted effort by intelligent officers that I came away feeling that it was some sort of no expense spared, elaborate game that was played out between the secret services of both - the ever so virtuous Christian West and the very wicked Communist East.

I also came away thinking that the evil Communists did exactly what they liked and when they liked (just as our side did), without the West's secret service being able to stop them - even if they did know in time which, on so many occasions, they did not!​

Why was there no human skeleton sitting there?!

Last Thursday, I discovered an old but modern looking folding camp chair, set up for someone to sit in.  It was not only miles from anywhere but sitting on a huge granite block on an island in the middle of a reservoir - Loch Loine.  All that was missing was the human skeleton sitting in it!  The water level was so low that I was able to walk out to the island and, on such a good road, that it even had a smooth tarmac surface in places and a dry stone, hump back bridge that was still safe to walk over.  That quality continued just below the surface towards the mainland on the other side of the island as I waded through for 15-20 metres before I turned back.

The road to the unoccupied camp chair was six or seven miles from the western end of Loch Cluanie.  The single track road, was flooded in 1957 for the new reservoir of Loch Loine.  130 years before that, Thomas Telford beautifully engineered the new 'Road to the Isles' with over fifty bridges and culverts all built from the local stone.  There were stone parapets, huge expanses of stone wall holding up the road of gentle gradient and easy bends and, today it looked passable, still by careful drivers in modern motors in second and third gear.  No 4x4 was needed.  But, much more sensible to cycle it, as I did!

“Old age is not for sissies.” David Attenborough (87) 18 Sept 2013 on Radio 4’s ‘Today'

I'm now officially an old man - at long last!

I'm an old bod, a grumpy old man (and with the mug to prove it, from Becky), a full-time old age pensioner with one foot in the grave, who has left the world of work to make room for a younger person to come along.

Years ago, I thought 2013 was an impossibly long way off and would never come.  How wrong I was.  Now for my new career of sheer idleness, leisure and pleasure, of spending the kids inheritance before the second half of the retirement career - of, perhaps, gentle exit from the world of everything!  I've given it all up at the politically correct age of 65, too.  Unfortunately, the next politically correct age of three score years and ten is all too near!  But, then, without departure there can be no new arrivals.

Even ten years ago, I would never have thought that I would end my working days cycle commuting for an hour, every day, over the roads through the Clent Hills and over the top of Romsley Hill - even with dodgy knees.  And, often, even longer routes for the return run!  But, I did have to gradually jettison weight in the final 18 months of labouring over the hills.  Surrendering the laptop, in 2012 meant a lot less weight on my back!  This past year, I've cycled through one monsoon-like downpour with mud and debris sliding down the steepest road, Uffmoor Lane, that I had never had before.  Often, in this last job, I had early morning commutes with cloud draping the hills but, so much better than jam packed in a London tube that was my very first paid work!

I want to acknowledge, here that brother in law, Tony was quite brilliant in supporting me over the most stupid, the strangest, the most mendacious incident that I was caught up in, in over 40 years of employment.  It was yet another nail in the coffin for my withdrawal of support for local government in favour of alternative ways of running services rather than local authorities.  Yet, my experiences of local authorities reinforces how very, very fallible all of us humans are in running our affairs – whether it is the public or private sectors.  This is a further reason why, I think, we are imperceptibly sleep walking into a nightmare of entirely our own making.

“Old age is not for sissies.”  David Attenborough (87)  18 Sept 2013 on Radio 4’s ‘Today'

The Library of Birmingham

The just opened Library of Birmingham is quite stunning and must now be the major tourist attraction in Brum city centre.  It's a building that, on the outside, is all angular, square and oblong.  Yet, the external decoration is a clue to how things look on the inside - to make a building of surprises and sheer delight.  You must visit to see what I mean!

There are two beautiful roof top gardens and, from the topmost observation lounge, in particular, you get great views over the city to the distant hills and landmarks.

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