Harry Smith

Harry Smith

Comments 0 Comment

I watched this again and am posting this again. It’s a good speech, very good. It has passion and authenticity. It’s great that at 91 Harry Smith can deliver a speech that shows he is in touch with his own soul and with ordinary people struggling to live on disgracefully low incomes while the structures of civilised society that ameliorate that struggle, structures such as the NHS, are eroded and pulled away from them. I’m sorry to say I don’t see this level of authenticity and understanding in Miliband or any of the current crop of political leaders. But maybe we have the politicians, the government and the Labour Party we deserve because we don’t have that level of authenticity and understanding either, do we?

Inner Christ

Inner Christ

Comments 0 Comment

The only way that I can understand this is to think that if Jesus said it he was referring to the way, the truth and the life in each of us and all of us. He would have been saying that the Light, the Christ is in all of us not just him. Jesus did not invite us to worship him or to look to him for salvation, he invited us to follow God’s will. He told us to look within ourselves and amongst ourselves for the Kingdom of God. (Luke 17:21). Knowing and doing the will of God expresses the Christ within us and makes us brothers and sisters of Jesus and of each other as Children of God (Matthew 12:49).

Chris Hedges on Capitalism

Chris Hedges on Capitalism

Comments 0 Comment

Chris Hedges is one of those journalists worth listening to for his erudition, articulacy and integrity. The interviewer tries to argue that capitalism drives innovation that is lifting people out of poverty. Chris says that this is true for a ‘neo-feudal’ elite but that for the masses capitalism is a system that oppresses and makes their lives worse. He argues that people in the US are worse off than they were forty years ago.

Bombing ISIS

Bombing ISIS

Comments 0 Comment

This week the British Parliament voted to join the US in bombing Islamic State (IS or ISIS) in Iraq. This is wrong because:

1. It is part of an ongoing plan for changing the shape of the Middle East including the eventual bombing of Syria and the overthrow of Assad. Cameron said that any planned British bombing of Syria would require Parliamentary approval but that he reserved the right to bomb Syria if it was immediately necessary in the national interest. Miliband apparently supports this.

2. It is stupid and hubristic to intervene militarily in a region where all UK and US intervention have resulted in greater instability, death and destruction. That is, it is stupid if it is intended to do good for the people of the region. Given the destructive means and ends of prior interventions one must be forgiven for thinking that the motives are less than benign.

3. Cameron admits that this will be a ‘generational struggle’, in other words the people of the region are being condemned to continuing chaos and destruction. There is no ‘roadmap’ here to achieving stability.

4. It is only by setting up mechanisms for dialogue between nations in the region whether they are Sunni, Shia or secular and establishing protocols for conflict resolution that peace will have a chance. The FUKUS (France UK US) interventions have not been about promoting dialogue but have fuelled division and destruction.

The UK Parliament is increasingly giving the appearance of being irrational and irrelevant and it is easy to understand why so many people view them with utter cynicism. I agree with George Galloway except on his concluding point that Saudi Arabia should be encouraged to do the bombing .. there should be no bombing in Syria without the consent and involvement of the Syrian government.

US Offensive on Syria

US Offensive on Syria

Comments 0 Comment

The US Air Force will strike back at Syria’s air defense if they interfere with US plans for bombing positions held by Islamic State militants (IS, formerly ISIS), according to recent reports. IS has a significant presence in Syria.
 
AP’s anonymous sources in the Obama administration revealed on Monday that the US is ready to ‘retaliate’ against Syrian President Bashar Assad’s air defenses if they attack American fighter jets launching airstrikes on Syrian soil. The US “has a good sense of where the Syrian air defenses, along with their command and control centers, are located,” AP informed.
 
Source RT

Let see if I have this right .. For reasons that are rather unclear to me the US has been supporting Syrians (and foreign fighters) rebelling against the Syrian government; this resulted in a brutal and ongoing war in which both sides but notably the anti-government side have been alleged to have committed numerous atrocities. The Syrian government has been shown to have the support of a large majority of Syrians and to be more friendly to religious minorities than their largely sectarian opposition forces, but the Syrian government has been deemed ‘illegitimate’ by the US

Arms from the US and its allies have fallen into the hands of ISIS, a brutal organisation that has taken over half of Syria and Iraq. The US plans to bomb ISIS in Syria but refuses to coordinate attacks with the Syrian government, instead they say they will work with the Syrian rebel groups, some of which are allied to ISIS.

These rebel groups will effectively tell the US air force where to strike. Should the USAF ‘inadvertently’ strike Syrian government positions and should the Syrian government defend themselves by shooting down US planes then the US pledges to destroy the Syrian air force and air defences.

And the Syrian people who have been suffering in the conflict(s) between their government, the rebels and ISIS will now, also, be bombed by the US.

This seems neither logical (in terms of achieving its stated end) nor humane (in terms of minimising suffering) nor legal (in terms of being endorsed by the UN). How is there not outrage at the obscenity of these proposals?

Scotland Independence Referendum

Scotland Independence Referendum

Comments 0 Comment

It’s Tuesday 16th September, 2 days before the biggest vote of our lives. This is the biggest democratic event we will ever likely experience, not just for us but for generations to come. The vast enormitude of the referendum vote on Thursday simply cannot be overstated – it’s kind of a big deal. – See more at: http://nationalcollective.com/2014/09/16/editorial-a-yes-vote-changes-everything/

Remarkably I’ve heard very little about the seismic event that is the referendum on Scottish independence though for the rest of the UK as well as the Scots this is hugely significant. This article is pro independence. Emotionally I am anti-independence; this is probably because I regard Britain as this island and the land as having a sort of mystical unity that embraces the English, Scottish, Welsh and the new communities, particularly the black communities that identify themselves simply as British in a way that is not just political but is spiritual and is willed at an emotional level. Independence for Scotland will mean that Britain is broken at the political level. Physically and metaphysically Britain can’t be broken but identifying with it may become harder. I would regret Scottish independence also because the Scots seem more sensible politically, less acquiescent to the aristocratic establishment, and their absence may ‘dumb us down’ politically. On the other hand I totally get the argument in this article that for the Scots this is a historic opportunity to break away from moribund, outdated and restricting political paradigms, structures and practices. It is looking at and challenging these structures that is important, it is seizing power for people that is important and whether Scotland goes or not I hope that the aftermath of the referendum will be a widespread national debate about the structures that underlie our so called democracy. The fact that we haven’t had that debate yet should tell us something about ourselves .. if the referendum that’s now upon us, whatever its result, but particularly if Scotland goes, doesn’t jolt us into widespread political reflection then it is proof that collectively our political awareness is pretty much dead.

Oligarchical Topography of Ukraine

Oligarchical Topography of Ukraine

Comments 0 Comment

I’ve watched about 20 minutes of this .. but have been falling asleep. Subtitles. Very information dense. Fursov very knowledgeable lots to learn here, even if it is not possible for me to assess his overview he makes some interesting references. Sees not just Ukraine but the world in terms of clans of oligarchs vying for power.