I learn the interesting news that David Aaronovitch tweeted to Joan Smith and Jenny Jones that I am:
“an angry and dangerous man who could as easily be on the far right as the far left”.
I had no idea I was on the far left, though I suppose it is a matter of perspective, and from where Mr Aaronovitch stands I, and a great many others, look awfully far away to the left. I don’t believe you should bomb people for their own good, I don’t believe the people of Palestine should be crushed, I don’t believe the profit motive should dominate the NHS, I think utilities and railways were better in public ownership, I think education should be free. I guess that makes me Joseph Stalin.
But actually I am very flattered. Apparently I am not just angry – since the invasion of Iraq and the banker bailouts everybody should be angry – but “dangerous”. If I can be a danger to the interests represented by a Rupert Murdoch employee like Aaronovitch, I must have done something right in my life. I fear he sadly overrates me; but it does make me feel a little bit warmer, and hold my head that little bit higher.
I use the ‘NewsNow’ website for current affairs headlines. It’s fairly robust at gathering all the most cited news stories from all the world’s online sources. And for the last two days the Julian Assange case has been effectively wiped off the radar by the ‘Essex Lion’ and ‘The Affro-Comb murder’.
Is it a deliberate connivance, or have people become cloy?
Article in the Daily Telegraph by Charles Crawford, bilious against Australia as well as Ecuador, and twisting and spinning every aspect he can.
Probably the article is of no import whatsoever. He suggests Britain might let Ecuador save face by agreeing to grant ‘safe passage’ for a flight to Sweden (!), and that Assange won’t be extradited to the US before he gets to Sweden. Is there any other explanation for that suggestion other than he is ruled by a conviction that foreigners are stupid?
He scoffs that it’s news to him that Assange has said he’s willing to face the Swedish judicial system. (How much are the DT paying this pompous man to keep up on what he writes about?) About the only thing of worth in the article is that he admits between the lines that an extradition request from the US would be likely after he got to Sweden.
Stephen really great to read your posts recently, thanks. Ive noticed, occasional ‘jew bashing’ in a minority of comments and i am always very suspicious of it, but at the same time some seemingly well read comments alert unspoken problems with jewish politics/history as well. I too try to refocus because the blame game is bottomless, and besides hate speech laws and norms are skewed in this area. Truth has a right to out though so, fair play…
Anyway, i typed this wee poem out of a free booklet, no copyright, published by Rock Historical Society for Paddy Toner of Moneygarragh, 1935-1985
“Who Made The World”
Now some will tell you naught but truth,
And some tell naught but lies,
But I was told that God is old,
With tired and weary eyes,
And lives away in the frozen morth,
Where the mountains meet the skies.
He is old, so old and far away,
And his beard is long and white.
His face it is terrible, old and sad,
And he sits by himself at night;
He looks on the weary wicked world,
And shudders at the sight.
Now some folks say he made the world,
When fire within him burned,
And then repented of his work,
And went away and mourned,
But some say Clootie did the deed,
When the good man’s back was turned.
They say he turned his back one day,
And at some cherubs looked,
And Clootie slyly slunk away,
Behind a star he snooked,
He laughed with glee for in his mind,
A nasty plan was cooked:
He made the cats to kill the rats,
And dogs to kill the cats;
He made the hawks eat little wrens,
And owls eat little bats;
He made the otters eat the trouts,
While trouts eat little gnats.
He made the lion eat the ox,
And the tiger eat the ram;
He made the wolf to eat the sheep,
And the fox to eat the lamb.
But then he had a fiendish thought,
Thinks he: “I’ll make a man!”
“I’ll make a man!” The arch fiend cried,
“And he will eat them all;
He’ll gobble everything he sees,
He’ll eat them big and small;
He’ll be a ruthless butcher king;
With pity – none at all”.
And so he made his man at last:
A screaming two legg’d type –
He tore the mammals flesh from bone,
He eat their very tripe –
Till all the animals and birds
Fled screaming at his sight.
“And now” says Cloots “I’ll make him fight
For little bits of land,
For greed and pride and selfishness,
He’ll kill his fellow man;
I’ll fill him full of pious cant,
To finish off my plan.
“Now some will preach in purple robes,
And some will prate in gowns,
And hold forth in stentorian tones,
Like silly circus clowns,
They’ll all be rascals underneath,
And get the keys to towns.
“And some will sell their souls for power,
While others sell for gold,
And most of them be wolves disguised,
To prowl among the fold.
But all their dreams will end in dust,
And all their lust in mould.
“He cannot conquer greed and hate,
And this will make him sad,
He cannot change his evil self
Hes such an awful cad
Then Clootie looked upon his work…
And found it very bad.
@JimmyGiro
I think that we are seeing some very subtle changes of tack on the propaganda front. First, we were treated to a full frontal attack on Assange. Judging by the comments section on a variety of media outlets, I would say that there has been a serious backlash in response to this strategy. Consequently, the “debate” has now moved onto the politics of rape, followed by sideshows such as Galloway’s remarks. The full frontal manouevre appears to have been put on the back burner for now. I expect to see a more steady drip drip of poison from this point onwards.
@Zoologist
I’m working through the books of his which are available, chronologically. I would not use the phrase alternative history if the inference is that it is conter-factual, there is much more than grains of disturbing truths there. The material is contemporaneous with the events described and thus invaluable first hand experience from someone who was there – first world war veteran, Europhile, reporter etc. – who e.g. sat through every day of the Reichstag fire trial. These are eyewitness accounts, first hand observations and many predictions of events which in the end did transpire: the Austria, Czechoslovakia, Poland etc. It is important that his work is appraised and any distortion or inaccuracies if found eliminated from the story he told, whatever checkable pieces of fact slotted into the mosaic that forms history. We are still too close temporally to events for sound judgement, a conclusive summation of the last century’s great upheavals is still impossible, it isn’t finished with us yet, there is much that cannot ever fit the received narratives we’ve taken as truth. I wouldn’t recommend Reed’s works except alongside other tomes such as Churchill’s masterly but puzzling WW2 history. I will approach Reed’s Prisoner of Ottawa having already read Otto Strasser’s own few available short works.
There is something indefinable, a thrill maybe in reading things the censorious have judged we ought not read and have sought to repress.
@JimmyGiro If any future development in the Assange case puts Britain in a bad light, I would not be surprised if something happens on the same day in Moors murderer Ian Brady’s ongoing court case.
(Incidentally, if anyone intends to follow the Brady case, look out for advertisements for Sensodyne toothpaste in the coverage. With Ilich Ramirez Sanchez [‘Carlos’], it was Johnny Walker Black Label whisky; with Saddam Hussein, Mars bars.)
Sky fairy
You may not believe in God, but you clearly have a very high opinion of your own good self.
@Cryptonym
Agreed on that. I like to read as much as possible and get all the perspectives.
Controversy was one of the few books I wish I had read earlier though. I was brought up without benefit of religious instruction of any kind so getting the long view on society since the Sumerians was invaluable for me. I’m not saying Reed is 100% right – he doesn’t even touch on the symbiotic relationship between the Christian monarchies and the money lenders (banksters) expertise with interest and taxes. But he does show how the ordinary Jews came to be persecuted time after time – how the guys who dreamed up the notion of the “scapegoat” have always used their “lesser brethren” as human shields.
And how the same thing has happened over and over for thousands of years.
The Hebrew bible has a lot to answer for.
Bradley Manning, Paul said, “is in the military so there are probably some debates on exactly how and what to do, but let me tell you: Bradley Manning didn’t kill anybody, Bradley Manning hasn’t caused the death of anybody, and what he has exposed, he is the equivalent to Daniel Ellsberg, who told us the truth about Vietnam.”
And: “I’m afraid that if we took a poll across the country and said ‘Should we try Assange for treason?’ that most Americans would say oh yes he’s a bad guy, he’s telling us all these secrets. But guess what, he’s an Australian citizen.”
From
Ron Paul Takes An Unapologetic Final Bow
Paul’s last hurrah in Tampa ranged from Julian Assange to the Federal Reserve, a long and at times surprisingly bitter farewell. Compromise never paid dividends but, he promised his supporters, “we will become the tent.”
http://www.buzzfeed.com/rosiegray/ron-paul-takes-an-unapologetic-final-bow
“You know the Queen of England claims direct patrilineal descent from King David and King Solomon don’t you.”
There is not one single iota of evidence that supports the existence of those mythical characters, let alone their great ’empires’. Only in the Old Testament are they mentioned and we know for a fact that the Old Testament is a collection of myths and stories which have been lifted lock, stock and barrel from other cultures.
What’s happening here is a subtle game. We know the Queen exists and has a long family history, so if she ‘claims’ such nonsense perhaps there must be some truth in it. The fact is neither have ever existed at any point in time.
@Steve Cook – if you’re quoting another comment, please wrap comments in blockquote/em tags – it makes it much easier to see which bit is you, and which bit is someone else. Thanks!
Hi all. Just added a couple of little fixes – including limiting pages to 200 comments apiece. That should make things a bit faster, and make our server handle high levels of traffic better.
Let me know if you spot any problems.
“so long as they don’t insist I beleive in it or insist I should alter my behaviour or words becasue they beleieve in it.”
altering your words would be a distinct improvement. Nowt like the wisdom of the ignorant. Your behaviour has been altered since the day you started attending school. When you sit down an watch Newsnight, it just continues. You will live your entire life believing you are knowledgeable and rational.
I’m not religious, thank God, but I find evangelical atheists quite odd.
‘Et Tutu, Brute,’ complains top war criminal & Christian
of top troublesome archbishop:
http://bit.ly/NANM8k
Jon,
Nice one on the page limits.Longer comment threads tended to reduce my mobile to a crawl.
Thanks.
Breaking story.
Rogue US Army group planning to take over base,commit terror attacks and assassinate Obama,allegedly.
http://rt.com/usa/news/us-army-plot-obama-770/
Like I said, people can believe in whatever non falsifiable stuff they want to, so long as they don’t insist I have to believe it or that I have to alter my words or behaviour to suit their beliefs.
It’s funny though; whenever someone makes the above self evidently reasonable statement, the sky-fairy believers tend to get particuarly hot under the collar.
Now we are cooking on gas!
Just one thing, those shortened urls are a web security problem if ever there was. Shame because they usually hide good links here, but it only takes one to send everyone blindly to a hijacking url.
Jonangus Mackay
Tutu despite his name has balls, and is a man of principle, Occupation is Oppression stood up to the ziofuckwits, and for his troubles was called an “antisemite” at calumny of his speech.
Theat man has my vote, and I deeply respect him, world needs more of this kind of brave souls. Good for him, world must shun that bastard opportunist war criminal Blair.
PS not being rude, but can you keep using tinyurl to a minimum, and instead either post the full link and or use hypertext please.
Jon,
Good on you, it is faster and neater.
Phew, a lot to respond to regarding Judaism and Israel.
@Grain:
A number of commenters responded to say that all ancient religions were in favour of one supremacy or another. I think that is the correct response – all holy texts contain endorsements of medieval cruelty and horror, in one fashion or another. In the absence of requiring those religions to edit those bits out, perhaps we can let them all take them with a bit of context?
So, do I think Judaism is worse than Christianity or Islam? No, I don’t – I just don’t think any such thing has been proven. It’s subjective at the very least.
@Grain
There’s a substantial error here. The concept of ‘Israeli national identity’ is not the same as Zionism, although the propaganda regularly blurs the two. But of the myriad of good, kind people in Israel who are not in favour of Israeli expansionism, and who sympathise with the plight of the Palestinians, are they not allowed a national identity other than Zionism?
Also, you/we need to be careful of the language you use. If you take your comments above, and swap “Jewish” with “Islamic”, I’d be pretty sure you’d condemn the speaker as fascist/nazi etc. That’s a good check of the tolerance of the speaker, in my view.
I hear you on the suffering of the Palestinian people, and the cruelty of the IDF and the Israeli security complex. I agree that “Israel defending itself” is often a euphemism for aggressive attacks on Gaza etc. Like you I am also (depending on the context of the debate) unwilling to reflexively agree with the suggestion that “Israel has the right to exist” since, of course, it should never have existed.
But – and it’s a big but – what would you do to encourage peace talks? This must be the starting point for any belief system on this subject. Your view as it stands would alienate the Israeli people (including their peace movement) so much that, even if their views were all democratically represented by a mythical fair media system, they would not have someone with your views lead them to the negotiating table. Why? Well, it sounds like you don’t want security for anyone but the Palestinians.
But if you do want, unequivocally, security for the Israeli people, then that’s a great start. Are you willing to guarantee them a state inside the 1967 borders in a Two State Solution? That might get some support from both sides. If you were a Palestinian adviser, would you allow Israel to come to the table without any preconditions? I’d hope so, since preconditions from Israel are usually what scupper talks in the first place.
If you’re in favour of a One State Solution, ok, I think that might work also (I think this is where I stand, although there is less support available for it). But if you want Israel to move, then I just don’t think that’s viable. You’d have so much opposition and very little support (perhaps except the Far Right, who you certainly don’t want as bedfellows).
@Vronsky:
I’m often accused of being over-moderate, but with religion, I actually insist on a moderate approach for the sake of atheism! The reason for this is simple: I have no patience with religion of any kinds, but oppressing any or all of them will just create more religionists. Hasn’t history taught us that, as forces come down against religion, it goes underground and/or pops up in a more virulent/extreme form?
@Technicolour:
@Passerby:
I haven’t at all endorsed Zionism as a reasonable/tolerable perspective. It isn’t tolerable at all. What I am fighting against is a one-sided language that creates more division between the two sides, and alienates folks who are stuck in the middle of the two poles. We can either use the language of justice, and attract people to the cause of peace, or we can use angry/unyielding language that alienates everyone other than a small band of supporters. You’re in danger of referring to Israeli human-rights workers and IDF watch-groups as “Ziofuckwits” – which will alienate people who you (mostly) agree with.
We already agree that things done in the name of Israel’s security are abominable. This is why I think Tech is right – if we fight with more anger/racism/violence, we’ll not build the movement that ultimately shames Israel to the negotiating table.
@Grain:
Well, it is hard for each of us to see outside of our own bell-jars, I suppose, so I am not sure you can be certain about that. For what it is worth, I don’t think you are being deliberately racist. I do however think that your language is angry and unhelpful, since it perpetuates division. We need the whole world to oppose Israel’s cruelty – and many people inside Israel too – and to do that we must be seen to be being fair to both sides.
So with all that in mind, Grain – if you were the chief facilitator of peace talks, what would be your framework? How would you persuade the Jewish diaspora and Israelis to support your approach?
@Jon (responding to Grain)
Why is this option dismissed so flippantly and with an attempt to discredit it thrown in, taking only your word for the delusions indivisibly harboured by the far right.
Equal civil, religious and political rights (as envisaged long ago) in a single state is still an enduring ideal solution. What do you mean ‘Israel to move’, it doesn’t entail Israel to move if such a thing were even a physical possibility. Even within a single state there could still be federal style Palestinian autonomy, as there could even be for disparate geographical Jewish/Israeli constituents, city areas and more rural agricultural districts. The names Palestine and Israel both retained for the states within a greater new third entity. Why should religious segregation be objectively wrong everywhere in the world but in Israel applaud insane murderous insistence on dis-assimilation and theocracy.
I’m paraphrasing but I read that both Nelson Mandela and Archbish Tutu, jointly asserted that the conditions the Palestinians endure dwarf anything they or their peoples endured in Apartheid South Africa at its vilest.
@Jon
Why wouldn’t a one state solution be the default position for a Western democracy?
Seems to work for the rest of us by and large..
@Cryptonym – you misread my point. I surmised that the Far Right might like to move Israel, just out of a generally anti-Jewish racism. That’s got nothing to do with the One State Solution, in which Jewish/Israeli people get to stay where they are. If you read my piece again, I didn’t dismiss this solution at all, nor did I attempt to discredit it – I said I was in favour of it!
@Zoologist – which Western democracy do you have in mind? If you mean the US, well they will follow the Israeli establishment, since it needs to get that support in order to project American power through its client state over the long term. The UK of course will just follow the US.
Certainly, it would be good if more countries around the world endorsed the One State Solution. I think this would have to go hand in hand with a South-African style Truth & Reconciliation Commission, so that the new state would not descend into violence.
Wow, it always seems to come back to the jimmy choos, don’t it?
Ho hum, what did Gibbon say in ‘Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire’? “Humanity is shocked at the recital of the horrid cruelties which they committed in the cities of Egypt, of Cyprus, and of Cyrene, where they dwelt in treacherous friendship with the unsuspecting natives, and we are tempted to applaud the severe retaliation which was exercised by the arms of the legions against a race of fanatics whose dire and credulous superstition seemed to render them the implacable enemies not only of the Roman government, but of human kind.” The usual catalogue of tortures including necklacing Christians with their own entrails. Lovely jewbbly! Gilad Atzmon, ex-member of the tribe, knows what’s what.
Never mind faffing around as a Goydian non-reader, do some serious boycotting. Gilad points out that Yisrael is actually worse than Hitlerite Germany, because the Hitlerites never won
a majority of votes, and no one had a chance to vote them out, whereas the Yisraelis vote for genocide all the time. FWIW the
zionists in al-Quds complain that the world choo population
has been decreasing by 50,000 a year, since 1950, its all time peak [Ferraro Rochocaust anyone?] as people decide they would rather be human beings than zionazis,and jump ship. So keep the year 2270 free for a party.
I think the one-state solution only works if the differences between the two peoples do not have religion as major aspect of the basis for that division. If there are significant differences in the economic power of the two or more parties involved, that only further exacerbates the problem. Different languages makes it even more intractable.
History shows that all singular states were, once upon a time, several smaller states that were subsequently subsumed into larger super states. “Nations”, in other words.
Nearly all of those nation states, though, were formed at the point of a sword or the barrel of a gun. It’s only a century or two after the fact that everyone forgets the old grievances and so can move forward as a single nation. Even then, cultural memories and their attendant enmities may still persist. We only need to look at Scotland’s and Ireland’s protestants and Catholics to see that to be the case. And they even speak the same language and believe in the same god!
@Jon – “which Western democracy do you have in mind?”
Errr .. Fair point .. None that I could recommend without reservation.
We have a de facto one state solution already. It just needs to become a state for all it’s citizens somehow. I’m not holding my breath.
BTW it should not have to be repeated that while racism is totally disgusting, the Js are NOT a ‘race’. In fact they are the world’s first racists [check the ‘Kushites’]. Read Prof Shlomo Sands, Gilad Atzmon, Israel Shahak – anything with facts in it.