I have been trying for the last few days to discover a coherent logic towards my feelings on man’s relationship with his environment. This is proving not to be simple.
The process started when I heard on World Service radio a gentleman from the International Panel on Climate Change discussing their latest report. As you know, I tend to accept the established opinion on climate change, and rather take the view that if all our industrial activity were not affecting the atmosphere, that would be strange.
But what struck me was that the gentleman said that a pause in warming for the last fifteen years was not significant, as fifteen years was a blip in processes that last over millennia.
Well, that would certainly be very true if you are considering natural climate change. But we are not – we are considering man-made climate change. In terms of the period in which the scale of man’s industrial activity has been having a significant impact on the environment, surely fifteen years is a pretty important percentage of that period? Especially as you might naturally imagine the process to be cumulative – fifteen years at the start when nothing much happened would be more explicable.
Having tucked away that doubt, I started to try to think deeper. Man is, of course, himself a part of nature. Anything man does on this planet is natural to this planet. I do not take the view man should not change his environment – otherwise I should not be sitting in a house. The question is rather, are we inadvertently making changes to the environment to our own long term detriment?
That rejection of what you might call the Gaia principle – that the environmental status quo is an end in itself – has ramifications. It is hard to conceptualise our relationship with gases or soil, but easier in terms of animals. I am not a vegetarian – I am quite happy that we farm and eat cattle, for example – and you might argue that the cattle are pretty successful themselves, symbiotic survivors of a kind. Do I think other species have a value in themselves? Is there any harm in killing off a species of insect, other than the fact that biodiversity may be reduced in ways that remove potential future advantages to man, or there may be knock on consequences we know not of that damage man somehow? I am not quite sure, but in general I seem in practice to take the view that exploitation of other species and substantial distortion of prior ecological balance to suit men’s needs is fine, so presumably the odd extinction is fine too, unless it damages man long term.
I strongly disapprove of hurting animals for sport, and want to see them have the best quality of life possible, preferably wild. But I like to eat and wear them. I am not quite sure why it is OK to wear animal skin on our feet or carry it as a bag, but not to wear “fur”. What is the difference, other than that leather has had the hair systematically rubbed off as part of the process of making it? A trivial issue, but one that obviously relates to the deeper questions.
Yes I draw a distinction between animals which are intelligent and those which are not. I would not eat whale or dolphin. But this does not seem entirely logical – animal intelligence and sensibility is evidently a continuum. Many animals mourn, for example. The BBC World Service radio (my main contact with the outside world at present – I have just today found my very, very weak internet connection just about works if I try it at 5am) informed me a couple of days ago that orang-utans have the ability to think forward and tell others where they will be the next day. Why cattle and fish are daft enough to eat is hard to justify.
I quite appreciate the disbenefits to man of radically changing his environment, even if it could be done without long term risk to his existence – the loss of beauty, of connection to seasons and forms of behaviour with which we evolved. But I regard those as important only as losses to man, not because nature is important intrinsically. In short, if I thought higher seas, no polar bears and no glaciers would not hurt man particularly, I don’t suppose I would have much to say against it. I fear the potential repercussions are too dangerous to man. At base, I don’t actually care about a polar bear.
Dearest Sophia,
It is good to see you managing to drop in, and although I read you have been partaking of Jolijoli potions, although I suspect imported wine gums can be strong, so discretion is the key to a sustained state of health. I have been “pleasured” by your post, although as yet I don’t feel I am immense, or endowed with piercing and alloy bottomed hexvision plasma driven nano particle penetrating observations, but, even I can see the dynamics on this thread to be a veritable feast for any anthropologist, or post doctoral psychologist.
It is good to be tethered to reality and remian aware of the actualities. Must dash ta ta for now.
Israel’s population register cannot list Israeli as nationality
Friday, October 04, 2013 – 07:53 AM
Continues: http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/world/israels-population-register-cannot-list-israeli-as-nationality-609045.html
Sorry, I’m rushing to go and vote – and I forgot italics or quotation marks. Mea culpa.
[Mod: fixed]
John Goss (12:46pm):
Don’t come on as the learned one, the only one to know anything about the Soviet state, Lenin and Stalin. With reference to your ‘rebutal’:
1. “You should know that a Leninist and a Stalinist are two different animals.”
Not in terms of what they got up to in practice: the Red Terror, repression and intolerance were features of the Soviet state from the beginning.
2. “…as I’ve pointed out to you before I have never been a member of the Communist party.”
Yes, you have. But you clearly subscribe to the ideas of the far left – or do you wish to deny that? I accuse you not of being or having been a member of the Communist party but of having a Stalinist mind-set. Accompanied, by the way, by an obsession about Zionists. Remember the envisaged trial of the Zionist/Jewish doctors in the early 1950s, abandoned only thanks the fortuitous death of the Little Father in 1953?
3. “According to a number of historical websites Zionist money funded the Soviet Revolution.”
Very coy of you. Name a few of them, so that we may inform ourselves (and also assure ourselves that you’re not referring to Jewwatch and Stormfront).
Secondly, you wrote (11:02am today) “Stalin was funded by Zionist money” (not “The Soviet Revolution was funded by Zionist money”). Right?
4. “..just blathers on about bollocks.”
See what I mean? The Stalinist (or far-left if you want) mindset: insults and the club rather than proper argument.
And finally, if you bother to reply to this, do please refrain from ending your reply with heart-rending info about Guatanamo detainees or sharia law. You done this twice already and it very diversionary. Which is another characteristic of the Stalinist or far-left mind-set.
Dreoilin –
Omid Djalili sketch – the BBC won’t let Brits view it on Youtube.
Here, it seems to be visible:
http://www.roozvideo.com/video/204/omid_djalili_scottish_film_student_sketch/
Komodo (9:15am):
“If you’re going to flame, my babu friend, at least do it amusingly.”
My “babu friend” ???
He writes like a Raj-era Hindu railway clerk.
And you call people Stalinist on the basis of less evidence.
I imagine him crying in a corner and imploring you to come to his aid. Very good of you, Rubbaduck, but if he can’t take it, maybe he shouldn’t be quite so keen to hand it out.
Fred: “Everybody here knows my rule, don’t make it personal”
But as you are so thin-skinned, and do take almost everything personal, & maybe you have noticed that most people only ever make the mistake of engaging with you only once !
Technicolour: “also objected equally strongly to Havacock, Halfacock blah blah ad nauseam, but were merely too polite and delicate to say it. Right? Or is it by any chance one rule for one lot of people and another for another?”
Are you really as clueless as Dreoilin ? You don’t know what a Troll is ?!
Dreoilin : “I wasn’t trying to engage you, or Macky. I wouldn’t waste my time”
Nice to know !
I said there were historical websites that made claims about Stalin and the Bolsheviks being funded by Zionist money, not that I agreed with them. Here’s one. There is a second part.
http://was-stalin-a-rothschild.blogspot.co.uk/
You don’t deserve people posting links you never read Red Robbokuk. You never read them, never listen to the opinions of those who post them and just generally make derogatory remarks about the person who made the comment. Which is why you got your marching orders. But hey, if you check back you’ll not find anywhere where I gloated over your ban.
“He writes like a Raj-era Hindu railway clerk.”
Deplorable racism.
@John Goss, funny how you get called an anti-semite everytime you mentioned the name “Rothschild”, yet these name callers bite their lips when somebody else mentions this name !;
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2013/02/israel-grants-oil-rights-in-syria-to-murdoch-and-rothschild/
@My Lovely Lizard. 3 24pm
Thanks for helping dwellers in the darker and more primitive parts of Englandistan with that Bin Laden link.
Here in Wathafeckoland the age old remedy to such connection problems is to have a bit more Jolijoli potion then paddle off to the Siltybend and perform the rite of Urika Ka, while rubbing the oil of the Puki Fig around the gnarled protrusions from the sacred stump. Works every time! But I’m sure your technical remedy may also have some merit so don’t be discouraged by the superior technique of others.
Vive la Diversité!
Thanks for the Omid Djalili link, Komodo.
“the BBC won’t let Brits view it on Youtube”
That’s a bit silly. Isn’t he all over British TV?
I can’t watch Jon Stewart anywhere – but the block is at their end, not mine. I’m in the “wrong location” apparently.
Bit of housekeeping:
For the record, just deleted a couple of contributions from “OT”, who is Krishamurky, or English Knight, posting under yet another new handle.
I think there is a likelihood, given the background info I see, that Red Robbo is in fact an old poster under a new name, and I’m not offering prizes for spotting that he may be wearing a geranium. Regardless, the advice about engaging politely or withdrawing totally still stands, even if you get called a Stalinist (or fascist/racist/whatever).
Dreoilin, I’m not in the habit myself of modifying politicians names for comic effect, but it’s long been tolerated here as a component of free speech. I agree with you however on personal insults, and people of all political persuasions have indulged in that here.
Oh no!
‘There could also be a return to Government benches for Liam Fox, the former defence secretary who quit over the Adam Werritty scandal.
Dr Fox, who has just finished a book, has spent months trying to reorientate the Tory party towards appealing to the blue collar working class vote.
He is also thought to be close to Lynton Crosby, the Tories’ election strategist, after serving under him as party chairman at the 2005 general election.’
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/10356601/Tory-women-set-for-promotion-in-David-Camerons-second-reshuffle-next-week.html
~~~~
Here is Fox speaking at the Conservative Friends of Israel ‘400 strong’ gathering in Manchester earlier this week.
http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/112017/beware-simple-peace-solutions-warns-liam-fox
Note his warmongering against Iran.
Pickles, Villiers and Feldman were present.
The previous evening Agent Cameron was the guest of honour at a party 40 40 event?
http://www2.cfoi.co.uk/Briefings/WeeklyBriefing/
~~~~
No further news on Werritty since I left a link on a previous thread that he was at Fox’s book launch at the beginning of September and that he, Werritty, has got married.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londoners-diary/a-paean-of-praise-from-liam-fox-for-best-friend-adam-werritty-8809086.html
“the BBC won’t let Brits view it on Youtube”
Never mind, Komodo, I follow you now. I replied without thinking.
Shin Bet humanized.
The Gatekeepers
Locking in Palestinians as Terrorists
by Dr. VACY VLAZNA
What image of Palestinians would viewers, who have a smattering, or if any, knowledge of the Palestinian struggle, gain after seeing Dror Moreh’s documentary, The Gatekeepers?
The word ‘terrorist’ and versions thereof – ‘terrorism’ ‘terror’ – occur over 40 times, and all, bar once, in reference to Palestinians implicitly justifying the raison d’etre for Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency).
The MO of the vicious Shin Bet or Shabak is covert counter-terrorism – based on the premise that the people of Palestine have no right to defend themselves or fight for their rightful independence enshrined in international law against the brutal illegal occupier and coloniser- the rogue State of Israel.
Meanwhile, Israel, the world’s fourth largest high-tech nuclear military force bleats its right to defend itself against Palestinian rocks and piddly homemade rockets.
The Gatekeepers presents interviews with six former Shin Bet commanders with relevant archival footage. Luke Buckmaster states, “These are men who, after consuming their toast and coffee, went to work to oversee every form of state-sanctioned violence. Manhunts. Executions. Torture. Missions that led to the death of countless innocent people… It seems highly improbable — despite unusually candid-feeling interviews — that the former top brass from the Shin Bet didn’t come to the project without an agenda in mind.” (Crikey 21-8-13)
/..
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/10/04/locking-in-palestinians-as-terrorists/
Dr. Vacy Vlazna is Coordinator of Justice for Palestine Matters. She was Human Rights Advisor to the GAM team in the second round of the Acheh peace talks, Helsinki, February 2005 then withdrew on principle. Vacy was coordinator of the East Timor Justice Lobby as well as serving in East Timor with UNAMET and UNTAET from 1999-2001.
John Goss (3:51pm):
“I said there were historical websites that made claims about Stalin and the Bolsheviks being funded by Zionist money, not that I agreed with them.”
You’re as slippery as George Galloway, MP, who is – purely coincidentally, if course – another extreme left-winger.
Your first comment (at 11:02) was “Stalin was, like most world leaders, quite evil and funded by Zionist money.”
Under pressure, you amended that, without apology, to read as follows(12h46) “According to a number of historical websites Zionist money funded the Soviet Revolution.”.
So “Stalin” morphed swiftly into “the Soviet Revolution”.
And now (3:51pm) you say “I said there were historical websites that made claims about Stalin and the Bolsheviks being funded by Zionist money, not that I agreed with them.”. Why did you mention the existence of those ‘historical websites’ if you don’t agree with them – of the kindness of your heart, just to keep us informed? Or to lend credence to your claim?
As for the ‘historical websites’ (plural), they turn out to be a blogspot entitled “was_stalin_a_rothschild”! Got any more for us?
“He writes like a Raj-era Hindu railway clerk.”
and
“If you’re going to flame, my babu friend, at least do it amusingly.”
Both from someone called ‘Komodo’.
Very nice.
Rise above, rise above 🙂
Thanks Macky for realising what a struggle it is against those who simply want to disrupt.
Technicolour thank you for the advice. I try to include all people but your advice of rising above the diatribe is more sensible than rising to the bait. Anyway, I’m too busy at the moment to engage those who seek to disrupt.
Hi Grownups.
This is probably my final post ‘cos I made a small blunder which the shaman reckons will probably cause global catastrophy.
Well excuse me, but no one told me I was supposed to share the contents of that gourd with the rest of the clan and by the time it was snatched from my hands there were only a few drops left.
Apparently my selfish act fulfils an ancient prophesy and means the planet will now have to pass through the debris field of comet ISON. Up to that point he says we were set to pass in safety millions of miles away.
The only way to put things right on the farther dimensions is to let him strap me into the ceremonial dugout and set me adrift above the dreaded 3000meter Omigad Falls, and even that isn’t a dead cert.
They warned me that things would get weird with jolijoli, but it all seems pretty tame to me compared with some of the stories coming out of the BBC. The shaman says they do some even stronger potions there. (Thanks for all the links Mary. Too bad you are about to lose your loyalest fan.)
Dear John, thanks. I am also quite interested to know the sources for the claim that the ‘Rothschilds’ (or, one presumes, some of them) funded either Stalin or the Russian revolution (presumably this means Lenin?). I did briefly click on your link but it seemed not quite impartial. Fred also seemed to agree, so sources from him would be welcome too.
“I am afraid that I am partly responsible for The Daily Mail’s outrageous attack on Ralph Miliband on Saturday. The only evidence it provided for its headline: “The man who hated Britain” comes from my page on Miliband.”
Related Pages:
Ralph Miliband
Lord Rothermere
MI6
The Daily Mail
Adolf Hitler
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/index.html
Mary,
Thanks for posting about The Gatekeepers – you may have missed that I posted a note about it a few months ago. I went to see it when it was on limited release near me. My understanding is that it didn’t cause much of a stir in Israel, for the mundane reason that there’s limited appetite amongst the cinema-going public there for documentary films. It garnered much more of a reaction in the US, where in some sense Israel is more of a hot potato than in Israel itself.
The official line is that Dror Moreh struggled to get any of the former heads of Shin Bet to talk to him, but when the first (Ami Ayalon) had agreed, Ayalon persuaded the others on the documentary maker’s behalf. I agree that an agenda seemed likely, but having seen it, it isn’t the naked propaganda piece one might expect. Firstly, Moreh asks some good questions about the nature of “license to kill”, and draws an angry response from one of his interviewees. Secondly, at least of the interviewees comes across as so sanguine about the appalling assassinations he was openly party to, I felt that it would cause revulsion in any neutral person. Thirdly, there was a very good section on the Jewish Underground, who planned to blow up The Dome Of The Rock but were foiled by the agency (the Underground plan was to cause a worldwide war against Muslim populations, in the fervent hope that Israel would prevail).
There are some really awful moments in the film, for anyone of a peaceful disposition, but overall I would recommend it. It certainly isn’t an IDF press release, although of course you need to know there are no Palestinian voices in it (and whilst that is a limitation of the approach, I did mildly consider it as a weakness). But the conclusions of the six men towards the end seem to be pointing towards “talking to the enemy”, and there are some eye-opening admissions. One could be forgiven, then, for thinking their agenda might be that they are trying to persuade the right-wing elements in the Knesset to sit down with Hamas and work the whole thing out peacefully – shocking stuff.
Thanks Jon – will try & get it.
Thanks for the heads up Jon. If I ever get to see the film (and I will have to go up to London probably as we have one of those popcorn and coke multi screen palaces here which only shows commercial films) I will remember your comments.
~~
What really went on behind the scenes at Manchester. Solomon Hughes talks about mobile phone apps promoting private medicine. I know that in the context of a ‘digital NHS’, this government are going for ‘virtual wards’ in a big way. The chronically sick are not wanted in hospital but will be at home, attached to monitors and maybe on camera, which will alert the medics if intervention is needed. 1984 has been superseded.
Messrs Afriye and Fallon.
Destroying the NHS? There’s an app for that…
4 Oct 2013
SOLOMON HUGHES braved the Conservative Party conference. He reports back on a Tory wheeze to ‘improve’ health care through the power of digital technology
http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-173b-Destroying-the-NHS-Theres-an-app-for-that#.Uk8Z3a9wbSc
Are you seriously suggesting there is a will for peace on the part of the ziofuckwits?
This has been the raison d’être for the continuation of the current fuckwit farrago, that has resulted in; war is peace, killing is life, oppression is freedom, that across the world has come to be accepted as “our way of life”. How can zionistan exist without the racism? How can zionistan exist without the apartheid? How can zionistan exist without the wars on its neighbouring countries?
Did you ever expect the South African apartheid to be less racist and more inclusive, too?
What is your solution then, equally ziofuckwit Fedup, who plays the same stupid games? Where is your ziofuckwit peaceful solution? What have you got to offer apart from more hate and fuckwittery? Tell us. And you tell me if you have seen ‘To Shoot an Elephant’ because the peaceful voices in Gaza are putting your hollow shrieks to shame.