The Insolence of some Muslims

With news circulating that Iran has pulled the film ‘A Cube of Sugar’ from consideration at the Oscars over the anti-Islam film I can’t help but let out a large sigh.

I have tried to avoid writing anything about this subject mainly because I kept wrongly thinking the fuss would all die down. But to no avail as a couple of weeks in from the film first scouting controversy people are still talking, tweeting and protesting about it. Not to mention the fact that the controversy surrounding that damned film has been topically name dropped by nearly all the relevant leaders in their recent speech’s at the UN summit.

So not wanting to be left out of the fray, here are my two cents on the subject.

Disproportionate reaction:

First things first, I believe the outrageously violent protests that were sparked by this film were firstly un-called for. I don’t care how offensive it was, you don’t respond to a movie that practically labels the people who follow the faith of Islam as savages by acting like savages. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy. Go ahead and protest, that is a right afforded to all, but protest like dam human beings. Having said that there were of course many protests that were carried out peacefully in many locations around the world. But with the world being the way it is, peaceful protests don’t enlist the media coverage as well as some angry flag-burning insult taunting Muslims losing their general shiz at a US embassy do.

US Focal point:

Another thing that has also annoyed me with regard to these violent protest is the fact they seem to be all aimed at US embassies or, in some cases, US franchises. Now correct me if I’m wrong, but last time I checked it wasn’t Barack Obama or any US senator or government official that was listed as a producer, director or even simple stage-hand in the credits of this nonsensical film. Too boot, I don’t remember any governmental budgets being set aside and stipulated for funding films *and to be honest, even calling it a film is in my mind giving it way too much credit* that spout hate-filled nonsense. This film was made by some twat who happened to have a U.S. citizenship. Hitler was born in Poland but you didn’t see the allied powers aiming all their ammo at Austria for simply being the homeland of the damned Fuhrer as opposed to Germany where boy had clearly set up shop during the war. Him being American is beside the point.

Over-Hype:

Another issue I find with all this controversy is the fact that the idiot who produced this beyond-a-low-budget-film-its-practically-replacing-the-Dead-Sea-as-the-lowest-point-on-Earth is that this tool has achieved what he set out to do. He has not only offended the people he set out to offend but also enraged a minority of those people enough to publicly make a**holes of themselves and further reinforce this negative ‘Muslamic Ray Guns’ rage stereotype of muslims. It’s like we Muslims aren’t complete unless we are seething with anger and burning a flag or 2. It’s utterly disgraceful. Adding to the fact that with all this extreme protesting more attention has been drawn to this film therefore affording it more publicity. The publicity means that more people are being exposed to the films insufferable views. Plus a point to note is that all the hits that are garnered on this video on Youtube do translate into money being paid to the uploader. The guy must be minted by now.

Priorities: Messed up:

And lastly I feel like these protesters who are so vehemently protesting the vilification of their prophet and religion are missing the bigger picture. Yes, the video was offensive, yes it was tacky. But can you not maybe think in this day and age of anything worse occurring that might be bringing a greater harm to your people? If you care so much about the muslim ‘ummah’ and the image of Islam surely you should be more outraged at the thousands of muslims being massacred in Syria? Have none of these hardcore touting muslims ever read this ayah in the Quran?

‘On that account We ordained for the Children of Isra`il that if any one slew a person – unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land – it would be as if he slew the whole humanity: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the whole humanity.’ Surah 5, verse 32

So where is the unbridled outrage at the death toll which numbers in the tens of thousands and which by far over-shadows the one person metaphor in this ayah? Or can the US flags you have stockpiled not wait to go up in flames?

I think the adequate response to a video like this is to simply give it the attention it deserves…which is none at all. It isn’t worth anyone’s time of day.  Don’t get me wrong, I do believe as a Muslim this the movie is disrespectful, grossly offensive, racist and intolerant. I just believe the response to the hate eschewed in this film shouldn’t be more exaggerated and violent hate. You don’t win by one up-ing bigots.

Follow @WellApparently

 

Casualty: Mubarak Addition

One of the things that had continually dogged the Mubarak trial had been the health status of Hosni Mubarak. With the ending of the trial on Saturday, which convicted Mubarak of having failed to intervene to stop the killings of protesters, questions regarding his deteriorating health continue to enlist coverage. Since the trials had begun Mubarak had been in and out of hospital and had also demanded to be carried into court on a stretcher re-emphasizing his overall ‘fragile’ state and health.

Now some of you may point to all this as simple theatrics. Some of you may point to Mubarak maybe having ulterior motives in his depiction of himself as a weak and frail man. So he can enlist sympathy? So he can engender concerns over a breach of his Human Rights? Maybe he has his eyes on a particular prize. An Emmy? Dare say an Oscar? Since he has lost the presidential seat he might be looking for a back-up career as a Hollywood method actor.

No No, I say. That is not what all this hoopla surrounding his health is about. It’s all a misunderstanding, and if anything, Mubarak has been in fact, wronged. Don’t believe me? Take a gander at some of the points listed below:

Firstly, Mubarak’s health further deteriorated on Monday after a visit from his wife Suzanne Mubarak who sobbed at the sight of Muabarak in his blue prison suit. I understand your pain Suzanne…. How could they do this to your husband? BLUE PRISION SUIT? Have you no sense of shame or ounce of morality Egypt? You know that BLUE isn’t his color. It clearly does nothing for his complexion and washes out his face without bringing due attention to his eyes. Savages.

But if this fashion faux pas isn’t enough to engender your sympathy for Mubarak then maybe recanting some of these events may sway you.  See if you can stomach this. Right after his sentencing on Saturday Mubarak was transferred directly from the court by helicopter to Cairo prison hospital. Mubarak reportedly cried and tried to resist leaving the helicopter. Why I hear you cry? Because Mubarak was insisting he instead be flown to his luxury suit were he had been held during his trial. Mubarak…selfless as always. You see Mubarak didn’t want to trouble the doctors and nurses in the hospital with his ailments as it would divert undue attention from their care of other patients at their facility and therefore inevitably lead to an increase in their workload. He, like the selfless hero he is, instead wanted to tough it out ‘bear- grylls’ style in the harsh and barren conditions of his luxury suite. Brave man…. Putting others before himself.

But then I hear you ask, why was he seen on a stretcher being carried in and out of court throughout his trial? Surely if the man is not well enough to walk into nor sit in court he should be in a proper medical facility which can afford him the treatment he so desperately needs rather than holed up in the confines of his luxury non-medical abode? To this I say you are misunderstanding the situation. This is a clear case of Hosni simply being thoughtful. The man was simply thinking of the health of the people carrying his stretcher. He saw that a few people needed some extra bicep and tricep action and so offered to be there ‘weight-training-man’. He was simply giving them their dose of exercise for the day which as any well informed individual knows, is integral to leading a healthy and balanced lifestyle.

But on a serious note, Mubarak, man the F’ up. The sympathy afforded to you and the treatment you have received while being held on trial is a million times more gracious than that afforded to the political dissidents, martyrs, protesters and revolutionaries whom you crushed, repressed, tortured and beat in your quest to retain power. The tears and theatrics you and your family spill mean nothing in the wake of the destruction and corruption of your rule. You have had the wish of having your son Gamal Mubarak moved to a nearby cell near you granted.  The people you held, tortured and who died in your prisons were never afforded the means to say farewell to their loved ones and family let alone having any of their wishes granted. They weren’t afforded luxury suits while they waited trial, hell most of them never even got a day in court to face the ‘charges’ brought against them.

They say you reap what you sow, but if that was true, you would be sowing a painful existence rather than a mere inconvenience to your living standards.

Follow @WellApparently

 

KONY 2012

So if the name Kony means nothing to you I suggest you firstly:

A) relocate yourself from under that quaint little rock u’v been living under and

B) watch the attached Youtube clip below before reading this article…

So ever since this clip became a viral sensation last Tuesday night the internet and media have been alight with debate and discussion over not only the organizations credentials but its aims. There have been a plethora of replies criticisms and backlashes over the whole campaign. So I thought it best to maybe put all this in perspective and answer some of the criticisms. Bearing in mind that this article won’t necessarily vouch for the organization itself but focus on the impact the organization has made.

Firstly let’s get one thing straight, this campaign has already achieved one of its aims. That is it has made KONY a ‘celebrity’ and pushed this reclusive figure and oft forgotten warlord onto the world stage and subsequently onto the radar of the mainstream media. Whether we like it or not, and whether you agree with the campaigns aims or not, the fact people are talking about Kony is a PLUS because it means that he isn’t confined to international purgatory and is subsequently no longer ‘out of sight and out of mind’.

By the force of people sharing this clip some people have conversely started thinking deeper about this issue and have flung open the debate on this topic. I think that’s a positive in itself because it is only through an open and healthy debate that issues can be resolved. Ironically, some of the campaigns harshest critics wouldn’t have had the platform they have now to discuss their views on this issue if it wasn’t for the video they so loudly denounce.

Another major complaint about the video is that the people who are tweeting, sharing and spreading the word about this campaign are meerily ‘jumping’ on a bandwagon engaging no critical thought on the debate and are merely acting as mindless sheep. To this I say, yes, but so what? I’d rather have these drones tweeting and talking about Kony then sharing their qualms over which celebrity is dating who and what Justin Beiber has decided to do with his hair. Because at the end of the day the blather of these sheep does help in amplyfing the issue to the ears of people who do genuinely care. Also, I am not one to belittle any sense of educational knowledge of Kony and his atrocities being imparted on this generation no matter how basic this knowledge is.

Another issue which links to this issue of the people who are spreading this campaign being seemingly ‘under-educated’ would be some of the posts I have come across which condescendingly state; ‘I’ll listen to you about Kony if you sow me where Uganda is on a map’

Now excuse me if I am wrong, but just because someone is not a walking talking geography book doesn’t mean they lack the means to empathize and care about an issue. That isn’t to say I don’t encourage them to find out more about Uganda just that these type of posts don’t really prove much of a point. Empathy isn’t tied up with a knowledge of the world’s borders. There are hundred’s of countries around the world and in every country there is bound to be some form of injustice occurring no matter how big or small. Plus since we are talking about peoples geographic knowledge, why not take this thought process a step further and demand people know the city locations of some areas that are being attacked i.e. How many people know where Homs or Baba Amar are located in Syria?

Another thing that has grinded my gears is this talk about the linking up of the Kony campaign to the U.S’s hegemonic interests. Firstly, let’s get one thing straight, it wasn’t the government who initiated this campaign, it’s a campaign which has been in the making for 9 years and has been largely ignored by the government for these 9 years. So it isn’t simply an overnight phenomonan but a project which was years in the making. Secondly, the U.S won’t invade Uganda over Kony, it has no reason to. This is because as the campaign itself points out on its website and in the video, the conflict has moved on from Uganda to other areas in Africa. So Kony is no longer at large in Uganda, though of course the aftermath of his presence in the country can still be felt.

Thirdly, people need to differentiate between ‘military advisors’ and ‘combat troops’. These 100 of military advisers in Uganda aren’t G.I. Joe and aren’t waging an ‘Expandables’ type war on the nations grounds. All they are doing is simply advising the Ugandan military on how to best capture Kony. Which in my regards, is fairly docile. Plus, people need to wake up, there are a plethora of American military bases stationed around the world which do similar things which no one is kicking up a fuss about. It’s just that people always like to think in conspiracy terms when it comes to dealing with  these global issues, its all about being ‘hipster’ and sticking it to the powers that be. Its more exciting to think of the world as a Hollywood production stage and that every issue has clearly delineated bad and good guys with an intricate plot to unravel.

Yes Uganda has oil, and the military advisors in Uganda have not been sent there because the U.S. has suddenly seen the light and is determined to make sure justice is carried out. At the end of the day, as the clip itself briefly mentions, the U.S. largely ignored Uganda’s plight because it wasn’t in their foreign policy interests to intervene. In other words, the U.S had nothing to gain from helping Uganda. So what gives? Why the sudden   change of heart? The sending of troops and assistance of sorts are tried and tested mechanism the U.S and other foreign countries have used before which help in building diplomatic links with countries. We  for example, send you troops to advise your military as a sign of ‘good will’ and we will surely be rewarded with some oil will.

The last thing I want to comment on is something that I truly find disheartening. This issue revolves around the incessant need to compete between different casues. i.e. between massacres as in x, y, z amount of people have died in this conflict and everyone is campaigning about Kony killing x,y, z amount of people. This is the COMPLETE wrong attitude, you may be a Syrian for example but you could just have easily been born a Ugandan.  You can’t call yourself a humanitarian if you close your heart off to the rest of humanity. ANY life lost no matter where is a life to many and every injustice deserves to be heard. But in trying to raise awareness of an injustice don’t trample on other people’s pain or belittle their cause to gain some ground. Because at the end of the day it’s NOT a competition.

Don’t let your ethnicity limit your humanism.

Follow @WellApparently

 

‘Donald Trump, your fired’… By Donald Trump

Before I get into the post, I’d just like to explain that I haven’t been able to update this blog as regularly as before due to end of year university exams and essays. This post was actually written a while back but I never got round to finishing it due to the above mentioned reasons but I have tried to modify it as best as possible so its up-to-date. So in summary, exams & essays are pure evil and I hope you enjoy this scatter-brained post.  :)

So yesterday Donald Trump single-handedly crushed the dreams and ambitions of millions of comedians stateside… how did he do this I hear you ask? By saying that he would NOT be running for the US presidential office in 2012…. GUTTED.

Now don’t get me wrong, I’m not a Trump-fan policy or ideas wise…I just think he is comedic gold who channels the late greats before him like Sarah Palin and George Bush…he simply manages to carry the torch of Tom-Foolery onwards.

So now what? I guess we have got to pool our prayers and thoughts together and hope Sarah Palin makes a blast of a come-back and takes on the republican candidacy in the race for president. But until then, let’s all take a sweet, short and poignant look back at some of the gems that Trump bestowed on us *wipes tears*:

Let’s backtrack a slight bit.. for all those who don’t know who Donald Trump is. He is simply the  ‘Alan sugar’ of America…but only in the sense that he hosts the same show as  Alan Sugar which is ‘the apprentice’ but stateside…that’s where the similarity ends though. Still not completely sure of who he is character wise? Well simply imagine someone with the brains of Sarah Palin, the looks of Susan Boyle, and the arrogance of Piers Morgan/Simon Cowell but with nothing much to back it up save for a fortune bestowed on him by his parents. Point is, boi is putting the lemons out of business in the ‘sour’ department

So let’s look at some of the views Trump made in his fake-tease-of-a-run-up-to-presidency.

The current Political climate:

Trump: The American people are tired of being ripped off by their government officials, representatives and leaders

Fighting words Trumpy, fighting words. But in the rest of the interview in which he stated this point, he spent basically boasting about his excellent and finely tuned skills at ripping people off which has got him to where he is today…Not only that but he also bequeathed us with his strong moral compass directed at equality… Trump is no ordinary man, Trump is blind to our differences and rips off people equally regardless of their ethnicity, creed, nationality, religious belief etc. … *tears up* A man that stands for equality, I know, Martin Luther King would be so proud.

On being called a Racist:

Trump: I have a great relationship with the blacks

Unless boi is referring to Rebecca Black’s family….. Enough said.

On his response to Obama releasing his birth certificate to silence accusations by Trump and his fellow birthers that he was not born in America :

Trump: Today I am very proud of myself because I have accomplished something that nobody else has been able to accomplish

I agree Trump, compared to your lackluster track record of achievements…this IS an achievement of sorts. I bet Trump felt the same kind of pride people at passport control feel whenever they ask to see your passport and you oblige…Nothing tops that high… you can see it on their faces…they are all kinds of E-C-S-T-A-T-I-C

On Libya:

Mirroring what we are all feeling watching these devastating events unfold and the untimely death and murder of innocent civilians by a mad dictator…

Trump: Are the rebels from Iran? Are they From Al-Qaeda?

Spot on Trumpy…spot on.. Smart play involving Iran and Al-Qaeda, that’s the buzz word that gets everyone in a tizzy… Doesn’t matter if they aren’t actually in anyway involved with the conflict… you got to use them buzz words…though I am slightly disappointed  you didn’t mention North Korea, Syria, Godzilla, Voldemort etc. as possible candidates…but it was early days yet, I’m sure these big baddies would have got their time to razzle, dazzle and shine throughout you’re campaign.

On oil in the Middle East:

Trump: I’m interested in Libya if we take the oil, if we don’t take the oil ..No Interest.

And the same kind of mantra was espoused in relation to Iraq and  any other oil-producing state. But when presented with the question of what he thought the Arab countries would think or feel to the concept of his policy of ‘it’s-all-about-the-oil’ he replied > Who cares

Simply put let us re-phrase the wise musings of Antione Dodson to best sum up his stance and message :

“I’m invading your countries, I’m snatching your oil, so y’all need to hide your kids, hide your wife, hide your husband, ’cause I’m stealing everything out here.”

Trumpy, you could have borrowed this campaign slogan for free if you had decided to run for office. I’d have gladly waivered all copyrights entitlements to this along with Antoine Dodson to help you best get across your message

And if you don’t know who Antione Dodson is and this refrence made no sense check out this Youtube link :

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzNhaLUT520

r

Though the above mentioned topics only scratch the surface of Trump’s views and opinions, it’s the most I could cram into a post without this turning into a personal autobiography of sorts. And to bring this Turmp-fest to a close we will end with a quote by Trump released when he declared he wasn’t seeking to run for office

Trump: I maintain the strong conviction that if I were to run, I would be able to win the primary and ultimately, the general election”

And that folks…is why he WONT be running for office…it’s only ever fun or right to run when the odds are you’ll lose…

Till Next Time,

r

r

Follow @WellApparently

 

 

Wikileaks….leaking and dumping

Firstly….who came up with the word  ’dump’ to describe Wikileaks  massive release of secret government memos? Shouldn’t it be more of a flood? Since the website is called Wiki-leaks….not man-rushing-to-get-to-toilet-after-a-few-to-many-vindaloos. Not only that but the layout that greets when you open the site…..well…..check it out for yourself:

http://213.251.145.96/

For a minute there I had to double-take before realising that no I had not stumbled upon a James bond-esque fan page but was actually on the Wikileaks page with the added grace of Julian’s Assange’s most thought-provoking pose….It’s like he is staring straight at me no matter where I position myself….Mona Lisa, you seem to have a contender vying for your throne of creepyness.

That of course is beside the point of this post. I’m going to avoid discussing Julian Assange himself and focus instead on the website. The topic has of course died off recently but has solicited polarised reactions in the public upon its release, dividing people generally between the camps of oh-no-he-didn’t and the oh-yes-he-did. Personally I think the issue resides somewhere in between though leaning more towards beneficial then a downright affront ….but first…lets touch upon the argument’s.

So one of the issues critics have with the Wikileaks ‘dump’ of information is that it basically hinders the working of diplomacy. They argue some things need to be kept secret because if they aren’t then diplomats will avoid voicing their true concerns through memos in fear of them being released and therefore them being exposed. It’s a simple case of if diplomats in foreign countries can’t rely the true facts of what’s going on in the grounds to their own governments it will obviously hamper state relations. And as we all know, what  governments say to other governments publicly isn’t necessarily what they say about them privately. And its not something alien, it’s something we do as people on a day-to-day basis, e.g. Iv heard Paul is a right old prick who dabbles in drugs on the side but because I happen to work with Paul whenever I greet him it’s all sugar and spice and everything nice. The aspect of states being two-faced to each other isn’t necessarily an issue when it revolves around petty matters i.e. how Sensitive and temperamental Nicolas Sarkozy is.

But it does of course matter  with big issues, but that isn’t really a point worth discussing as  much of the info revealed was generally low down in the secrecy stakes. Which then brings me on to my next point, the whole drama about how shocking and revealing the leaks where and how they need to be stopped as a matter of US state security. Calls where made that Julian Assange *public figurehead of Wikileaks* should be hunted down like Osama bin laden, jailed, assasinated etc. point is Boy should be stopped one way or another. This argument is in itself absurd, because lets face it, the only person genuinely shocked by the Wikileaks revelations was probably Sarah Palin…..and to be honest, the same shock and awe could have been attained if you’d handed her a map:

Mama Grizzly herself aka Sarah Palin: Africa ain’t a country? it’s a continent? Well ill be damned

Please do be damned if it gets you to stop wasting our time with your constant drivel….  I digress, point is, Anyone who knows anything about politics will know that most of the revelations where already known. But what the leaks did do was solidify the fact that this info was also known by the governments and by their diplomats….if anything…it strengthened slightly the faith in diplomats as it actually meant that the lack of public commentary by the government officially wasn’t due to lack of info from the ground.  So in a sense the leaks where helpful to that affect as well as to alerting the general public of info known by a select few groups.

But another strong argument levied against the Wikileaks revelations was that the diplomats or people mentioned in the memo would be in danger off repercussions for simply voicing their opinion….this is of course a valid point …and it’s one of the issues I do feel that actually bare weight, names should be omitted because if its simply the information we seek who imparts it should be of no concern. I of course do acknowledge that Wikileaks did attempt to contact the US state department to attain their take on which names should be omitted but where rebutted….but nevertheless, some names are shown to be omitted though not all…which I think if addressed would help stem that aspect of the criticism.

Generally….the existence of Wikileaks or something similar to that effect is here to stay, this is something that cannot be stopped once it has started. And that should be viewed generally as more of a good thing then a bad as transparency is of course a vital aspect of democracy and if not applied leads the governments actions to go unchecked by the public and media…..well….I say media… but truly…the media in this day generally, not in all cases, is becoming more and more complacent and less and less intrusive…this is an affect we see more starkly in the US where Fox news is seen by the public to be the most ‘trustworthy’  source of news even though recent findings emerged to show that fox viewers, compared to any other US network, where more likely to be misinformed. Anyone outside the US *and even informed groups within the US* can clearly see that Fox is as trustworthy as a banker-with-anyone-else’s-money…..I don’t even need to expand on that analogy….you get the point….so with the advent of  internet sites like Wikileaks it’s an interesting twist on how news and checks on government activity will occur in the future….the internet will no doubt wrangle as many chains in the Journalistic world as it has in the music and film world.

Till Next time

 

Burn Baby Burn

Burn this burn that, these days it seems when words fail us a torch will do.  I know I know I’m a bit late in getting to this topic which has been buried and put to rest in the last couple of weeks. But this isn’t just a topic brought up by the recent Quran burning scandal, it’s one we see occurring time and time again, be it with a different item being burnt.

Since I am discussing this topic it would be bucking the trend *of the majority who have all thrown in their 2 pence worth* not to comment on the Quran burning issue. I’m surprised that this fact wasn’t sufficient to quell some of the drama > ‘Pastor’ Terry has said himself that he hasn’t EVEN read the Quran. That should be enough for the media to clearly establish that this guys argument should be given less weight than the opinion of a toddler on the middle east crisis. Now it hasn’t been clarified whether the fact he hasn’t read the Quran  is cause the fella can’t  read *which with a face like his I wouldn’t put it past him* or if it’s generally cause he’s a fool who doesn’t know the first thing about building a structured argument. Regardless of which of the two is true, ‘Pastor’ Terry *and calling him a pastor is giving him too much credit if you ask me* is a fool. And like a fool he has done wat fools before him have done and resorted to pure ‘sensationalism’ to make a point. Judging by how ‘intellectual the Neanderthal of a guy sounds’ *and yes I’m judging a book by its battered and barely their cover* I’m guessing he has just discovered fire and is keen to put his discovery to use. Nothing says Harvard graduate/ Ivy league professor like a man setting books on fire.

Now yes I do know he didn’t actually go through with it but to be honest I don’t think he had much choice. When Sarah Palin is saying what your doing is insensitive then you KNOW  shit has hit the fan and that you have reached a new low. I know it’s like pot calling kettle black but nonetheless, the pot is calling the kettle out on what it’s doing.

But this whole burning thing has gotten out of control. People these days think setting something on fire is a novel way of getting your point across. And those who defended ‘Pastor’ John’s actions by saying ‘well you see muslims in different parts off the world burning the american flag and effigy’s of leaders in protest’ or ‘muslims burnt the Salman Rushdie books when they came out in protest over their content and many of those shouting the loudest hadn’t even read the book’. Now firstly, what kind of argument is that? He jumps off a cliff so I might aswell jump off a cliff too. Not only that, but you ARE talking about america a place which claims to uphold the highest morals of liberty and justice and claims to be a beacon of hope to the world. So to try to par its domestic goings on to those of other countries which are in many cases third world countries and far from upright democracies is really just scrapping the bottom of a barrel for an argument.

It’s not to say that american people are all better than other people its just that if you as a country are going to impose your form of democracy and laws on other countries then you better well make sure these are at the highest standards they can be.

And the whole Salman Rushdie thing is also a case in point that two wrongs don’t make a right. To burn a book of his you’d have to acquire a book of his which would mean you’d BUY one and therefore he profits. Not a smart way to argue a point I’d say. And furthermore, for those who didn’t read the book and where shouting heresy they are just as ill-informed as ‘pastor’ Terry. The best way to make a point or argue a cause is to be WELL informed about what you’re arguing about, which at LEAST requires you to have read the book you so vehemently despise. By simply being swept so easily by the crowd’s sway without any rhyme or reason causes this increase in ignorance which usually leads to more hatred and conflict.

What we don’t need now is any more ignorant people, it’s about time reason made a comeback, I hear its way more flattering and becoming on a person than ignorance will ever be.

Till next time

 

Blair’s ‘personal memoirs’

I just don’t get people like Blair who choose to take up the mantle of political leader and adopt this quasi-humanitarian-warrior-ghandi-esq rhetoric and who fail to grasp the complexities of what it exactly entails to be a great leader. To be a great leader one doesn’t just have to lead and make the right choices but also BARE responsibility for those actions and decisions whether they turn out to be right or wrong.  We are all human and because of this fact we are all privy to making mistakes and being flawed. A great leader is someone who accepts this fact and embraces it and works to minimise the mistakes he makes whilst also admitting and apologising when he is wrong. It’s true what they say that it takes a great man to admit that he is wrong and this should be even truer in the case of politics where it seems hardly any leader is EVER wrong.

This whole episode of rambling comes about after I read some extracts from Tony Blair’s forthcoming memoirs. The issue that interests most people surrounding his leadership is the case for the war on Iraq. It’s what many people believe to be the biggest failing in his term in office and that which helped signal his slow demise. In his memoirs Blair does take about some regrets in his time in office, like for example, the fox-hunting ban *how one can suddenly be enlightened to the fact that savage dogs bloodily hunting a lone fox to its death for the mere sport and enjoyment of the upper class echelons is actually something that shouldn’t be banned goes beyond me, he might as well legalize dog baiting, cockfighting etc. to boot and call it a full house*.

On the war on Iraq however, with all the hindsight we have Blair still professes he has no regrets and if given the chance, would make the same exact decision. The evidence that Saddam clearly did not have weapons of mass destruction, *let alone ones he could detonate in 45 minutes*, the fact that Saddam did NOT have any ties to Osama Bin Laden and al-Qaeda and that BECAUSE of the invasion Iraq has become MORE dangerous rather than less, the fact that Iraq to say the least is in the throes of a civil conflict, the fact that Iran now is able to influence some of the political powers in Iraq which before it could not due to the animosity between Saddam and the Iranian regime, the fact that they prematurely waged war on Iraq before securing the threat and stability of Afghanistan therefore derailing and draining vital resources from Afghanistan, oh and the mere fact that Osama bin Laden himself has yet not been captured *yes we can fly to the moon, send satellites into outer space, build man-made islands etc, but finding one notorious man….we are still working on it* seems to not bother or hinder his conviction in that he was right in the least.

Lets not kid ourselves, if another war/offensive needed to be waged the place to wage it would be in the uncontrollable and ungovernable no mans land between Afghanistan and Pakistan where Osama bin Laden and his main operatives are rumoured to be seeking refuge.

But no, all these facts and details mean nothing to Blair because he BELIEVED it was his moral and god given right to invade Iraq to get rid of an evil dictator who as Blair has on countless times exclaimed, murdered his own people. Now Saddam’s brutality and blighted human rights records are by no means contested. He was an evil dictator to say the least, but what frustrates me is when Blair exclaims that now as a reason why he was toppled but back then the reason given was Saddam = Al Qaeda links + weapons of mass destruction….+ evil man. Two vital pieces where missing in the case for why we should go to war, yes one still stands but Blair has to admit that what took us to war was an inadvertent lie. So he SHOULD regret his decision because his case was and still is flawed. Military powerhouses don’t just go to war because of human rights breaches, as disheartening and as unfair as that fact is. Yes in cases of severe human rights breaches countries may go to war to ratify that, case in point being Bosnia, but that isn’t the case always, case in point the Rwandan genocide. The crimes Blair speaks of are crimes that occurred in the past i.e. gassing of his own people and the Iranians, and at a time where the west knew FULL well what was going on and STILL supplied Iraq with some of the chemicals used in creating these chemical weapons. And to just skim over the dictator part of his argument maybe Blair should look at neighbouring countries like Egypt, Syria, Saudi etc. where dictatorship seems to be an over glanced fact when it comes to their ties to the west.

My point is, if Blair is going to act like a Knight in shinning armour upholding the bastions of Human rights then he should just claim to be doing that and not pepper and season his argument to the people of the country with lies and untruths. If you believe strongly in something then that should be your argument. The least the people of Iraq who will bear the brunt of this war deserve is the truth to why they should burden this. The same goes for the soldiers who fight in this war and risks their lives for queen and country. And the same applies to the people you claim to serve who’s money through taxes goes to fund this war.

Not to mention the rising death toll of people killed in this war.

“It is the highest form of self-respect to admit our errors and mistakes and make amends for them. To make a mistake is only an error in judgment, but to adhere to it when it is discovered shows infirmity of character.”

Dale E. Turner

That is all for now,

Till next time

 

Re: Ground Zero Mosque

So regarding the last article I posted more information about the debate have emerged.  One of the most interesting ones is that in actual fact the so called Ground Zero Mosque is actually a Muslim community centre. This changes things greatly as what was once portrayed as being just a worshipping place for Muslims to go to is in fact something that is more community focused. The Community centre will have a basketball court, a memorial site for the 9/11 victims and other recreational facilities as well as a place to for Muslims to worship. So this begs the question what is so profoundly wrong with the building of this so called community centre two districts *which in American terms is a rite old road trip away* from Ground Zero?

The image portrayed by some news outlets in America made it seem like a Taj-Mahal proportionate mosque was being built on the foundations of ground Zero itself. It says a lot that it took quiet a while for the news to filter out that the proposed building was actually a Muslim Community Centre. Is the fact that its a Muslim community centre that bothers people? Even though this community centre has in itself a memorial for the victims of 9/11 which in itself stresses the community focused aspect of the structure. Or is it because there are prayer facilities for Muslims available that make this idea such a heinous one? How far away from ground Zero do you need to be able to practice your faith freely or in this case, be a Muslim?

This all leads me to believe that most of the opposition voiced on this issue are less concerned about the actual building but more concerned about opposing Muslims themselves. This is exactly what I was arguing against in the previous article and it is the real underlying issue here. For some the Community centre is just a prop to give them reason to voice their hate and ignorance. Proof being the recent protests against this building in new York where people began heckling a passer-by who happened to look like a Muslim i.e. had a beard and happened to be a man of colour wearing an unfortunate looking hat,  but who was in actual fact a carpenter. The carpenter throughout the confrontation stated he was not a Muslim but this fell on deaf ears and in the end he had to be escorted away for his own safety as the hecklers got more and more aggressive.

The most unfortunate thing of all are that those who where protesting where banding about signs that summed up the ignorance that some Americans today are left believing. Signs like ‘No mosque No jihad’  reflect the real problem here. Its the lack of clear and informed knowledge that is causing this uneasiness and fuelling this hate.   Even 24% of Americans a survey has found recently still believe Obama is a Muslim. This fear mongering and uncertainty is driving community’s apart and is causing more problems than solutions by increasing tension and hostility. Extremism comes in all forms shapes and sizes and you don’t have to have a bomb strapped around you to fit this criteria. Extremism in all its forms should be combated and that includes people who hold racist and bigoted views.  Fear and Ignorance compounded make up a lethal combination and this is being aided by right wing conservative politicians and networks like Sarah Palin, Fox News etc. who rather then address the facts as they are, are choosing to further cloud the water of the debate with misinformation to suit their own agenda.

But overall, I think this article sums up the debate about the ground zero ‘mosque’ more eloquently than me:

http://www.cracked.com/blog/3-reasons-the-ground-zero-mosque-debate-makes-no-sense/

‘The most violent element in society is ignorance.’  ~Emma Goldman

Till next time

 

Reclusive Genius

This story just fascinated me today:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/shy-maths-genius-leaves-million-dollar-prize-money-on-the-table-1928032.html

Though his motives are hard to ascertain I can’t help but feel a great sense of respect and awe towards him.

It goes to show that sometimes some people just do what they do through simple love of what they do and not just to attain fame and money.

You have to respect that, it’s not an easy task to do what he did, and once he did it, he spurned all the rewards that came with out. Its simply his perrogative.