BLOG POSTS

In these days of economic depression, high unemployment, and battles within Congress over spending cuts, it may come as some surprise to a few – those of us with something still working between our ears – that 34,000 of our US fellows have signed a White House petition demanding America build a ‘Death Star’.^[1]

Not being one of the herd obsessed by Hollywood’s “Star Wars” epics, I was a trifle perturbed to learn a ‘Death Star’ is a huge military machine armed with super-lasers, roaming around space and in the business of destroying whole planets.

Apparently, even if the US Congress were in favor of the idea – and, let’s face it, they’ve managed to approve a few crazy suggestions in their time – the cost, $850 quadrillion dollars, would be prohibitive.

That’s $850 thousand billion, or billiards, as they’re known by mathematicians. And, let’s face it, there’s a load of balls in this somewhere. Not at all, say the exponents of this lunacy, it would create jobs and strengthen defense.

Given that the US arsenal of nuclear weapons is sufficient to destroy this planet a hundred times over, and it’s just possible not too many folks would be queuing up to work in outer space, it may be the whole deal hasn’t been completely thought through.

But then, is anything given suitable consideration anymore? If it comes off the TV, or out of Hollywood, it must surely have merit. It’s how Americans appear to be educated. I don’t know why they bother to keep the schools open. Think how much money would be saved if the government fired all the teachers and professors and paid kids to stay home and learn from the “History Channel”, and the “Biography Channel”. They’d know all about ancient aliens and celebrity ghosts within a week.

And, let’s not forget, “The Learning Channel”. No, on second thoughts, forget I wrote that.

With a state subsidy, cinemas could be free to students; universities offer degrees in religious studies based on the, “Passion of the Christ”…

…and “The Devil’s Rock”…

…just so they get a nicely balanced view of the subject.

Ben Affleck’s “Argo” is the latest Hollywood effort attempting to educate young minds. It’s a tale of the 1979-81 Iranian hostage crisis, and ‘tale’ is the operative word. Mark Lijek, one of the US diplomats caught up in the crisis, likes the film but admits it’s way off the truth.

From the BBC:

…Argo’s final scenes are superbly tense, as the six make it onto the plane by the skin of their teeth. The CIA had given them false departure documents for which, of course, there were no matching arrival forms.

The big climax is a heart-pounding chase down the runway as gun-toting members of the Revolutionary Guard try to stop them taking off.

“Absolutely none of that happened,” says Mark.^[2]

It doesn’t matter. Hollywood hasn’t produced anything truly factual in its history. It’s a dream factory, designed to titillate and entertain. Which would be fine if Americans saw it in that light. Sadly, for many, it’s how they learn about life, history, and, yes, even religion.

Right now there’re 34,000 signatures on a White House petition to prove it.

^{[1] “US shoots down Death Star superlaser petition” BBC, January 12th 2013}

^{[2] “Argo: The true story behind Ben Affleck’s Oscar-nominated film” BBC, January 13th 2013}

It’s a source of constant amazement how Western nations, desperate to sow democracy throughout the world, happily trample that aim underfoot when dollar bills rear their ugly heads. Democracy, it seems, is far less important than Capitalism.

You didn’t really think they were one and the same, did you? Silly!

Take the latest atrocity perpetrated by that staunch ally and market trader with the West – Saudi Arabia.

From the BBC:

Saudi Arabia has beheaded a Sri Lankan domestic worker for killing a baby in her care in 2005 in a case that has been widely condemned by rights groups.

The maid, Rizana Nafeek, had denied killing the four-month-old boy.

Her supporters say she was only 17 at the time of the killing. They say her execution is a breach of international child rights.

The Sri Lankan government condemned the execution, which it said took place despite numerous clemency pleas.

The Saudi interior ministry said on Wednesday that Ms Nafeek was executed for smothering the infant after an argument with the child’s mother in the town of al-Dwadmi.^[1]

The argument here is not whether this girl committed the crime, though that is undoubtedly in dispute. She confessed under duress (read:torture) and was unable to understand the language sufficiently to know what she was confessing to.

The crux is a) that she was executed, and b) the execution was performed in an utterly barbaric manner.

Western nations, with the odd notable exception, have evolved beyond the archaic idea of, “an eye for an eye, etc.”. Even Texas draws the line at beheading.

This teenage girl, in a foreign country with a strange language, and without access to a lawyer, was committed to prison for five years never knowing if she was to live or die. Unhappily, it proved to be the latter.

BBC:

Human rights groups including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch (HRW) have criticised the Saudi authorities for their handling of the case, as have campaigners in Sri Lanka, who argue that there were also serious translation problems at the time she confessed to the crime.

They argue that her reported execution breaches the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child which Saudi Arabia has ratified.

“Saudi Arabia is one of just three countries that executes people for crimes they committed as children,” said senior HRW women’s rights researcher Nisha Varia,

“Rizana Nafeek is yet another victim of the deep flaws in Saudi Arabia’s judicial system.”

Is it too much to expect those nations with a supposedly deeper respect for humanity and justice than the likes of Saudi Arabia – a dictatorship masquerading as a monarchy – to take economic measures against these despotic regimes, to dissuade them from acting in such a barbaric fashion?

Apparently, it is.

Abdullah holds the key to Arabian oil wells. Saudi has recently placed an order with Britain for fighter aircraft worth billions of pounds. There’s been little mention of the sad fate of the Sri Lankan girl, Rizana Nafeek, in the Western press, and none in the American press. [Google: “Rizana Nafeek” and note how many US media websites carry the story. I found none in the first three pages.]

The doctrine of Capitalism, as we’re all learning, contains no regard whatever for human life – except, of course, when there’s a profit to be had.

^{[1] “Sri Lankan maid Rizana Nafeek beheaded in Saudi Arabia” BBC, January 9th 2013}

On this eve of the New Year, America should turn its attentions outward, for a change, towards that part of the United Kingdom known as Scotland. A land of rather good whiskey, weird men in skirts with a barely understandable brogue, and a habit of dancing around swords crisscrossed on the floor for the delight of tourists, is how this land is viewed by many in the United States.

As US politicians bicker and squabble over whether the rich should get wealthier as quickly as America’s poor lose their homes, they might spare a moment to learn how a government is supposed to govern. Scotland is an old country. America is still wet behind the ears, not yet ready to appreciate the benefits of learning from its elders. Perhaps now is a suitable time to begin the process.

From the BBC:

Legislation which aims to effectively end homelessness in Scotland has come into force.

The change entitles anyone finding themselves homeless through no fault of their own to settled accommodation.

Previously, only those classed as being in priority need – often families with children – had that right.

It meets Scotland’s historic 2012 homelessness commitment, first set 10 years ago by the Labour/Lib Dem government.

The change, passed unanimously last month under the Homelessness (Abolition of Priority Need Test) (Scotland) Order 2012, will give an estimated 3,000 more people a year the right to settled accommodation.

As the changes came into force, the deputy first minister also announced £300,000 would be spent over the next two years to help councils with their efforts to prevent homelessness.

Nicola Sturgeon [Deputy First Minister of Scotland] said: “This is a landmark day in the fight against homelessness.

“I know the heartache and trauma of homelessness from working closely with households faced with the prospect of losing the roof over their head.

“Meeting our 2012 commitment guarantees that those who lose their home from no fault of their own will be guaranteed settled accommodation.

“It is absolutely right to offer this guarantee in a time of crisis for people. It sends the signal that we are there to help, there is hope and that the state will do what it can.”

Official figures from February 2012 suggested the number of homeless people in Scotland is at its lowest for a decade.

Graeme Brown, director of the housing and homelessness charity ‘Shelter Scotland’, said: “Scotland can be very proud that it is making history by meeting the 2012 commitment – which is internationally regarded as the cutting edge of progressive homelessness reform.

“I congratulate all the local authorities who have made widespread changes in order to meet their new responsibilities to homeless people.”^[1]

This from, “The Hill”. It’s what US politicians are prepared to own up to:

[In America…] The odds for a person in the general population of experiencing homelessness in the course of a year are 1 in 194. For an individual living doubled up, [forced to live with relatives or friends] the odds are 1 in 12. For a released prisoner they are 1 in 13. For a young adult who has aged out of foster care, they are 1 in 11.”^[2]

In a year when more and more middle class American families have lost their homes to unscrupulous money men peddling worthless mortgages, many with no choice but live in their cars, isn’t the beginning of 2013 a good time for the corrupt, degenerate, narcissistic, politicians in Washington to turn towards Scotland for advice on how to properly govern a nation?

The ‘Fiscal Cliff’ is of little concern to the homeless. My guess is, as US politicians head home to their fancy houses and mansions to celebrate New Year’s Eve, the homeless are of little concern to them.

^{[1] “New rights for the homeless come into force” BBC, December 31st 2012}

^{[2] “Homeless in America: 636,017; Homeless veterans: 67,495 The Hill, February 1st 2012}