May is entertained by Salman of Saudi ~ April 5th 2017
I’ve been saying it for years. I’ve been writing about it for years. In fact, I’ve been doing so till I’m as blue in the face as that darned budgie staring balefully at you now from the top of the page. Finally, it seems someone has evidence of the truth. The BBC actually headlined it on their website this morning, but by this evening I couldn’t find it anywhere on the BBC. And, so far as I can tell, it never came up on the BBC news either.
(I did eventually locate it hidden away in the “UK Politics” section, somewhat subdued from the major headline of the morning).
When David Cameron was U.K. Prime Minister, he instigated a government investigation into who was funding terrorism in the U.K.. That investigation is, according to the present lot in power, “still ongoing.” It was due to be completed by last Easter. In fact Theresa May’s been sitting on it for the past six months.
According to the Independent:
Theresa May has been accused of burying a report about Saudi Arabian funding of Islamist extremism in the UK for fear it may damage relations with their ally.
The report, which was originally commissioned by David Cameron in January last year, was due to be completed by last Easter and is believed to have been in Mrs May’s possession for at least six months.
The study, which began while Mrs May was still Home Secretary, was designed to examine the origins and scale of funding of terror groups in the UK with an additional remit to follow international funding streams…
…Last month, a spokesman for the Home Office admitted to The Guardian that the report may never be published as its contents were “very sensitive”. [1]
However, today an independent report was published into the funding of terrorist groups in the U.K., by the Henry Jackson Society (a somewhat right-wing think-tank that originated in Cambridge University, U.K. but is headquartered in London). It was this the BBC reported on this morning – in big headlines on their front page.
According to the BBC:
Saudi Arabia is the chief foreign promoter of Islamist extremism in the UK, a new report has claimed.
The Henry Jackson Society said there was a “clear and growing link” between Islamist organisations in receipt of overseas funds, hate preachers and Jihadist groups promoting violence. The foreign affairs think tank called for a public inquiry into the role of Saudi Arabia and other Gulf nations…
…The Henry Jackson Society is a foreign policy think tank that advocates the robust spreading of liberal democracy, the rule of law and the market economy. Their report says a number of Gulf nations, as well as Iran, are providing financial support to mosques and Islamic educational institutions which have played host to extremist preachers and been linked to the spread of extremist material.
At the top of the list, the report claims, is Saudi Arabia, the UK’s closest ally in the Middle East and biggest trading partner. It alleges individuals and foundations have been heavily involved in exporting what it calls “an illiberal, bigoted Wahhabi ideology”, quoting a number of examples. [2]
Saudi Arabia tops the list as the biggest sponsor of terrorism, NOT Iran as the United States continues to insist, and it’s fairly certain that the government report Theresa May is refusing to publish states the same.
Isn’t it time a) May released that report so we may confirm what it says, and b) that she resigned from government for continually denying that the Arab nation she’s so politically entwined with is responsible for the deaths of numerous British citizens, and those of other nations, on the streets of the country she’s responsible for governing?
The world is obsessed with Donald Trump. It’s impossible to open any newspaper, turn to any news channel, or access any news website without Donald Trump leaping out at you from the front pages. For him it’s a feeding frenzy of narcissism. He’s loving it. He’s the most powerful narcissist in the world and every moment is sheer heaven to his sad little ego.
Why is he still president of the United States? He should be removed as unworthy to hold the office. He’s an embarrassment, a low form of humanity with an even lower mentality. He behaves like a three-year old bully in the kindergarten playground. Every single day he brings the Office of President into disrepute with his bizarre tweets and ugly comments. Also, by these actions he’s opening the door to military-style organizations like the NRA, to whip up hatred and violence with the potential for wide-spread civil strife, or even low-grade civil war. Earlier this week we had the latest NRA ad go viral on the internet:
Yesterday, the media was full of Trump’s latest ‘animated tweet’ in his bitter and obsessive struggle with CNN: [1]
This glorification of violence is further reinforced in one of his latest tweets, presumably aimed at inducing more nationalistic fervour on Independence Day:
GOD BLESS OUR NATION’S VETERANS & THE UNITED STATES OR(?) AMERICA!
America’s men & women in uniform is the story of FREEDOM overcoming OPPRESSION, the STRONG protecting the WEAK, & GOOD defeating EVIL! As long as our country remains true to its values, loyal to its heroes,&devoted to its Creator, then our best days are yet to come. Happy Independence Day! God bless our nation’s VETERANS & the U.S.A. [2]
Since 9/11 the United States has become a violent and divided nation, held in check until recently by the thin veneer of ‘civilization’ that managed to maintain its credibility in the world. Iraq 2003 changed all that. Iraq showed the world the true America, its military cold, calculating, arrogant, hellbent on pursuing the power-crazed ideals of its politicians and corporate leaders. Americans have conveniently wiped the name ‘Abu Ghraib’ from their memories. They’ve been fed false tales via Hollywood and their media, of brave, kindly souls in uniform battling evil and coming out victorious to the plaudits of the oppressed and abused.
The truth is very different. In Afghanistan, where civilians have suffered horrendous abuses by the U.S. military. In Somalia where an ignominious U.S. defeat at the hands of one warlord followed massacres of innocent civilians (later turned into a tale of brave heroes winning against overwhelming odds in the film ‘Black Hawk Down’). In Yemen, where U.S. support is enabling wholesale slaughter of civilians by U.S.-supplied Saudi warplanes, bombs, and missiles; in Syria, where once again civilian slaughter by the U.S. military is couched under the phrase, ‘collateral damage’.
The idea of the U.S. military as some sort of world guardian angel, a bevy of Supermen rushing to the aid of the unfortunate, has long been part of American myth translated into fact by calculated propaganda. By further perpetrating the myth Trump plays to the nationalistic fervour rampant among many Americans.
America is a violent nation awash with firearms. The divide between the political left and right grows ever wider by the day. Why not have Trump removed from office? The conflict of interest regulations enshrined in the U.S. Constitution DO NOT apply to a POTUS, but there’s one law that does. It’s in the Ethics Reform Act of 1989, and as a report last October in the Atlantic states:
…it prohibits any senior “noncareer officer” of the government from permitting his or her name to be “used” by any firm that “provides professional services involving a fiduciary relationship.” While the conflict-of-interest statutes exempt the president, the text of the use-of-name law does not, though its use in court would require the repeal of a 25-year-old executive-branch regulation that does exempt the president and vice president. As important, Congress explicitly said this statute was meant to ban the use of an officer’s name not only in traditional fiduciary-based firms, such as law partnerships, but in a range of other ventures including “real estate, consulting and advising, [and] architecture.” The U.S. Office of Government Ethics regulations that apply the law adopted this broad definition. [3]
So, if Congress was to repeal that 25-year-old executive-branch regulation they’d be free to impeach Trump over his business interests. Will they do so? It’s extremely unlikely. Firstly, Congress is awash with Republican senators right now, and while some of them aren’t happy with Trump they’d never get the numbers in a vote to support such an act.
Secondly, Congress is somewhat betwixt a rock and the proverbial hard place in that removing Trump from office could spark just the sort of civil unrest discussed earlier. Of course, if they leave him in control, all sorts of problems may develop. America could find itself at the heart of a potential world war. Trump is a loose cannon and there’s no way of knowing where the ball might land.
The nation that believes itself to be the ‘leader of the free world’ is in a hole. Trump is, undoubtedly, an embarrassment and potentially dangerous to the government he heads. He has support, and is financed, by a number of powerful, wealthy, people. They happen to be the same people to whom Congress has been bowing the knee for quite a long time – making laws in their favour, acquiescing to the demands of their lobbyists, etc..
The Congress of the United States of America has rather neatly hog-tied itself. It will likely do nothing, apart from making noises about committees to investigate Trump, blow smoke-screens about Russia, and huff and puff like the wolf after the three little piggies.
Unfortunately for them, and possibly for the rest of us, they’ll likely find Mister Trump’s house is made of something a bit more substantial than straw.
What have exorcisms in France got to do with an overturned oil lorry in Pakistan? Not a lot, is the immediate response, but maybe there is a connection. In Pakistan recently, a tanker carrying hundreds of gallons of fuel overturned after blowing a tyre. In excess of one hundred and fifty people died when the truck exploded as a passer-by lit a cigarette. [1]
Hearing of the tanker leaking fuel, people from all over the locality, and some from further afield, rushed with cooking pots, cans, and anything else capable of holding liquid, to salvage the leaking fuel for themselves. Most of them died when the tanker blew up.
It was a horrendous tragedy. The dead weren’t thieves, they were just poor, desperate people who saw the tanker accident as a gift from Allah. They were Muslims. It wouldn’t have mattered if they’d been Christian, or Hindu, or even Buddhist. They were still dirt poor, and their religious beliefs had done nothing to improve the bitter poverty of their existence.
A recent report in France reveals that more than three times the number of exorcisms are being carried out now, than was the case ten years ago. Most are conducted by the Catholic church. Because French people are less religious now they leave themselves open and vulnerable to diabolic attacks. At least, that’s what one Catholic priest told the newspaper printing the report.
In fact, there hasn’t really been any increase at all. What’s changed has been the numbers of cases identified as possession by the Devil, as opposed to other causes such as psychiatric illnesses. In some cases the church will have a psychiatric assessment done, or more likely, the priest relies on his own experience to diagnose the unfortunate sufferer.
It all smacks somewhat of medieval Europe, or maybe 21st century Pakistan. In both cases the people affected are under the control and dominance of a powerful hierarchical religious organization. And you can bet that the vast majority are poor, struggling, individuals with probably little in the way of education.
There’s no doubt that any original sense of moral purpose, humanity, or plain ‘goodness’, which may have been inherent in any of the major religions at their inception, has been usurped by the greed and quest for power of those charged with the responsibility of guiding and caring for its doctrines down through the ages.
In 21st century France, Pakistan, and throughout the world, religion is now no more than a tool of the marketeers, peddling heavenly immortality to anyone fool enough to be taken in by the glib tongues and promises of godly love in the next life, even if the one being lived today is squalid and purposeless.
The words of Mohammed, Jesus of Nazareth, or any of the other so-called “Divine Prophets” may have held a certain sense of comfort at one time (or, they may not), but today there’s no room for the originals in human society. All that’s spouted in the mosques and churches is twisted rhetoric, honed through the ages into tools of power and control over those who venture into these mausoleums of a bygone era.
Might the poor folk lying dead on the street in Pakistan have expected their prophet to at least provide them with sufficient for their needs so they’d not have to lose their lives filling a cooking pot with petrol? Might the mentally sick Catholics of France expect more of their god (and their church) than a priest informing them they’re possessed by Beelzebub?
Isn’t it time we buried these old superstitions once and for all? It takes only a modicum of intelligence to quickly conclude that the ‘devil’ only exists in celluloid cinema. Any cleric who says otherwise is either lying for his own nefarious purpose, or is, himself, in need of psychiatric medicine.
Of course, there is a modicum of insecurity behind this sudden influx of diabolic insemination in France. It’s a secular nation with a secular government. Separation of church and state is a reality, unlike certain other nations where its mere lip-service. The Catholic church fears its loss of power. “There’s a growing paganism,” said one French priest, “so the Devil is more at home.” Which is best translated, “We’re losing our control over the people, so we use the myth of the Devil to bring them back into the fold.”
Is there a place for religions in modern society, or is it time we recognised them for the myths they are and consigned them to the dustbin of history? It’s hard to argue there was ever any justification for their existence, except as a means to control the poor, disease-ravaged, peasantry of middle-ages England, or the 21st century peasantry of Pakistan. Life was/is so desperately hard for these people that some hope of a better life after death is probably the only belief that keeps them functioning. Let’s not forget that the mullahs, imams, priests, curates, vicars, bishops, archbishops, and pastors, peddling these myths are mostly living very nicely off their wares. The idea of giving all they own to the poor, somehow seems to have got lost in translation.
If, after reading this diatribe, you conclude the writer has a down on religion, you’d be right. He happens to believe the idea of immortality is total and utter bunkum. It works like this: okay, you have a crap life. You live in squalor, you have trouble feeding your family, you have to work at three really terrible low-paid jobs for eighteen hours a day to survive, your baby daughter has a terminal disease that can’t be treated because you can’t pay the hospital fees, your husband is serving ten years in prison for smoking a joint of marijuana while trying to gain a few moments of relief from the hell that is his life, and your house has just been repossessed. Don’t worry, because so long as you believe and come to our church, and leave a little something on the plate as you leave, Jesus/Allah/Hare Krishna/ will make it all up to you once you’re dead. Hang in there and don’t complain.
Doesn’t it truly sound like a load of bollocks? That’s because it is. If there was no religion we would all accept the inevitability of death as a personal ending. Carl Sagan, the great physicist, astronomer, poet, said of the concept of afterlife:
…it can be dangerous to believe things just because you want them to be true. You can get tricked if you don’t question yourself and others, especially people in a position of authority […] anything that’s truly real can stand up to scrutiny.
So let’s scrutinise. There is no evidence for human immortality. Not one shred. It’s a lie perpetrated by clerical conmen who are either themselves deluded, or out to deliberately delude others to their own ends.
Imagine for one moment the idea that we all believe in our own mortality. How might the world be different? Perhaps, we might not be so resigned to our own individual plights. We may be somewhat less agreeable to one person flying around in his private jet, while others had nothing. Just maybe our own lives, and by comparison those of others, may become more important to us. It could mean less wars, more concern for those less well off than ourselves, a more peaceful, understanding world. After all, if we all accepted our life on earth was all we have and death truly was the end, we just might be more accommodating to our neighbour, less tolerant of the inequalities in the world, and far less willing to allow our husbands and sons into a war-zone at the whim of power-crazed politicians.
Had this revelation come about a hundred years ago, it’s even possible 150 Pakistanis might be alive today, their standard of living such they’d no need to risk their one life for a gallon of petrol, and the Catholic clergy of France would have had to go out and find themselves a proper job.
Of course, there are those who will question this premise. To them the writer will say only this: in the two or three thousand years that religion has had a bearing on human life on this planet, name one time when factually i.e. not by myth, or twisted teaching, but using scientific evidence, there has been any great positive happening that can be subscribed solely to the influence, or effect, of religion.
Personally, while this writer can list a multitude of negative occurrences resulting from the effects of religion on human life: myriad religious wars, torture, the Inquisition, evil popery, persecutions, and in more modern times, ISIS, Sunni v. Shia, false lip-service by politicians to various ‘divinities’ to attract votes, etc, etc…balancing these often inhumane and barbaric acts with any positive effects of religion on humanity is frankly beyond him.
Religion and politics go hand in hand as institutions to control and brainwash the people. Of the two, religion is by far the most dangerous. Politics isn’t able to invoke a divine being to persuade the voters (though some politicians might consider themselves at least semi-divine!) but the churches hold over us the power of divine retribution versus an all-encompassing divine love, all dependent on how we behave here. At least, if we’re foolish enough to believe that tripe.
Until we break free from the yoke of religion the peasantry of Pakistan will continue to die in abortive attempts to procure the most basic items of survival in this, their only life. And the poor Catholics of France will carry on suffering diabolic possession, egged on by power-hungry clerics denying them the modern, psychiatric skills that would otherwise be their true salvation.
