Wednesday, August 12, 2015

Congress’ Test of Allegiance: US or Israel?

Consortium News, August 12, 2015
 
Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has instructed the U.S. Congress to reject an international agreement constraining Iran’s nuclear program and to humiliate the sitting U.S. president, thus testing where the primary allegiance of most members of Congress lies, with the U.S. or Israel, writes John V. Whitbeck.

By John V. Whitbeck

The choice facing members of the U.S. Congress in September’s “disapproval” votes could scarcely be clearer and has little to do with the merits of the international agreement reached on July 14 with respect to Iran’s nuclear program.

Whether one believes that there was a genuine risk of Iran attacking Israel with a nuclear weapon or, more sensibly, that there was a genuine risk of Israel attacking Iran with conventional or nuclear weapons (the real and only rational reason for the mobilization of the European Union, the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany on this issue), the “Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action” reached in Vienna should vastly reduce the risk of a catastrophic war involving Iran and Israel.

Continues >>

Saturday, August 08, 2015

Did God speak to the former US President G. W. Bush? Some reflections

Nasir Khan, August 8, 2015

“God speaks through me. Without that, I couldn’t do my job.”
 — George W. Bush, quoted in Lancaster New Era, July 16, 2004
Such was the claim of the former US President. He said this after the US armed forces had invaded and occupied two large countries, Afghanistan and Iraq. At that time, he was the most powerful leader of the mighty militarist superpower as well as a ‘divinely’ elevated person because God communicated with him. To my knowledge, in modern history we do not find another instance when a mortal man and the immortal God joined forces for U.S. to unleash two destructive wars! However, the implications of his pronouncements had a direct bearing on his political stature and his policies. Even though, he made his policies and issued his executive orders with the help of his close neoconservative advisers and secretaries but in doing so he was doing God’s work. God was speaking through him; therefore, God mandated whatever he did. God had chosen the right man to do His work!

If we accept the claims of divine guidance, for the sake of argument, that he, in fact, made on many times, then we can point to the results he achieved by his genocidal wars. Under his leadership, the US armed forces invaded and occupied Afghanistan and Iraq in the most brutal way. They killed hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis and Afghans who had no quarrel with the people of the United States or posed any threat to the global U.S. hegemony and power. The destruction of Iraq was systematic. The Bush administration undertook the destruction of Iraqi state and its infrastructure as a necessary step to imposing the imperial diktat in the Middle East. It uprooted the social and administrative structure of Iraq and replaced it with sectarian puppet regimes that followed the orders of Washington and the Pentagon.

To make the imperial take-over easy and to neutralise any resistance to the new geopolitical order in this vast and oil-rich country, imperial masters used sectarian discord of the population as a convenient tool. How did it matter to Bush if Sunni and Shia turned against each other and started terrorist violence against their own people – the people of Iraq? Religious fanatics and miscreants were free to weaken Iraq while the occupiers could have an easy task to control the country and its resources. Thus, the US occupation could continue with greater ease while the country was drenched in bloodshed and mayhem that is still going on.

Through his destructive policies in the occupied Iraq, the Bush administration destabilised the whole region and played with the lives of millions of Iraqis by reducing them to destitution, poverty, homelessness and helplessness. The rampant killings in Iraq have claimed the lives of uncountable victims. In the first 7 years of US occupation, about 1.3 million Iraqi died. The main source of this incredible catastrophe that engulfed Iraq in 2003 was the US invasion. The ultimate responsibility of the present cycle of violence and bloodshed remains with Mr Bush.

Mr Bush’s military invasion and occupation of Afghanistan resulted in large-scale deaths of Afghans. The brutal treatment of the prisoners of war and the innocent victims in the process of occupying Afghanistan is a dark chapter in the history of twenty-first century. The occupying power violated the Geneva Conventions regarding the treatment of prisoners of war, international humanitarian conventions and all norms of international law. All this happened because God said to Bush to do so! In fact, this is a preposterous assertion that even Al Capone would not have resorted to! Let us take a common sense view of his claim and its consequences. What that means is that the former president is not responsible for the wars and war crimes but someone else is! In legal terms, he is implying that God is vicariously responsible for his wars and war crimes. In this way, he absolves himself of any responsibility for his actions and his policies as the head of US Government! A very convenient but cheap method to deceive the world, no doubt!

There is no need for us to enter into any lengthy theological discourse on God and his attributes. It is common knowledge that most believers see God as a kind, merciful and loving power. For having such attributes, believers hold Him in high respect and praise Him. It is hard to think that the Heavenly Father, as Christians call God, could have asked or encouraged Mr Bush to start major wars of aggression and commit the most heinous crimes against other weaker nations in this century. In brief, to impute such designs to God or because of fulfilling a mission from God is a reprehensible act on the part of Mr Bush. In the eyes of any sincere believers, he is maligning God in a vicious way if he believes in Him as he seemingly professes to do.

Alternatively, what if he really believed in what he asserted about God? That is something, which we can look at cursorily from a legal point of view. In criminal law, the actions of the alleged offenders are primarily judged for the mens rea – that is, their state of mind and intentions when they committed some indictable offence. In some cases, they are entitled to the defence of diminished responsibility or diminished capacity if their mental condition was impaired in such a way that they did not fully understand what they did. If such a defence is successful, the accused are given mitigated sentences or sent for medical treatment, depending on the gravity of offences involved. In an old case of acute insanity, one person beheaded a sleeping man just to see what he would do when woke up in the morning but didn’t find his head!

There are many cases when people hear sounds or messages from some unknown sources exhorting them to do something that may amount to a criminal offence. A hallucination is a perception that is not based on objective reality. It is very much a subjective condition of mind and in this condition, people may see or visualise things that having nothing to do with reality. In this age, we come across cases when some people say they have heard God or God has given them some message. If Mr Bush is sincere in his claims about God speaking to him, then that is something for which only the professional psychologists can offer their expert views.

In case a judicial miracle (which I don’t see taking place!) takes place and the world sees the former US president, G.W. Bush, being prosecuted for his wars and the alleged war crimes in a court of law then the question of hallucinations would certainly be an issue in any legal process. However, facts point to a different direction: That he acted with deliberation and premeditation in pursuing his policies and his destructive wars.

Wednesday, August 05, 2015

Believers can become a force for the common good

Nasir Khan, August 5, 2015

Among my friends are both believers and non-religious people. My believing friends include Muslims, Christians, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists and Bahais, etc., who follow different traditional theologies of their respective religions. Through my interaction with vast number of people, I have come to realise that they can be a great force for the common good if they acknowledge the rights of others to follow their religions and religious traditions as long as these do not constitute a threat to society or violate acceptable social norms.

As a small step to peaceful relations between people and advance the cause of social understanding , I ask all my Facebook friends, who are believers, to be generous to each other and to all others, and say that all of them are right to believe in their versions of god! If there is only one god, called by different names in different religions and cultures, as many believers believe, then all old and new controversies and disagreements about Him become baseless. An apple remains an apple even though different languages have a different word for it.

Consequently, we can safely assume that the believers of one religion have no real problem with the believers of other religions. Their historical feuds and conflicts have been caused more by misunderstandings and misperceptions than anything else. In other words, there is no real problem among the believers. They are all members of one big human family, worshipping and praising the same god.

The message of tolerance and concern for the interests of all, irrespective of their religions and creeds, is old; many sages and thinking people have proclaimed it in all ages and epochs. One great example of such a noble thought is found in the edicts of the Indian Emperor Asoka the Great (r. 273-232 B.C.). His Twelfth Edict says:

“His Sacred Majesty honors both ascetics and the householders of all religions, and he honors them with gifts and honors of various kinds. But [he] does not value gifts as much as he values this – that there should be growth in the essentials of all religions. Growth in essentials can be done in different ways, but all of them have as their root restraint in speech, that is, not praising one’s own religion, or condemning the religion of others without good cause. And if there is cause for criticism, it should be done in a mild way. But it is better to honor other religions for this reason. By so doing, one’s own religion benefits, and so do other religions, while doing otherwise harms one’s own religion and the religions of others. Whoever praises his own religion, due to excessive devotion, and condemns others with the thought ‘Let me glorify my own religion,’ only harms his own religion. Therefore contact (between religions) is good. One should listen to and respect the doctrines professed by others. The Sacred Majesty desires that all should be well-learned in the good doctrines of other religions.”

In this edict there is much food for thought for believers of all religions.

Monday, August 03, 2015

PAKISTAN: No place for slum dwellers — Asian Human Rights Commission

Asian Human Rights Commission,  July 31, 2015

In urban planning, slums are thought of as a tumor; an alien growth that can risk the overall development of an urban mega project. The notion ignores the fact that the labor force needed to materialize the urban dream often comes from this underbelly, which provides shelter to lives lived in the shadow of ostentation. Militancy, terrorism, natural calamity, and operation against militants, are driving mass migration to the cities of Pakistan at an unprecedented rate.

According to UN Habitat report, in 2000, nearly 50 percent of Pakistan’s most populated city, Karachi, lived in slums. Around 40 million of Pakistan’s urban population lives in katchi abadis, where they are deprived basic facilities like water, sewerage and electricity.
Islamabad, the capital, has witnessed mass migration from other provinces, particularly from Khyber Pakhtunkhuwa (KPK), following operation Zarb-e-Azab that intends to root out militants. Those evicted so have turned to urban centers for job opportunities and better educational facilities for their children.

Continues >>

Wednesday, July 22, 2015

Science, Magic and Truth

Nasir Khan, July 22, 2015

The reality of something is also the truth about it. Therefore, the reality of something and the truth about that thing are not two different things. The question is: How do we know the truth about something? The answer is: In the correspondence of any propositions/statements we make with the facts. If there is no such correspondence, then there is something lacking in the propositions we make when they cannot be validated. But there is a rational method rooted in empiricism to approach the facts about a given entity that ultimately may be the reality of that thing.

If we don’t get bogged down in irrational claims (magic and miracles included) on which any proposition is based to find the ‘reality’ of something, then we stand on some firmer ground when our propositions can be validated by corroborative evidence. If we don’t do that then we remain mired in the mud of confusion and make-believe fantasies. Science and magic cannot be put in the same category as both being ‘means to approach reality’. However, magic, miracles and fairy-tales are interesting and entertaining but they have nothing to do with what constitutes public knowledge about the reality of something.


NATO is used by the US to exert pressure on Europe. Here’s how it’s done

July 20, posted by Morning Star in Features
 
ALAN MACKINNON explains how the military alliance is geared to promote Washington’s interests

IN MY previous article (Nato is the menace not Russia, M Star June 20) we examined the case study of Ukraine and discussed the rapid expansion of Nato over the past 20 years.
In this piece we focus on how the United States exercises its power over Europe — and why.

Firstly, it is often asserted that Nato is a purely defensive alliance.

Certainly, the original Washington Treaty which established Nato in 1949 was framed as a mutual defence pact with the emphasis on defence, security and protection.

Yet the reality of recent practice is different.

Over the past two decades an enlarged Nato has fought wars against a range of adversaries on three continents. None of these was in response to any threat to its members in Europe or North America.

Continues >>

Tuesday, July 14, 2015

No scientific evidence of GM food safety: Norwegian Govt Study

By   OpEdNews 7/14/2015,  Permalink
 
Reprinted from medium.com

From flickr.com/photos/68859904@N02/8854166005/: March Against Monsanto Salt Lake City, UT 5.25.13 March Against Monsanto Salt Lake City, UT 5.25.13
(image by SarahBethB1)   License   DMCA
A new study commissioned by the Norwegian government, and conducted by a nationally recognised scientific authority on the safety of biotechnologies, concludes that available scientific data on GM crops is inadequate to prove their safety.

Absence of evidence

The new study analyses a dossier by giant agribusiness conglomerate, Monsanto, submitted to the Brazilian government, and also conducts a comprehensive review of the available scientific literature from other sources.

Its focus is on Monsanto’s GM soybean Intacta Roundup Ready 2 Pro, which is grown in Brazil, and also authorised in Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay, and probably also present in Bolivia due to illegal introductions from neighbouring countries.

 The report, titled ‘Sustainability Assessment of Genetically Modified Herbicide Tolerant Crops’ concludes that due to major gaps in the scientific literature, it is not possible to give a scientific verdict on their safety. Monsanto’s dossier, the report concludes, demonstrates a range of methodological weaknesses, and highlights the problem of incomplete information and research on GM crops in the available literature.
 
According to Monsanto, genetically modified organisms do not harm human or animal health, and therefore do not have any adverse effects on crops and the environment.