Lines on A Line in the Sand

I was lucky enough to visit Jerusalem last year for work purposes, and it’s an amazing city with an incredible history, which is still being fought over in a conflict that’s hard to fathom.

Having now visited  and seen just how close three of the major religions of the world live, it strikes me no-one will ever solve that city or reach a compromise that could bring any real ever-lasting peace.

Such thoughts were reemphasised this week when I finished A Line in the Sand by James Barr. This was an excellent piece of engrossing historical writing about the problems caused by the British and French intervention in the Middle East dating back to the eve of the First World War when two diplomats, in that brilliantly awful high-and-mighty manner of the old era of colonial dictatorships, drew a line across a map and apportioned themselves a piece of the Middle East to manage, maintain and manipulate.

Of course, as in other areas, this didn’t go as smoothly as they’d hoped, especially when the locals realised they were being had. What was even more fascinating was the rivalry between the French and the British over the years that led to endless in-fighting and even the funding of local militia to covertly attack one another, even when they were supposed to be allies during the Second World War.

The research Barr must have undertaken is mind-blowing as not a paragraph goes by without a reference to a letter, some archived minutes, a newspaper article, a diaries and other first-hand sources he scoured to tell the story in minute and revealing detail. 

At school and university there was often a surface level debate about whether history was about the fates of people or nations i.e. should you study macro or micro history. What Barr does so well is tell both in an interlinked fashion.

So we see the frontline intrigues and personalities of those who shaped the history of the region, from TE Lawrence to Churchill to Truman as the household names we know, to the local gangs and tribes people, like Avraham Stern, while also seeing explaining the wider picture from the national and local interests of numerous competing groups and how their aims affected the actions of those on the ground, and vice versa. 

Highly recommended reading.

Films and books

I like reading books, I like watching films, I like watching films of books I have read.

I watched Remains of the Day on Sunday evening. Perfect film to end a hot British weekend. The book is a fantastic tale, told in sumptuous, almost hypnotic detail, about a repressed butler's all-too consuming devotion to his Lord played out against the world-changing issues of time: the rise of Nazism, British appeasement, and hugely rigid and highly-defined class layers.

The film was an excellent adaptation. Not quite as strong as the book, in ways you'd expect – a characters internal monologue can't be utilised directly, for example – but still full of excellent set pieces and subtle but strong scenes of pathos and anger.

Christopher Reeve was excellent too as a congressman at the hall, and subsequently the new owner. It was the first time I've ever seen him in anything other than Superman and I thought he was excellent.

On a similar note, I finished reading Brighton Rock. I didn't really enjoy it that much, truth be told. They're making a film of that for later this year, which will star Helen Mirren, so it will be interesting to see how that does and how closely it matches the book. I imagine they'll lose a lot of the repetitive religious mutterings that overtook the strong story the book begins with.

They also made a version some years back staring Richard Attenborough, which is meant to be good, so I might try and watch that first too.

Where was I?

Talking about planes. That's what I was doing. Sounds made up but it's true. Just about how great it would be to own a private jet so you could fly to London from Cornwall, rather than taking the train. Why we were actually talking about this though is beyond me now.

Then a call from across the common room and on to an entire afternoon of confusion, bewilderment. And this was for people in Cornwall so far removed from the epicentre. Yet the same reaction for people in Times Square, Beijing, Kiev, no doubt.

There were so many ridiculous things that happened that afternoon. We had to go to geography and on arriving I informed the teacher of what was taking place. He was disinterested and refused to put the television on. I urged him this was massive news, we should watch, so he relented and put it on silent. Half-way through learning about central business districts we noticed that the Pentagon had been hit too. Still nothing registered on the geography teacher.

The next day, as confusion still reigned, our English teacher scrapped his lesson plan to look at the Iraq war, and poetry inspired by it, to give us some context of maybe why the day before had happened. His understand was stark contrast to that of Mr Geography.

Strange days.

On the buses

The poor old bendy bus has had it rough in recent months. Indeed Boris Johnson based a lot of his campaigning on his desire to rid the city of London of this lumbering beast.

Now it finds itself once again caught in the cross-fire of a debate it probably didn’t ask to be in – the existence, or not, of God. Just a small one then. It all stems from the fact the British Humanist Association (BHA)are to run a series of ads on the buses rejecting the idea of God and telling people,"There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life." Which is fair enough.

But, of course religion will argue back, and Stephen Green of pressure group Christian Voice said: "Bendy-buses, like atheism, are a danger to the public at large.” Which is a great comparison: a bus whose merits are disputed and the unbelieving of a mythical sky creature who controls our lives and whose system of practice has caused millions of needless deaths and numerous wars throughout history.

He continued, “People don't like being preached at. Sometimes it does them good, but they still don't like it." Which is less great seeing as Mr Green is a rather odious man who is fond of preaching and telling people what to do.

It's the bus I feel for.

Pass the collection plate

The Pope has criticised the pursuit of wealth, again. As you can see from the picture on the BBC site, added here, he still likes carrying round that big gold cross, and wearing a rather ornate hat and all those robes, and living in the Vatican City. Ah, such piety.

Next they'll be criticising short-selling before admitting they use it in their accumulation of wealth, or pursuit of wealth, if you will.

Oh, wait, what?

Weird City

The Vatican’s list of new ‘Seven Deadly Sins’ is really odd. Here are the new sins:

Environmental pollution
Genetic manipulation
Accumulating excessive wealth
Inflicting poverty
Drug trafficking and consumption
Morally debatable experiments
Violation of fundamental rights of human nature

So: Environmental pollution – ok, they’ve got EVERYONE here, except for some tribes somewhere in the Amazon, maybe. So it doesn't really count.

Genetic manipulation – apart from a few select doctors in top-notch research facilities, this doesn’t concern the vast majority.

Accumulating excessive wealth – clearly the Vatican hasn’t heard of Student Loans, Council Tax, Gas Bills and so on.

Inflicting Poverty – see above.

Drug trafficking and consumption – most people don't do that unless tea / coffee / alcohol count?

Morally debatable experiments – seeing how long you dare leave the washing up until the mould becomes a life form? (Which I suppose is a form of genetic manipulation).

Violation of fundamental rights of human nature – ok well now I am totally lost.

So unless you’re a gene research scientist, who trafficks cocaine for massive profit at the exploitation of others on the side, and you occasionally carry out experiments that are against the laws of nature on other human beings against their will, then I think you’re alright.

Giving Science a Bad Name

Tom Cruise really scares me. It’s the misplaced belief and sense that his conviction seems worryingly ‘extreme’ that gets me the most. And the news about this leaked video just makes everything even more, well, sinister.

Regardless of the fact he is a film-star, celebrity, actor, etc if you just look at him and realise he actually ‘believes’ not only in the idea of Scientology, but also clearly ‘believes’ in his own conviction as a Scientologist, then it’s a bit disturbing.

If a man who seemingly ‘has it all’ can be turned on to something as strange as Scientology what hope can we have for people who are desperate for a direction, any direction, and who might well be susceptible to the weird propaganda or recruiting techniques these people may or may not have.

What price Britney Spears a Scientologist by the end of 2008?

Title

And?

This is quite a badly written piece as well by the BBC journalist and the same four-line quotation is repeated twice in five paragraphs. If the Beeb does have to sack 1,800 journalists, and if Jonathan Ross really is worth 18 million, then this writer could well find themselves clearing their desk.

God Bothering

I’ve read some pretty barmy stuff in my time but I think this story about a judge in India ‘summoning’ two Hindu Gods to help in a legal dispute is the most preposterous and ridiculous thing I might have ever read. It is made all the more brilliant by the BBC’s utter lack of humour and completely straight reporting.

When you look at the details of the story it takes on an even higher levels of incredulity. I quote: “The gods have been asked to appear before the court on Tuesday, after the judge said that letters addressed to them had gone unanswered.”

The letters went unanswered? How surprising. But the reasons for this are that, “Judge Singh sent out two notices to the deities, but they were returned as the addresses were found to be "incomplete".

What on earth ‘did’ he put on the envelopes?

So he has taken out an advert in newspapers – because all deities read the news – although surely being Gods, they know everything anyway? Unperturbed the notice states:

"You failed to appear in court despite notices sent by a peon and later through registered post. You are hereby* directed to appear before the court personally.”

That will definitely work.

The year 2007 – legal disputes between Gods and priests – letters and adverts to the Gods asking them to appear in person in court sent by a judge – unbelievable.

-------

*The spelling on the BBC website is herby.

Contradictions

The recent furore surrounding Salman Rushdie's knighthood has thrown up some bizarre contradictions that those "outraged" don't seem to realise. The First Deputy Speaker Mohammad Reza Bahonar in Iraq was quoted as saying, "The British monarch lives under this illusion that Britain is still a 19th Century superpower and that bestowing titles is something still deemed important." - So if it isn't important any more why are they all getting so annoyed?

And then the Pakistani religious affairs minister said, "If someone commits suicide bombing to protect the honour of the Prophet Mohammad, his act is justified." - So which is more evil and more worthy of condemnation? Writing numerous books which bring pleasure to millions or condoning suicide bombers purely on the basis someone disagrees with your 'belief'?

But since when do people like this ever stop and think for themselves before they open their mouths to spout violent rhetoric against things they don't really understand?

A News Link

Religion yet again shows it's ugly side

Some Good Writing

A very controversial post attacking Mother Teresa here.

And an even better article here published after those anti-Islamic cartoons caused controversy after being published by a newspaper in Denmark.

Incidentally both are written by Christopher Hitchens.