By Ekow Mensah
 |
| Ghanaian President John Dramani Mahama |
It happened in very strange circumstances.
Accra woke up one early morning and plagues
had been affixed to the seat of Government announcing a reversal to its
original name “Flagstaff House”.
The uproar was to be expected. The
previous administration had renamed the huge edifice which used to house
Osagyefo Dr Kwame Nkrumah “Jubilee House” apparently in
celebration of the 50th
anniversary of Ghana’s independence.
Pro-Nkrumah forces somehow saw the change to
Jubilee House as a continuation of the effort by those responsible for the CIA
sponsored coup of 1966 to destroy all the reminders of the glorious days of the
Osagyefo.
They recalled the fact the
Parliament sat under a certificate of urgency to make the possession and
distribution of photographs of Nkrumah a criminal offence.
In addition books by Nkrumah and
about him were set ablaze in huge fires on University campuses and activists of
the Convention People Party (CPP) were banned from contesting elections and
holding public office for 10 years.
 |
| Late President John Evans Atta Mills |
The re-appearance of “Flagstaff
House” sounded like sweet victory for those seeking to correct a historical
injustice and to reaffirm their belief that somehow one day Nkrumah would be
restored to his proper place as the Founder of the modern democratic republic
of Ghana.
It is amazing how little things can
assume historical and political prominence.
President John Evan Atta Mills whose
vice President was John Dramani Mahama was seen then to have made huge
political statement by simply changing the name of the power house of Ghana
politics.
It is even reasonable to assume that
some Nkrumaist and progressive elements threw their weight behind the Mills
administration because it appeared that the Nkrumaist revival movement was on
the move.
Then early this week, President
John Dramani Mahama’s administration
changed the name again from “Flagstaff
House” to “ Jubilee Flagstaff House”
sending mixed signals all over the peace.
The first question which popped up
was, could this change of name be important at a time when the country is suffering the
effects of a power and water crisis?
There were many other questions.
Could this have been an attempt to divert
attention from the numerous problems facing all Ghanaians at the time?
Was President Mahama distancing himself from
his former boss and sending a message of reconciliation to the Danquah- Busia
tradition which has refused to acknowledge the fact that he won the 2008
elections?
 |
| The Flagstaff House |
What did President Mahama, a son of
a Minister in the Nkrumah Government want to achieve by a move said by many to
lack logical and political substance?
First, the rebuilding of the
Flagstaff House was done or completed not in the jubilee year but in 2008.
Secondly, the renaming of the Flagstaff House
has never been a major or substantial
demand of the opposition which is
battling President Mahama in court over his legitimacy.
Indeed, only extreme naivety can even remotely
suggest that by renaming the “Flagstaff House” the opposition will abandoned
what it sees as it legitimate and legal
obligation to bring the presidency of John Dramani Mahama to an end.
The bigger question on the lips of many
loyalists of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) is has President Mahama
betrayed Professor Mills again?
EDITORIAL
Pleasing Who?
Perhaps it is time for somebody to
tell President John Dramani Mahama that the only way he can please the New
Patriotic Party (NPP) is to step down and recognize Nana Addo Dankwa Akuffo-Addo
as the new President of Ghana.
The distortion of history and other deliberate
moves aimed at appeasing the Danquah- Busia elements will simply not be enough
for the NPP.
On the other hand such appeasement
only serves to alienate the President from his traditional base and weaken his
defences.
If the President wants to pursue his
mandate, then he ought to realize that there is only one way forward for him-
truth and commitment to principles.
Is the president listening?
Where is
President Rawlings’s autobiography?
 |
| Former President Jerry John Rawlings |
Almost 13 years after leaving office after 19
years in power, President Rawlings has not written a single book on his
momentous political life!
Five years post presidency, President Kufuor has failed to write a single word on what influenced the major decisions of his tenure!
President John Mills— four years as Vice President, four as President. Dead! No autobiography! Vice President Aliu Mahama— eight years in office. Dead! Without a book. Justice Daniel Francis Annan—for eight years, Speaker of Parliament and an experienced political hand. Dead! No autobiography! Peter Ala Adjatey—four years, Speaker of Parliament and past leader of a major political party. Dead! Without a book. Major Courage Quashigah, probably the only first class US Army- trained ranger, national party organiser, and Minister of State for eight years. Dead! No book!
How many more of our leaders are waiting to die without sharing their experiences with a younger generation? How many are woefully failing in their social obligation to prevent avoidable governance pitfalls with carefully documented historical accounts to be learned from!
William Jefferson Clinton left office in the same year as Jerry Rawlings. Within four years, “My Life” was published. When Clinton decided to dedicate his post presidency to so-called citizen activism, he went beyond the traditional presidential library and formed the Clinton Global Initiative.
Within three years of “My Life”, he published his second book, “Giving: How Each of Us Can Change the World.” Vice President Al Gore; within six years of losing the presidency, released “An Inconvenient Truth” in which he argued that, “The truth about the climate crisis is an inconvenient one …” George Walker Bush Jnr, his foibles in Iraq and Afghanistan notwithstanding, wrote “Decision Points” within two years of leaving office, reflecting on the major decision points that defined his presidency. Tony Blair, his British conspirator, also reflected on “A Journey”. Vice President Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Barack Obama, and even Monica Lewinsky have all shared something with us!
Five years post presidency, President Kufuor has failed to write a single word on what influenced the major decisions of his tenure!
President John Mills— four years as Vice President, four as President. Dead! No autobiography! Vice President Aliu Mahama— eight years in office. Dead! Without a book. Justice Daniel Francis Annan—for eight years, Speaker of Parliament and an experienced political hand. Dead! No autobiography! Peter Ala Adjatey—four years, Speaker of Parliament and past leader of a major political party. Dead! Without a book. Major Courage Quashigah, probably the only first class US Army- trained ranger, national party organiser, and Minister of State for eight years. Dead! No book!
How many more of our leaders are waiting to die without sharing their experiences with a younger generation? How many are woefully failing in their social obligation to prevent avoidable governance pitfalls with carefully documented historical accounts to be learned from!
William Jefferson Clinton left office in the same year as Jerry Rawlings. Within four years, “My Life” was published. When Clinton decided to dedicate his post presidency to so-called citizen activism, he went beyond the traditional presidential library and formed the Clinton Global Initiative.
Within three years of “My Life”, he published his second book, “Giving: How Each of Us Can Change the World.” Vice President Al Gore; within six years of losing the presidency, released “An Inconvenient Truth” in which he argued that, “The truth about the climate crisis is an inconvenient one …” George Walker Bush Jnr, his foibles in Iraq and Afghanistan notwithstanding, wrote “Decision Points” within two years of leaving office, reflecting on the major decision points that defined his presidency. Tony Blair, his British conspirator, also reflected on “A Journey”. Vice President Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Barack Obama, and even Monica Lewinsky have all shared something with us!
 |
| Former Ghanaian President John Agyekum Kufuor |
What makes their leaders routinely document their learning and move on to new
conquests while some of ours sometimes appear only too happy to remain slaves
of past glories and too scared to embrace a new future?
The conduct of President Rawlings’ post presidency is especially less than impressive, especially where documenting his reflections on momentous national events of historical significance are concerned. Kufuor’s shortcomings in not writing a book notwithstanding, he seems to have a clear plan with his foundation. But still, both they and others painfully refuse to write. Is it selfishness? Is it lack of awareness of its importance? Is it lack of adequate technical support? Is it for fear that we will not read? Whatever the reason, a lot of our leaders have woefully failed to prioritize this.
Some leaders, desirous of documenting their legacies, have, perhaps, either found inspiration in or been intimidated by Singaporean leader Lee Kuan Yew, reputed for moving underdeveloped Singapore, bereft of so called natural resources, “From Third World to First” over a 35 year period. What they lacked in natural resources, they more than made up for in what Henry Kissinger called “superior intelligence, discipline, and ingenuity.”
Today, Lee Kuan Yew’s book appears to have become standard reference text for students of transformational leadership. Would this have been possible had he not taken the painstaking trouble to document his views, experiences and his learning? Mandela took us on a “Long Walk to Freedom” while Nkrumah gifted us an entire golden collection.
The conduct of President Rawlings’ post presidency is especially less than impressive, especially where documenting his reflections on momentous national events of historical significance are concerned. Kufuor’s shortcomings in not writing a book notwithstanding, he seems to have a clear plan with his foundation. But still, both they and others painfully refuse to write. Is it selfishness? Is it lack of awareness of its importance? Is it lack of adequate technical support? Is it for fear that we will not read? Whatever the reason, a lot of our leaders have woefully failed to prioritize this.
Some leaders, desirous of documenting their legacies, have, perhaps, either found inspiration in or been intimidated by Singaporean leader Lee Kuan Yew, reputed for moving underdeveloped Singapore, bereft of so called natural resources, “From Third World to First” over a 35 year period. What they lacked in natural resources, they more than made up for in what Henry Kissinger called “superior intelligence, discipline, and ingenuity.”
Today, Lee Kuan Yew’s book appears to have become standard reference text for students of transformational leadership. Would this have been possible had he not taken the painstaking trouble to document his views, experiences and his learning? Mandela took us on a “Long Walk to Freedom” while Nkrumah gifted us an entire golden collection.
 |
| Justice Daniel Francis Annan |
Various strategies have been deployed by some of these leaders in their unquenchable
quest to write for younger generations amidst busy schedules. Fundamental to
these strategies has been the deployment of research assistants and writers to
assist these former presidents dig through voluminous government materials and
minutes of crucial meetings, etc.
The research for Yew’s book took almost five years. If the country truly values the documentation of historical events through the eyes of principal actors in those events, then there would be the need to facilitate the writing of same. This may take the form of a supporting secretariat of writers and researchers.
Clinton wrote long hand in 22 big note books, leaving gaps where further research/fact check was needed. Assistants then filled it up, printing outputs for his edits. Hettie Jones co-wrote “My Life with Bob Marley” with Rita Marley in the latter’s words.
This is much the same way that Alex Haley, through extensive interviews with Malcolm X, enabled Malcolm X to write his autobiography as “told to Alex Haley.” So, our leaders can sit with writers and talk through the various chapters while it is recorded on tape for later transcription and editing.
Kwame Nkrumah had an energized private secretary who, for want of a better word, was especially relentless. Erica Powell continuously hounded the Osagyefo while in office to complete his books. Perhaps, this is one of the reasons for Nkrumah’s prolific writing; Powell will herself take notes and advance the book project.
The research for Yew’s book took almost five years. If the country truly values the documentation of historical events through the eyes of principal actors in those events, then there would be the need to facilitate the writing of same. This may take the form of a supporting secretariat of writers and researchers.
Clinton wrote long hand in 22 big note books, leaving gaps where further research/fact check was needed. Assistants then filled it up, printing outputs for his edits. Hettie Jones co-wrote “My Life with Bob Marley” with Rita Marley in the latter’s words.
This is much the same way that Alex Haley, through extensive interviews with Malcolm X, enabled Malcolm X to write his autobiography as “told to Alex Haley.” So, our leaders can sit with writers and talk through the various chapters while it is recorded on tape for later transcription and editing.
Kwame Nkrumah had an energized private secretary who, for want of a better word, was especially relentless. Erica Powell continuously hounded the Osagyefo while in office to complete his books. Perhaps, this is one of the reasons for Nkrumah’s prolific writing; Powell will herself take notes and advance the book project.
 |
| Osagyefo Dr Kwame Nkrumah |
After the Osagyefo, the only other high profile Ghanaian political leader to
have bothered to write anything has been the then Vice President John Dramani
Mahama with his “First Coup d’Etat.”
In it, he writes eloquently about Africa’s “lost decade,” describing how “For many individuals, there is a moment that stands out as pivotal to the awakening of their consciousness. Often, that moment can feel like a harbinger of disaster: the first tremors of an earthquake or rains of a hurricane, the eruption of civil war or riots. An assassination or a coup d’etat. It is a moment that serves as the line of demarcation, separating the certainty of what was from the uncertainty of what lies ahead. It is a moment in which you suddenly become aware of who you are; you become aware of the fragility and unpredictability of the world in which you live. Ghana’s descent into the “lost decades” began with such a moment, with the coup d’etat that unseated our first president, Dr Kwame Nkrumah. When I look back on my life, it’s clear to me that this moment marked the awakening of my consciousness.”
An aha! moment if ever there was one!
Fortunately, it is not only President John Mahama who gives us hope about a newer crop of leaders who do not fear to document their stories. An even younger generation inspires greater hope: Robert Nii Arday Clegg’s, (first class political science and philosophy student and the 2004 best graduating law student) “10 Strategies for Making Top Grades At The University”; Dr. Yaw Perbi’s numerous books on Christian leadership, finance and investment; journalist Ato Kwamina Dadzie’s “Pretending To Be President” and whatever book the grapevine maintains the intelligent broadcaster Bernard Avle is writing.
In it, he writes eloquently about Africa’s “lost decade,” describing how “For many individuals, there is a moment that stands out as pivotal to the awakening of their consciousness. Often, that moment can feel like a harbinger of disaster: the first tremors of an earthquake or rains of a hurricane, the eruption of civil war or riots. An assassination or a coup d’etat. It is a moment that serves as the line of demarcation, separating the certainty of what was from the uncertainty of what lies ahead. It is a moment in which you suddenly become aware of who you are; you become aware of the fragility and unpredictability of the world in which you live. Ghana’s descent into the “lost decades” began with such a moment, with the coup d’etat that unseated our first president, Dr Kwame Nkrumah. When I look back on my life, it’s clear to me that this moment marked the awakening of my consciousness.”
An aha! moment if ever there was one!
Fortunately, it is not only President John Mahama who gives us hope about a newer crop of leaders who do not fear to document their stories. An even younger generation inspires greater hope: Robert Nii Arday Clegg’s, (first class political science and philosophy student and the 2004 best graduating law student) “10 Strategies for Making Top Grades At The University”; Dr. Yaw Perbi’s numerous books on Christian leadership, finance and investment; journalist Ato Kwamina Dadzie’s “Pretending To Be President” and whatever book the grapevine maintains the intelligent broadcaster Bernard Avle is writing.
 |
| His Excellency, Captain Kojo Tsikata |
While commending the above, it bears investigating what it would take for the
mythical Captain Kojo Tsikata (distinguished intelligence capo who did much,
saw everything and said little) to write everything –well, almost everything,
from the Ghana Army through Angola to heady revolution days. We need Dr. Obed
Asamoah (Ghana’s longest serving Minister for Foreign Affairs) to write a
scorching critique of Ghana’s foreign policies from Nkrumah to date, evolving
key lessons on what could have been done differently. We need J.H. Mensah,
reputed to be one of the very few to have experienced it all from Nkrumah through
Kufuor to share. Prof. Kwesi Botchwey’s personal account of the tough
decision-making that turned the Ghanaian economy from abject stagnation and
decline of the late 1970s to growth in the 1980s is painfully missing.
Dr. Christina Amuako-Nuamah (dedicated mother and grandmother, staunch Christian, accomplished academic, political strategist and politician) cannot refuse to inspire young women and men alike with her compelling story. A book by the Ahwoi brothers, spelt Ato and Kwamena, on grassroots political mobilisation and critical decision-making in the corridors of power will be worth killing for. Dan Botwe’s distinctive focus and quality as a young party General Secretary, unmatched since, proved crucial in Kufuor’s successful 2000 presidential run. He too must share.
Kwesi Pratt Jnr., Kweku Baako Jnr., Kweku Sakyi-Addo, Azumah Nelson, Abedi Pele, and Kojo Antwi must all rise from the current slumber and write! It is a great failing and they all owe us many books which we must see by 2015!
I am reading Professor Kofi Awoonor’s affirmatively disruptive “African Dilemma.” Erudite, thought provoking and poetic, it reads like music on paper. His previous major work covering poetry, fiction and nonfiction notwithstanding, the acclaimed writer and statesman too, could gift us with another book covering these latter years. I almost allowed him to escape!
Sodzi Sodzi-Tettey
Sodzi_tettey@hotmail,com
www.sodzisodzi.com
Dr. Christina Amuako-Nuamah (dedicated mother and grandmother, staunch Christian, accomplished academic, political strategist and politician) cannot refuse to inspire young women and men alike with her compelling story. A book by the Ahwoi brothers, spelt Ato and Kwamena, on grassroots political mobilisation and critical decision-making in the corridors of power will be worth killing for. Dan Botwe’s distinctive focus and quality as a young party General Secretary, unmatched since, proved crucial in Kufuor’s successful 2000 presidential run. He too must share.
Kwesi Pratt Jnr., Kweku Baako Jnr., Kweku Sakyi-Addo, Azumah Nelson, Abedi Pele, and Kojo Antwi must all rise from the current slumber and write! It is a great failing and they all owe us many books which we must see by 2015!
I am reading Professor Kofi Awoonor’s affirmatively disruptive “African Dilemma.” Erudite, thought provoking and poetic, it reads like music on paper. His previous major work covering poetry, fiction and nonfiction notwithstanding, the acclaimed writer and statesman too, could gift us with another book covering these latter years. I almost allowed him to escape!
Sodzi Sodzi-Tettey
Sodzi_tettey@hotmail,com
www.sodzisodzi.com
CHAVEZ – THE PEOPLE’S PRESIDENT
By Kwasi Adu
 |
| Late President Commandante Hugo Chavez |
Hugo Chavez, President
of Venezuela, has passed on. This was a President who was loved by the ordinary
people of his country; but hated by the local elite and US government. He
endeared himself so much to the hearts of his people, that even when the
oligarchy of Venezuela, with the tacit encouragement of the government of the
United States tried to overthrow his government in a coup, the ordinary people,
with their bare hands, braved the weapons of the Venezuelan top military and
restored his government to power.
This is something that
the ordinary people of Ghana could not do for the government of Osagyefo Dr.
Kwame Nkrumah, when a similar situation befell this country on 24th February
1966.
Hugo Chavez was a
President who did not measure the achievement of his government in terms of
some academic “macro-economic stability”, or on some intangible GDP growth or
low inflation. On the contrary, his consideration of social development was on
the basis of how many of his people had been lifted out of poverty, how many
people had access to affordable health care, how many people had equitable
access to quality education, good drinking water and, employment. Chavez
established a genuine feeling of well-being and self-worth among the ordinary
sections of Venezuelan society. In short, he brought about a feel-good factor
for the majority of Venezuelans. This is what a good leader and President
should be.
One of the main
factors for the popularity of the Chávez Government is the actual reduction of
poverty, made possible because his government took effective control of the
national petroleum company PDVSA, and used the abundant oil revenues, not for
the benefit of a small class of elite, but to build needed infrastructure and
invest in the social services that ordinary Venezuelans needed. In the
last ten years, the Chavez government increased social spending by 60.6%, a
total of $772 billion.
In the area of health,
Venezuela now is rated within the Latin-American region to have the lowest
inequality level, having reduced inequality by 54%, poverty by 44%. Poverty has
been reduced from 70.8% (1996) to 21% (2010). Extreme poverty has been reduced
from 40% (1996) to a very low level of 7.3% (2010). About 20 million people
have benefited from anti-poverty programs, called “Misiones” (Up to now, 2.1
million elderly people have received old-age pensions – that is 66% of the
elderly population while only 387,000 received pensions before the Chavez
government.
 |
| The Revolution moves on even in death |
Education is a key
determinant of both health and poverty and the Chavez government placed a
particular emphasis on education, allotting it more than 6% of GDP. UNESCO has
recognized that illiteracy has been eliminated. Furthermore, Venezuela is the
3rd county in the region whose population reads the most. There is tuition-free
education from daycare to university; 72% of children attend public day-cares
and 85% of school age children attend school. There are thousands of new or
refurbished schools, including 10 new universities. The country places 2nd in
Latin America and 5th in the world with the greatest proportions of university
students. In fact, 1 out of every 3 Venezuelans is enrolled in some
educational program. (Ref. venezuelaennoticias@minci.gob.ve). A Gallup poll, released in December 2012,
revealed that Venezuelans are the 4th happiest population in the world. (Gallup
Poll 2012).
In my book, a great
national leader is one that always acts so as to produce the greatest aggregate
happiness for the greatest number of people in his or her nation. That was
Chavez!
In 1998, before Chavez
came to power, 21% of the population was malnourished. Venezuela now has
established a network of subsidized food distribution including grocery stores
and supermarkets. While 90% of the food was imported in 1980, today this is
less than 30%. Misión Agro-Venezuela has given out 454,238 credits to
rural producers and 39,000 rural producers have received credit in 2012 alone.
Five million Venezuelans receive free food, four million of them are children
in schools and 6,000 food kitchens feed 900,000 people. The agrarian
reform and policies to help agricultural producers have increased domestic food
supply. The results of all these food security measures is that
today malnourishment is only 5%, and child malnutrition which
was 7.7% in 1990 today is at 2.9%. This is an impressive health
achievement by any standards.
 |
| Hugo Chavez |
He achieved all these
because, rather than hand over the resources of his country to the minority
elite and foreign economic interests, his government took control and used the
revenue for the benefit of the majority of the population. I really wonder how
many African leaders can beat this. Sadly in Africa, our leaders believe that
our people are incapable of managing our own affairs. Because of this, they
hand over our natural resources to foreign economic interests, and even the
crumbs that the foreigners offer us are used for the benefit of those in
government and their relatives and immediate friends.
In Ghana, for example,
the poor are rather taxed for the benefit of the rich. Imagine how our
governments increase utility tariffs in the full knowledge that state
institutions and large private companies would not pay the tariffs; only the
ordinary people are supposed to pay. Otherwise their services would be cut off.
Chavez did not deceive
his people. While campaigning for the high office, he did not promise to fight
for them; and once in power, resort to ethnocentrism. He did not cast his party
aside in favour of sectarian goals. When his government built houses, the houses
were for the poor who were badly housed, rather than for the middle classes.
That was a real President of the people.
For such a person to
be cut off in his in his prime, I am at a loss to find my own words to write an
appropriate eulogy. I can only find plagiarise sections of the tribute that
Matthew Arnold wrote in honour of his father:
What
is the course of the life of mortal men on the earth? Most men eddy about, here
and there—eat and drink, chatter and love and hate, gather and squander. They
are raised aloft, are hurled in the dust, striving blindly, achieving nothing;
and then they die. They perish;—and no one asks, (after their death), who or
what they have been. Just like the waves, in the moonlit solitudes mild of the
mid-most Ocean, they swell, foam for a moment, and they are gone.
 |
| Chavez waves from Helicopter |
And
there are some, whom a thirst ardent, unquenchable, fires like Chavez; not with
the crowd to be spent, not without aim to go round in an eddy of purposeless
dust. Their efforts are unmeaning and vain. Ah yes! Some leaders strive, not
without action to die fruitless. They rather aim to snatch something from dull
oblivion. Chavez chose his path— path to a clear-purposed goal, path of
advance! But it led to a long, steep journey, through sunken gorges, over mountains
in snow. Cheerful, with friends, he set forth; then on the height, (in 2002 came
the storm; when they tried to overthrow him). Thunder crashed from rock to
rock, the cataracts replied while lightning dazzled his eyes. However, with the will of the people, he
bounced back in triumph.
With
the death of Chavez, havoc is made in the train of the ordinary people of
Venezuela! A friend, who set forth at their side, is lost in the storm. With
the people of Venezuela left in this state, their foreheads are marked with frowns
while their lips are sternly compressed. However, I believe that they will
strive on till they reach their intended goal.
Chavez
did not leave his people in the wild. When they were weary, and fearful, he
turned and beckoned even the trembling ones and held their weary hands.
Even
when in the paths of the world, illness wounded and tried his spirit; he
soldiered on with cheer and fortitude.
Good
Chavez, when you battled with cancer, you did not do it to save yourself, but
to save the social gains of your people. Now that you have come to the end of
your time, Oh faithful leader; fare thee well. Go forth and join the ranks of
the brave and honoured ones like Simon Bolivar, who went before you.
You
always wished Africa well. We were your friend. We wish we would have leaders
like you; not those who bluster or cringe, and make life hideous, and arid, and
vile for their people.
Fare
thee well, my brother, whom I only knew from a distance. You are still the
people’s President.
Growing up Catholic
By Lisa Karpova
 |
| Pope Benedict |
On the eve of the Papal conclave, I was talking to a close
acquaintance who basically grew up in the Catholic Church. Not a regular church
goer, however, she fondly remembers regular church attendance in the "good
old days" with a true reverence for the history and traditions of the
Church.
Walking down the street with her friend, she noticed a strange man approaching. She asked her friend, "Who is that man in a dress?"
How embarrassing for mother and father. Next thing she knew, she was in Catholic school and the family was attending church. Funny how that happens.
There is probably nothing more beautiful and awe inspiring than hearing the Latin Gregorian chant in any form it takes, especially when done by children. She recalled memories of fasting breakfast every morning in order to receive Communion at the morning Mass which the school children eagerly sang completely in Latin. It was a beautiful experience, and the school children eagerly devoured the donuts and chocolate milk served to them when the Mass was over.
There was First Communion, Confirmation and frequent use of the little white first Communion dress for special church events when the pupils would make processions in that special attire. On Friday, there was abstaining from eating meat. It was a sin to eat meat on Friday in the days of old. Prayers and catechism questions were memorized by heart. There was the special nervous feeling of the Priest opening up the sliding door in the Confessional so that the pupil could tell the Priest their tiny little venial sins like coverting their neighbor's play money, getting angry at the teacher or something of that nature.
Then there were the infamous Nuns who are basically remembered for their fury, making those bad children who had the nerve to do so at school, place their chewing gum on their noses. Or the rap on the knuckles with a ruler for other terrible infractions, such as talking out of turn with one's neighbor when one is supposed to be attentive to the classroom teacher.
 |
| Pope Benedicts Bautler Paolo Gabrielle Released Damaging files on Pope Denedict |
It was a rich experience that was shattered by Vatican II, which was followed
by deep change in the Mass as Catholics knew it then. They started with the
folksy guitar masses, these and all Masses being done in the native language
instead of the traditional Latin. The entire structure of the Mass seemed to
change so that one could hardly imagine that it was "Catholic" anymore.
It felt more "Protestant" as she would say. The hand shaking sign of
peace felt strange and intrusive, as opposed to the very personal feelings one
had previously as a Mass attendee. Not that there is anything wrong with a
symbolic gesture of peace, but it made her ill at ease and she felt it out of
place under the circumstances.
That is when she parted ways and stopped being a regular church goer. She didn't leave the church, the church had left her.
After that, there was experimentation with other religions, but basically the values instilled by many years of Catholic education had made their mark.
As a new Pope is being chosen, those brought up with the old time traditional values can only hope that perhaps instead of more change, the Church might return to its history and traditions...keeping what has always been accepted doctrine within the Church. Most people are familiar with that...against abortion, no married priests or female priests, etc. There are always rabble rousers that want to throw out the doctrines and traditions of the Church, but fortunately most of it remains to the satisfaction of the Church body. You just cannot throw out instilled values and traditions...
The Church on Earth is made up of human beings who are far from perfect, given their sin nature. One other belief of the Church is that man has a sin nature they are born with. That being the case, it might be well to briefly discuss the problem with pedophile Priests. Reputable, knowledgeable psychologists will tell you that pedophiles basically cannot be cured or changed. Put in situations with children, they will always be offenders.
That is when she parted ways and stopped being a regular church goer. She didn't leave the church, the church had left her.
After that, there was experimentation with other religions, but basically the values instilled by many years of Catholic education had made their mark.
As a new Pope is being chosen, those brought up with the old time traditional values can only hope that perhaps instead of more change, the Church might return to its history and traditions...keeping what has always been accepted doctrine within the Church. Most people are familiar with that...against abortion, no married priests or female priests, etc. There are always rabble rousers that want to throw out the doctrines and traditions of the Church, but fortunately most of it remains to the satisfaction of the Church body. You just cannot throw out instilled values and traditions...
The Church on Earth is made up of human beings who are far from perfect, given their sin nature. One other belief of the Church is that man has a sin nature they are born with. That being the case, it might be well to briefly discuss the problem with pedophile Priests. Reputable, knowledgeable psychologists will tell you that pedophiles basically cannot be cured or changed. Put in situations with children, they will always be offenders.
Some of these people have been attracted to the opportunities provided by the
priesthood, but in no way are these mentally sick individuals an indication of
what the priesthood should entail. They have been an embarrassment, of course.
But in no way do they diminish those that really have this great calling and it
should not be allowed to be accepted as any sort of trademark or inclination.
It is sin and sickness, bottom line.
You have individuals in youth programs that take leadership positions in order to be close to victim children, yet you do not hear far ranging criticism of these organizations and their leaders. Nor should it be made a general criticism of the Church, who accepts candidates in good faith for the priesthood.
God only knows how rare the people are who are willing to make the necessary sacrifices that are part of the priesthood.
The Church and everything that constitutes its essence is something that is always a part of one's internal makeup and values.
Hopefully, the new Pope will make great strides in returning to and keeping to tradition and history...in particular the enforcement of the Latin Mass once again. That is her great hope. It also seems that having an Italian chosen might feel more comfortable as well, as a rather time honored tradition. A little bit of pride, a little bit of nostalgia and a lot of hope will be generated by the upcoming Papal enclave.
You have individuals in youth programs that take leadership positions in order to be close to victim children, yet you do not hear far ranging criticism of these organizations and their leaders. Nor should it be made a general criticism of the Church, who accepts candidates in good faith for the priesthood.
God only knows how rare the people are who are willing to make the necessary sacrifices that are part of the priesthood.
The Church and everything that constitutes its essence is something that is always a part of one's internal makeup and values.
Hopefully, the new Pope will make great strides in returning to and keeping to tradition and history...in particular the enforcement of the Latin Mass once again. That is her great hope. It also seems that having an Italian chosen might feel more comfortable as well, as a rather time honored tradition. A little bit of pride, a little bit of nostalgia and a lot of hope will be generated by the upcoming Papal enclave.
Is the new pope a 'Stalinist of God'?
 |
| Pope Francis |
In the coming days, there's going to be quite a
bit more parsing of the religious, social, and political views of the
newly-named Pope Francis. That the new pope is a Jesuit, hails from South
America, and has chosen the name Francis, may lead some to wonder if he'll be a
bit more liberal than his docrtinaire predecessor Benedict XVI. CTV's Paul Hahn
summarizes the conventional
wisdom so far:
He
is known for his strict views on morality -- having staunchly opposed same-sex
marriage, contraception and abortion. He has called adoption by gay parents a
form of discrimination against children -- a stance that was publicly
criticized by Argentinian President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner.
Still,
Bergoglio has shown compassion for HIV and AIDS patients, visiting a hospice in
2001 to kiss and wash the feet of some of those affected by the disease.
“This
is a man who goes into the shantytowns and cooks with the people," said
Gerard O’Connell, CTV Vatican specialist. "I think the world is going to
discover a very new style of being pope."
Pope
Francis chose his name from St. Francis of Assisi, who communicated and cared
for animals.
A WikiLeaks cable
written during the last Papal conclave also suggested that Bergoglio might be
somewhat left of center by Vatican standards:
What
could count against him is his membership in the Jesuit order. Some senior
prelates, especially conservatives, are suspicious of a liberal streak in the
order, perhaps most pronounced in the U.S., but also present elsewhere.
Bergoglio has also joined in social
demonstrations in his home country, speaking out in 2001, for instance, against the disparity
between "poor people who are persecuted for demanding work, and rich
people who are applauded for fleeing from justice".
But Bergoglio's ideological background is a
little more complex. For instance, unlike many of his fellow Latin America
priests, he was wary of the "liberation
theology" movement of the 1960s and 1970s. John R. Allen of the
National Catholic Reporter explained:
These
were the years of the military junta in Argentina, when many priests, including
leading Jesuits, were gravitating towards the progressive liberation theology
movement. As the Jesuit provincial, Bergoglio insisted on a more traditional
reading of Ignatian spirituality, mandating that Jesuits continue to staff
parishes and act as chaplains rather than moving into "base
communities" and political activism.
 |
| The Vatican City |
There are also some allegations in Argentina
that Bergoglio may have turned
a blind eye to some of the junta's crimes, which are likely to receive more
attention now. There will also be some new scrutiny of a lay movement known as
Communion and Liberation:
Over
the years, Bergoglio became close to the Comunione e Liberazione
movement founded by Italian Fr. Luigi Giussani, sometimes speaking at its
massive annual gathering in Rimini, Italy. He's also presented Giussani's books
at literary fairs in Argentina. This occasionally generated consternation
within the Jesuits, since the ciellini once upon a time were seen as the
main opposition to Bergoglio's fellow Jesuit in Milan, Cardinal Carlo Maria
Martini.
The ubiquitous Allen profiled CL,
whose gatherings can draw over 100,000 people, in 2005:
To
most Italian Catholics, Comunione e Liberazione represents a right-wing
alternative to the "mainstream" lay movement in the country, Azione
Cattolica.
Though tensions date back to the early 1960s, the definitive rupture
came in 1986, when Azione Cattolica made its so-called "religious
choice," which meant in effect distancing itself from the Christian
Democratic Party with which the church had been identified since 1948. The idea
was that the church should be in dialogue with all social forces, including the
left.
CL,
on the other hand, argued for a more active "presence" of Catholics
in political life, which in practice translated into a closer identification
with the Christian Democrats and with the right.
The
debate turned so bitter that some spoke of "mutual excommunications."
Aggravating the situation was that both movements are concentrated in Milan,
where Catholic Action was seen as close to the more progressive position of
Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini, while many cielini were seen as a
"loyal opposition."
 |
| Pope John Paul II |
Under
John Paul II, the cielini were dubbed variously "the pope's
Rambos," "the Stalinists of God," and "Wojtyla's
monks" because of their fierce loyalty to the papacy, a devotion that some
observers see as uncritical. Certainly Giussani could sound this way; of Pope
John Paul II, for example, he once said, "We serve this man; with our very
existence, we serve Christ in this great man. This pope is the event which God
has brought about; his human figure is the concrete phenomenon which we must
observe, hear, follow, and whose mentality we must make our own."
Cardinal Ratzinger was also a fan of the cielini,
and delivered a homily at the funeral of the founder, Giussani, who he said
"changed my life." The cielini have also reportedly backed away from
active involvement in politics in recent years.
In the end, it's probably a waste of time to try
to locate any pope on a secular left-right political spectrum, but Francis
seems linked to a number of constituencies within the church. This may have
helped his case in the conclave.
Cars and socialism
By Stefan
A massacre of 28 children and teachers
at a school in Connecticut on December 15 received weeks of intensive media
coverage. And yet very little attention is paid to the roughly 100 people
killed in the U.S. every day by motor vehicles. The carnage at the scene of a
serious road accident is just as horrific as a battlefield, but only those
directly involved – the victims and the workers whose job is to clean up the
mess – are fully aware of it as an everyday reality.
Millions of animals – deer, badgers,
frogs, birds, etc. – also die on the roads. They are called “roadkill”. That
seems an apt term for the human casualties too. Worldwide human roadkill is
estimated at 1.3 million a year. The injured number in the tens of millions.
Average annual human roadkill in the
U.S. in recent years has been about 40,000. (Another couple of million are
hurt; 250,000 of them have sufficiently bad injuries and sufficiently good
health insurance to be hospitalised.) There has been a modest decline since the
1970s, when the yearly average was about 50,000.
Various reasons have been suggested
for the decline, including a crackdown on drunk driving and the adoption of
certain safety features, especially seat belts and eventually (in the 1990s)
air bags. We owe these improvements to persistent efforts by campaigners for
safer car design, Ralph Nader being the best known.
Feeling safe
This example demonstrates that
campaigns for reform can sometimes achieve worthwhile results. Worthwhile, but
limited and temporary. Because there has been no decisive reorientation of car
design toward safety, as opposed to style, power and comfort.
Thus, as Catherine Lutz and Anne Lutz
Fernandez point out, car manufacturers prefer to make the driver feel
safe rather than help him drive safely By swaddling driver and
passengers in a warm, quiet and smoothly moving cocoon, insulated from the
noise and bumps of the road, they “prevent drivers from sensing how fast they
are going or how dangerous the road conditions are” (Carjacked: The Culture
of the Automobile and its Effect on our Lives, Palgrave Macmillan 2010, p.
179).
However, the biggest setback to the
cause of safe design has been the rise of the monsters known as Sport Utility
Vehicles. SUVs are much more prone to roll over than ordinary cars and much
more lethal when they collide with other road users (Keith Bradsher, High
and Mighty: The Dangerous Rise of the SUV, PublicAffairs 2002).
The decline in human roadkill is
partly the result of people minimising their exposure to traffic as
pedestrians, though at a high cost in the form of isolation and loss of community.
In the old days, when motor vehicles were few and far between, children were
free to roam around on their own and play with friends in the streets. Now they
are cooped up at home. There they can prepare for their future role as drivers
by playing video games like Carmageddon, where the goal is to smash up as many
other cars and run down as many pedestrians as possible.
Pollutants
Besides direct roadkill, cars harm and
kill people through the pollutants that they emit into the air we breathe. Here
too campaigns for reform have had some successes. In particular, exhaust
filters are now in wider use and petrol no longer contains lead additives.
Here too, however, the few successes
are overshadowed by a daunting list of failures. And here too SUVs are the worst
culprits. Motor vehicles still emit enormous quantities of tiny particles and
poisonous compounds, including nitrous oxides, carbon monoxide and volatile
organic compounds that react in sunlight to form ozone.
Most of these gases and
particles do most harm to the respiratory system, causing such diseases as
asthma, bronchitis, emphysema and lung cancer. Another pollutant, benzene,
damages the bone marrow and immune system and causes leukemia and other blood
cancers.
A car emits poisons into the air both
inside and outside, making it hard to tell whether it is less unhealthy to ride
with the windows closed or open.
Burdens on society
These are not the only burdens that
the car imposes on society. It devours enormous material and labour resources
and generates a vast stream of material waste, much of it hazardous and/or
non-recyclable. The car and the hydrocarbon fuels that power it make a big
contribution to the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases and thereby
to climate change.
Cars have a huge impact on land use.
Land is used to manufacture cars, sell cars (showrooms), service and repair
cars (garages, filling stations), wash cars, drive cars (roads, driveways) and
– no small item! – park cars (roadsides, car parks, home garages). An expanding
area of arable land is being used to cultivate biofuels for cars.
These burdens grow heavier as the
numbers of cars (and especially SUVs) increase. The total number of motor
vehicles in the world passed the one-billion mark in 2010. It can be expected
to continue rising rapidly as cheaper models open up new consumer markets in
countries such as India and China.
Cars and socialism
Thus, society pays a terrible price
for the motor car – in pollution and disease, ugliness and noise, social
atomization, injury and death. Does it follow that a socialist community is
likely to decide to stop producing cars? How compatible would such a decision
be with the idea of socialism as a world of material abundance and free access?
First point. Socialism will make a lot
of car travel unnecessary. This applies especially to commuting. Many jobs to
which people now commute will disappear with the abolition of money. Over time
geographical patterns of habitation and production can be changed to enable
most people to live close enough to their work not to need a car to get there.
We can expect new forms of public
transport and the restoration of environment-friendly old forms such as trams
and canal barges (for non-perishable supplies). Sizeable urban areas can be
made safe as pedestrian precincts. Some towns in Germany are already car-free
and accessible only by rail.
Second point. Replacing
petrol-guzzling motor cars by electric cars should reduce pollution from cars
and their contribution to global heating, provided that the electricity comes
from low-carbon sources (not from coal, as it often does at present).
Sharing systems
Third point. Free access to car
transport as a service can be achieved without permanently assigning a car
to each family or individual. In social terms, the current arrangement, with
most cars sitting unused most of the time, is extremely wasteful. The total
number of cars required can be minimised by relying on a pool of cars available
through a network of depots.
When people want to go on a trip that
cannot conveniently be made by public transport, they will borrow a car from
the nearest depot. When they no longer need the car, they will return it to the
network (not necessarily to the same depot). The depot staff will recharge,
repair and maintain the vehicles and monitor their use.
Such arrangements already exist,
though not for cars. The public lending library provides free access to books
and cassettes. A free-access sharing system for bicycles was pioneered in
Amsterdam by the Provos in the 1960s, and now exists in Paris, Hangzhou and
many other cities. In socialism sharing systems will expand to cover
specialized tools and other things that people need to use occasionally.
In a free-access society people will
develop a different psychology. They will view the goods being held for their
use in public stores and depots as already belonging to them. As they
will have free access to those things whenever needed, they will feel no urge
to transfer stuff to their homes in order to make it “theirs”. Such pointless
behavior will appear pathological. People will feel a need for exclusive and
permanent possession only of those things which have a special personal meaning
for them.
Electric cars still a problem
So it may be possible to provide free
access to electric cars at a social cost lower than that now paid for motor
cars. Much lower, perhaps, but still considerable.
Switching to electric cars will not
stop the carnage on the roads. Electric cars also pose environmental problems
of their own.
There are two types of electric car:
one runs on a battery, the other is powered by a stack of hydrogen fuel cells.
However, the manufacture of both devices depends on the availability of rare
earth metals (REMs). These substances occur in very low-concentration ores from
which they have to be separated out by means of acid baths and other processes,
generating vast quantities of highly toxic waste.
The REM smelting plants in Inner
Mongolia dump the waste into a large pool. From there the “radioactive sludge”
seeps into the soil and groundwater, destroying local agriculture and the
health of local residents. A socialist society could not tolerate such
poisoning of the environment, even in a single locality. No local community
would voluntarily sacrifice itself to provide the world with certain raw
materials. And the world administration would lack the coercive power to
sacrifice a local community against its will.
So the waste would have to be
reprocessed, stored in sealed vessels and buried in stable geological
structures deep underground. This is not done under capitalism because it would
cost too much. But even in socialism it will surely be impracticable to store
more than a certain quantity of waste in this way, especially as it will be in
addition to hundreds of thousands of tons of accumulated nuclear waste in
urgent need of similar treatment.
That constraint will limit the amount
of REMs extracted. And as REMs will be needed for many other uses (including
energy-efficient fluorescent lamps and magnets for wind turbines) it will be
necessary to set priorities for their allocation.
Free access to everything?
Thus, we cannot be sure whether
socialist society will be able or willing to provide free access to car
transport. The social cost associated with maintaining an adequate pool of
electric cars may still be judged unacceptably high.
US criminal propensity justifies
North Korea's nukes
By Finian Cunningham
 |
| Kim Jung Um |
The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea stands
out. But it is not because the secretive Stalinist regime is a nuclear pariah
threatening global security, as the Western corporate media would have us
believe.
No, North Korea stands out for being a beacon of rationality and, incredible as it may seem, peace.
Bear in mind the following features:
No other state on earth has endured a trade embargo or a gamut of diplomatic, financial and economic sanctions more than North Korea. For more than 63 years, since the beginning of the Korean War (1950-53), the DPRK has been frozen out of normal relations with other international states because of a trade embargo imposed by Washington. This illegal straightjacket has been tightened several times down through the decades with resolutions and sanctions implemented by the UN Security Council - the latest being instigated last Friday.
Iran has endured more than 30 years of US-led sanctions, while Cuba has had to live with five decades of a US-led blockade. North Korea, therefore, has the dubious distinction of being the country that has been most cut off from the international community and all the vital opportunities that come with such normal contact for beneficial development.
 |
| A North Korean Soldier |
The latest round of sanctions at the UN, initiated once again by the US, aims
to make all remaining international conduct by North Korea next to impossible.
As well as complete blackout of financial transactions, North Korea’s shipping
and air transport are to be impounded if they do not comply with unilateral
inspections at any point.
The second distinguishing feature of North Korea is that no other state has been threatened on more occasions with nuclear annihilation. Not even Iran, despite despicable threats from the US and Israel, can out-claim North Korea on this level of criminal aggression towards its people.
All threats of nuclear extinction made against North Korea have come from one source - the United States of America. On just one of these nefarious occasions, in 1995, former US Joint Chiefs of Staff General Colin Powell quipped that North Korea would be turned into a “charcoal briquette”.
Yet in the Orwellian world of Western governments and their dutiful news media, reality is turned upside down. Selective amnesia and selective reporting convey the public image that it is North Korea who is the aggressor and insane nuclear threat while the US is the voice of reason, peace and legality.
The second distinguishing feature of North Korea is that no other state has been threatened on more occasions with nuclear annihilation. Not even Iran, despite despicable threats from the US and Israel, can out-claim North Korea on this level of criminal aggression towards its people.
All threats of nuclear extinction made against North Korea have come from one source - the United States of America. On just one of these nefarious occasions, in 1995, former US Joint Chiefs of Staff General Colin Powell quipped that North Korea would be turned into a “charcoal briquette”.
Yet in the Orwellian world of Western governments and their dutiful news media, reality is turned upside down. Selective amnesia and selective reporting convey the public image that it is North Korea who is the aggressor and insane nuclear threat while the US is the voice of reason, peace and legality.
This past week, Western media have quickly highlighted North Korea’s threats of
“pre-emptive nuclear strikes” against South Korea and its American patron
following the latest round of UN sanctions. The subtle bias inculcates the
notion that North Korea is some kind of crazed pariah, while the US and its
South Korean ally are as innocent as white doves.
Britain’s Guardian newspaper headlined: “North Korea urged to halt 'provocative actions' in wake of sanctions”. While CNN reported: “Even by North Korean standards, the threats this week by leader Kim Jong Un have been incredibly provocative, making the situation on the Korean Peninsula more worrisome.”
The Guardian quoted a White House spokesman saying: “North Korea's threats are not helpful. We have consistently called on North Korea to improve relations with its neighbours, including South Korea.”
One would never guess the true nature of the conflict on the Korean Peninsula and its very real threat to global security from a reading of the Western mainstream media. All history of the Korean conflict has been whitewashed of salient facts.
Britain’s Guardian newspaper headlined: “North Korea urged to halt 'provocative actions' in wake of sanctions”. While CNN reported: “Even by North Korean standards, the threats this week by leader Kim Jong Un have been incredibly provocative, making the situation on the Korean Peninsula more worrisome.”
The Guardian quoted a White House spokesman saying: “North Korea's threats are not helpful. We have consistently called on North Korea to improve relations with its neighbours, including South Korea.”
One would never guess the true nature of the conflict on the Korean Peninsula and its very real threat to global security from a reading of the Western mainstream media. All history of the Korean conflict has been whitewashed of salient facts.
Take just the recent history over the last months. The latest sanctions imposed
on North Korea are said to be in response to the DPRK’s underground nuclear
bomb test on 12 February. But that test was carried out after the country was
threatened with sanctions in January following its successful launch of a
long-range missile into outer space in December. That missile was not armed,
threatened no-one and helped put a civilian satellite into orbit. Quite an
achievement that should be lauded not condemned as the action of a criminal
miscreant state.What we have here is a long cycle of US-led provocation and North Korean counter-provocation. But the dynamic is only ever presented as an irrational series of provocations by Pyongyang.
The nuclear test last month by the DPRK is its third. Previously, there were tests in 2009 and 2006. Both the Obama administrations and its George W Bush predecessors have scuttled disarmament negotiations between North Korea and China on one side and the US, South Korea and Japan on the other.
Contrary to the spin put out by Washington and the Western media, North Korea has engaged fully in earlier talks, but every time it is the US that has jettisoned the dialogue. That suggests that Washington is not serious about disarmament on the Korean Peninsula. Why not? Because by continually fanning the conflict and tensions, Washington buys itself an excuse to maintain its military and nuclear presence on the Korean Peninsula, carrying out its endless war games and adding pressure on its main target - China.
And let’s remember that North Korea only embarked on its nuclear program following earlier threats of nuclear devastation by the US in 1993, after which the DPRK gave notice that it was quitting the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Nuclear weapons were first introduced into the Peninsula by the Americans in 1950 and have been maintained there ever since - contrary to popular opposition to such US warheads, on both sides of the Korean border.
Going further back in history is crucial to understanding the roots of the conflict in Korea and why the North appears to have such a militant position. The Peninsula was partitioned at the behest of the US in 1948 following World War II to thwart the popular Korean resistance against Japanese fascism that had brutally colonized the country. In the newly created South Korea state, the US went about suppressing the socialist resistance allied to compatriots in the North, and installing remnants of the pro-Japanese puppets and quislings.
When the war broke out between North and South in 1950, the US mobilized its military, including nuclear weapons, in support of the South. China and Russia gave its backing to the North. But the indiscriminate violence inflicted by the US on the northern population through a 37-month non-stop aerial bombardment far exceeds any aggression that may have emanated from the North. Using saturation bombing with incendiaries and napalm, it is estimated that one-third of the entire civilian population in North Korea - some three million people - was killed by US air force bombers. Every city and major town in the North was completely destroyed.
 |
| The North Korean people |
The northern population ended up living in deep mountain caves in order to
survive from the hell unleashed by the American air force. On at least one
occasion, then US President Harry Truman and his General Douglas MacArthur were
a hair’s breadth from launching multiple nuclear strikes on the North.
Since then, the Korean War has never ended technically. The armistice that the two divided entities signed in July 1953 is only an agreed cessation of fire. Thus, the people of North Korea have lived under the shadow of destruction from American napalm, incendiary firestorms and nuclear bombs.
Given the economic, political and military stranglehold that Washington maintains on North Korea it is hardly surprising that the latter has suffered from retarded development and remains fiery in its military policy.
Since then, the Korean War has never ended technically. The armistice that the two divided entities signed in July 1953 is only an agreed cessation of fire. Thus, the people of North Korea have lived under the shadow of destruction from American napalm, incendiary firestorms and nuclear bombs.
Given the economic, political and military stranglehold that Washington maintains on North Korea it is hardly surprising that the latter has suffered from retarded development and remains fiery in its military policy.
US government and media
never let the world forget about 3,000 people killed on 9/11. That event has
justified American-led wars all over the planet. Yet, during the 1950-53 war,
North Korea lost 3 million of its people - a thousand-fold more than America on
9/11 - and at the hands of the same superpower that has continued to threaten
it with nuclear obliteration ever since. And when North Korea, for
understandable reasons, issues belligerent warnings, as it has done in recent
days, the Western media portray it a delinquent rogue state.
However, North Korea’s insistence on having nuclear weapons and the right to use them is based on rational and even sound moral judgment.
With an objective understanding of history, it is the United States which is seen to be the rogue state that is a threat to global security. Not only that, the US is a depraved coward that only attacks countries that it knows does not have nuclear weapons or weapons of mass destruction. Iraq, Libya and Syria come to mind.
We can be quite sure that if North Korea did not possess nuclear capability, it would have been attacked by US forces by now and destroyed. North Korea’s nuclear weapons are probably the only thing restraining Washington in its criminal propensity to gratuitously attack other nations. In that way, ironically, North Korea and its nuclear defences have managed to sustain peace in East Asia in the face of relentless US aggression.
Is there hope for Syria in sight?
By Sergei
Vasilenkov
Nobody thought
that the military action in Syria would last that long. The country has been
engulfed in a civil war for nearly two yeas, and the end is nowhere in sight.
On the contrary, the situation gets increasingly more aggravated every day, and
the number of victims is growing. When would this confrontation end and what
would its outcome be? What is in store for the Syrian people?
At a meeting with
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said that
the situation in Syria was becoming increasingly more tragic and there were no
prospects for a political settlement of the issue in sight. According to the UN
estimates, so far nearly 70,000 people have been killed, and the number of
refugees exceeded 700,000.
Ban Ki-moon said
that he supported the initiative endorsed by the head of the National Coalition
opposition Sheikh Ahmed Moaz al-Khatib providing for a dialogue with the Syrian
authorities.
"We cannot
miss this opportunity," said Ban Ki-moon. The same statement was recently
made at a briefing in Moscow by Alexander Lukashevich, a spokesman for the
Russian Foreign Ministry. He stressed that the situation in Syria was
deteriorating and the internal conflict remained strong.
Now it is
important for the parties to the conflict to engage in a dialogue, Lukashevich
said, adding that Russia would continue to work with the government and the
opposition in Syria. In recent weeks, the Syrian rebels have become more
active. Militants took hostages 45 passengers of a bus heading from the
province of Idlib to Damascus. A few days earlier the opposition seized the
largest dam in Syria on the Euphrates River. Every day there is information on
the dead and wounded.
 |
| A victim of the Free Syria Army Houla Massacre |
The armed
confrontation between the government forces and armed opposition groups in
Syria has been ongoing since March of 2011. Tens of thousands of people were
killed in this Arab country, and hundreds of thousands were forced to flee.
Syrian authorities believe that they are opposed by well-armed militants
supported by the West.
Syria has remained
the main topic of the world politics in the last two years. Contrary to the
predictions of several Arab and Western media outlets, the government of
President Bashar al-Assad, backed by the majority of the population, is
standing strong against the international terrorist group collected virtually
from around the world.
According to some
local media, special forces from Turkey, France and the UK are involved in the
Syrian conflict. Barack Obama signed a document that allows the CIA to assist
the Syrian rebels. Western intelligence agencies are working hard to
consolidate the rebel groups and subsequently transform them into a
full-fledged army that will have even heavy weapons.
Initially, the
armed opposition has sought to establish control over separate regions of the
country, simultaneously terrorizing Alawite, Christian, and Druze enclaves, but
then focused on the destabilization of Damascus.
The rebels failed
in the Syrian capital and made a strike at the trade and economic capital of
the country, Aleppo.
 |
| Another victim of Houla massacre |
The conference
supported by the Brookings Institution in Washington was a cover for the
political opposition. As a result of the conference, creation of a transitional
government of Syria was announced. Coalition "Friends of Syria"
(NATO, Turkey, Gulf monarchies, the Salafis, the militants of "Muslim
Brotherhood" and "Al Qaeda") is trying to dominate in the UN,
not without success.
Political and
diplomatic moves of the coalition unfailingly run into a consistent and clear
position of China and Russia. A fierce media war has been launched against
Russia. The West accuses Russia of refusing to "keep up" with the
rest of the "civilized world community." The same mantra was used
during the bombing of Yugoslavia. The leaders supplying weapons to the Syrian
opposition and trying to impose fake international bureaucracy on another
country should not be equated with a real voice of the international community.
Some analysts
believe that Western intelligence agencies are preparing a large-scale
international crime with the use of chemical weapons that the Syrian leadership
and the Russian authorities as accomplices will be accused of. What is behind
the violent street clashes and political and diplomatic confrontation?
The irreconcilable
nature of the struggle, above all, is explained by the geopolitics. Various
interests of many countries have come into a conflict in Syria. This Middle
Eastern country is considered to be a link between the Shiite organizations in
the region and Iran, which is very important in light of the U.S. attempts to
use the Shia-Sunni controversy, creating the required conditions for a military
action against Iran. "Syria is only the prelude to a conflict with Iran,
and the Western countries are doing their best to approach Iran at the time
when Tehran is weakened by dropping out of its regional ally, Syria," said
a representative of the International Institute for Strategic Studies in
London.
The second theme
of contradictions is natural resources, namely, extraction and transportation
of oil and gas. Syria has significant gas reserves. The West also plans to use
its territory for construction of oil and gas pipelines from Qatar and Saudi
Arabia to the Mediterranean coast. In addition, Syria is the only secular Arab
regime that, despite of the unimaginable brutality of rebels, did not sink into
the "controlled chaos" promoted by some strategists as the
"bright future" for the Middle East and the entire humanity outside
of the "golden billion".
Moscow is trying
to prevent the Middle East and the rest of the world from sliding into a
civilizational catastrophe. Russia stated that it was ready to provide its
territory for the negotiations between the authorities and the opposition in
Syria. However, Damascus believes that the dialogue with the opposition must
take place in the Arab Republic.
Russia seeks to
resolve the Syrian conflict through democratic means, advocating the extension
of "action groups" in Syria through the inclusion of several new
countries, said Mikhail Bogdanov, deputy head of the Russian Foreign Ministry.
"The
"action groups" can be expanded through such influential external
players as Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt and Iran," said the deputy
minister.
Mikhail Bogdanov
also mentioned that Moscow was planning to organize a meeting of the
"quartet" on the Middle East settlement at the ministerial level. It
was proposed to hold the meeting in March, along with the UN Security Council
meeting on Afghanistan, or in April, at the meeting of G-8 in London.
 |
| Russian President Vladimir Putin |
Russia has never
supported the regime of Bashar al-Assad, as recently stated by Sergei Lavrov.
However, he added that Moscow strongly opposed a military intervention in this
Arab country.
"All our
actions are aimed at compliance with the Geneva agreement on the development of
the transitional governing body in Syria." "We want to stabilize the
situation and create conditions for the people of Syria so they could determine
the fate of the nation and the country," said Sergey Lavrov.
This issue is of
concern to many, but there is no simple answer. For example, President Bashar
al-Assad recently said that if Turkey ceased passing weapons and militants
through its border, the war in Syria would end in two weeks. However, today the
border between Syria and Turkey remains restless.
- FREEDOM BOOKSHOP
Are you looking
for books by Nkrumah or about Nkrumah.
Go to the Freedom
Bookshop o Liamomo walk near the Asylum
Down Bridge or the Appllo theatre.
Books in Stock include
- Africa Must Unite
- Towards Colonial Freedom
- 3 Class struggle in Africa
- 4 Fight Back
- 5 The Great Decpetion
- 6. Street people
And many more.
No comments:
Post a Comment