We can't get into the World Cup, and we don't have any real role models in Scotland, except one we should not be proud of. Per head of population, it has now been confirmed that Scotland has the highest rate of Cocaine use in the... UK? No! Europe? No! Yes, you've guessed it, The WORLD! We are a nation stuffed full of junkies and we don't seem to think it deserves much media coverage. In the words of another, 'we can't even be bothered to be apathetic'!
We have all seen the evidence on our streets, at the GP Surgery, and even in our schools, and yet there are those who will shake their finger at us and say, it's not as bad as you think. These are nice people you know, and they have a lot of problems to deal with. You are lucky not to have their troubles to handle!
Get a grip! Our nation is tarred with being THE worst cocaine user in the world, and we sit back and accept it? Drug usage is a national scandal, and it is destroying many of our younger generation and turning them into zombies. And please do me the favour of not comparing them to drunks and alcoholics. They are different, and we have tolerated and accepted their blight on our communities and culture, and yes our children for long enough.
How about some facts? Drug addicts don't care how they get their money for the next fix. They don't care if they rob the same family who will try to support them. The crime rate for drug users is top in the police files for muggings, burglary, assault, disturbance, and right through to murder! And we seem to sit on our hands and say we can't do anything about it. We have become 'Scotland the Grave' by our collective apathy.
What can be done? Personally, I think it has a lot to do with the breakdown of the family unit. Ok, don't all shout at once, of course there are many kids who live in a bad family unit, and don't turn to drugs, but don't make that the reason to dismiss the many, many addicts who have had a sad background of a broken and unhappy, even abusive family! These are the ones we are talking about. If Scotland had a better attitude to the family unit, and the responsibilities and challenges within it, we would have stronger and better adjusted children, who would be less likely to turn to drugs for their escape. Anyone who has followed any of my blogs will know that I am a strong advocate for the importance of good family units. It follows also that many young parents have already survived their own 'abusive' family unit, and that makes the work of raising their own children even harder. Take heart, I know good people who have bucked the trend of a bad start in life, and made a point of giving their children the kind of upbringing they didn't have! It can happen!
Changing our family attitude is the start and also the toughest part, but we need to do something about the ones who are still a 'threat' to our community. How about jailing them as soon as they get their FIRST drug related conviction? Not a slap on the wrist, and some community work while out to do it all again. Yes, give help and support, but from inside the prison, and don't let them out until the course of treatment has been finished! Sound tough? So is getting over any kind of crime or abuse to your property or family! One of the biggest problems will be our politicians, because none of them would want to see a rise in the crime rate, or certainly not put more offenders in jail. No, they want to reduce the number of offenders who will be in for six months or less. Guess who these offenders will be?... Right again, the drug users, who will not even benefit from any kind of treatment or therapy inside jail, where it should be done.
While we are at it, what about teaching some morality in our education system. You know, the progressive way of being bold enough to say what is right and what is wrong, and not to convince our children that it's ok if it makes you feel good, or you think it's right for you! The people who gave us that philosophy have failed, sold us down the river, and helped get us where we are today, so let's not have any more of that drivel. There are some things in this life which are without doubt, wrong, and should be seen and taught as wrong!
Unless we turn our nation's drug use around and make it anti social, we will evolve into an even worse country, with nothing to show for the heritage our ancestors left us, because we will have squandered it! Let's take an active part in returning us to a nation called, 'Scotland the Brave'!
The aim is to provide a stimulating mix of personal opinions (from a mainstream Christian worldview), and associated comments, which will be accepted and published if they comply with the usual courtesy and decency.
Tuesday 29 June 2010
Sunday 27 June 2010
How Are The Mighty Fallen!
What a change between the talk of the media and the supporters before the England v Germany World Cup, and the end! From world beaters to a well beaten third rate performance, with goals to confirm Germany's dominance, or to put it another way, England's dreadful football.
It's not the play on the field that gets to me, it's the attitude of the English media and supporters. Just a short time ago, they were booking their place in the final! Now, they will be lucky to get to the plane home without being lynched verbally, emotionally and almost literally. What a sorry lot they are.
If pride goes before a fall, then I suppose arrogance goes before a nose dive! Was it just me, or did the whole England band wagon say too much too soon? Did they maybe talk too much before their brains were in gear? I do not support the ABE (Anyone But England) camp, but I can see why England's attitude does them no favours, and grates on any other UK nation's nerves as they push their invincibility on us, and the rest of the world. For me, I welcome their defeat. In the name of all that is sportsmanlike, they did not deserve to win. Their performance on the field of play is one thing, but their attitude off the field needs to be given a knock, and who better to do that, than the German team?
The only down side is that they will now revert to their old chant of '1966' and that is bad. Mind you, it could have been worse. They might have got further in the competition, so for that reason, I am glad they are out. That kind of human nature does not deserve to be rewarded! Maybe it's a kind of natural justice after all! Yes, 'how are the mighty fallen', and fallen badly. The following verses from that quote, continue (paraphrased) as 'sshhhh don't tell anybody about it!!' How appropriate.... Let the recriminations begin!
It's not the play on the field that gets to me, it's the attitude of the English media and supporters. Just a short time ago, they were booking their place in the final! Now, they will be lucky to get to the plane home without being lynched verbally, emotionally and almost literally. What a sorry lot they are.
If pride goes before a fall, then I suppose arrogance goes before a nose dive! Was it just me, or did the whole England band wagon say too much too soon? Did they maybe talk too much before their brains were in gear? I do not support the ABE (Anyone But England) camp, but I can see why England's attitude does them no favours, and grates on any other UK nation's nerves as they push their invincibility on us, and the rest of the world. For me, I welcome their defeat. In the name of all that is sportsmanlike, they did not deserve to win. Their performance on the field of play is one thing, but their attitude off the field needs to be given a knock, and who better to do that, than the German team?
The only down side is that they will now revert to their old chant of '1966' and that is bad. Mind you, it could have been worse. They might have got further in the competition, so for that reason, I am glad they are out. That kind of human nature does not deserve to be rewarded! Maybe it's a kind of natural justice after all! Yes, 'how are the mighty fallen', and fallen badly. The following verses from that quote, continue (paraphrased) as 'sshhhh don't tell anybody about it!!' How appropriate.... Let the recriminations begin!
Saturday 26 June 2010
700+ UK Lives Lost in Afghanistan
A terrible milestone of 700 UK service men and women have paid the ultimate price, and made the supreme sacrifice in Afghanistan since we were deployed there just a few years ago. It is a dreadful thing to lose any life in war, never mind 700! The news media, quite rightly paid a lot of attention to the war effort, and the part played by our brave military, both men and women, as they try to defeat an enemy which is almost unseen.
I don't want to get into an argument of whether the war in Afghanistan is just or unjust, or if we should be bringing our troops home now, or later. The thing that strikes me is the way we treat the word 'war'. This is not a numbers game, and neither is it played on games consoles of the Nintendo, or x-Box series. War is blood, lost limbs, shattered bones, broken bodies and psychological and emotional scars. Then there is the death of many. We seem to have missed some of that, and have come round to a way of thinking that war is somehow clean, and sanitised. We can kill from a distance, thus protecting ourselves from injury or death. We think we can be involved in a war from a safe way off, and without any loss of life. Our lives!
How do we come to think that 700 is a high number to be lost in a war? Between 1939 and 1945, the Russians lost 20 Million, yes 20 Million, Germany lost 7 Million, UK and USA 1 Million! In the context of these figures, where does Afghanistan stand? Does that make it a less just war? I don't think so. I think it is the attitude and resolve of the people who fought these battles that make the difference. They didn't have the benefit of Nintendo or Wii or X-Box, so they didn't think in terms of a bloodless war. They had the courage of conviction. We have lost that.
If we now had courage or convictions, we could make the correct judgement call to pull out of Afghanistan, or stay the course until the job is done. Until then, we play pretend computer games in our minds and delude ourselves into thinking we can have war without loss of life! Of course, the Taliban and Al Qaeda don't think like that, do they?
I don't want to get into an argument of whether the war in Afghanistan is just or unjust, or if we should be bringing our troops home now, or later. The thing that strikes me is the way we treat the word 'war'. This is not a numbers game, and neither is it played on games consoles of the Nintendo, or x-Box series. War is blood, lost limbs, shattered bones, broken bodies and psychological and emotional scars. Then there is the death of many. We seem to have missed some of that, and have come round to a way of thinking that war is somehow clean, and sanitised. We can kill from a distance, thus protecting ourselves from injury or death. We think we can be involved in a war from a safe way off, and without any loss of life. Our lives!
How do we come to think that 700 is a high number to be lost in a war? Between 1939 and 1945, the Russians lost 20 Million, yes 20 Million, Germany lost 7 Million, UK and USA 1 Million! In the context of these figures, where does Afghanistan stand? Does that make it a less just war? I don't think so. I think it is the attitude and resolve of the people who fought these battles that make the difference. They didn't have the benefit of Nintendo or Wii or X-Box, so they didn't think in terms of a bloodless war. They had the courage of conviction. We have lost that.
If we now had courage or convictions, we could make the correct judgement call to pull out of Afghanistan, or stay the course until the job is done. Until then, we play pretend computer games in our minds and delude ourselves into thinking we can have war without loss of life! Of course, the Taliban and Al Qaeda don't think like that, do they?
Thursday 24 June 2010
Ageism at all Ages.
Within the next few years, men will be retiring at 66, or even 68, and women's retirement age will follow hard in the heels of the men's. It seems we can't afford to pay the pension bills of the over 65s as it is, so we will have to work longer to make up the cost. In a way, that is understandable, although many people will disagree, and some violently!
This made me think about the ages of our life. Have you noticed that Primary School children (yes, they are still children, in spite of their appearance) want to be older than they are? They want to look older, act older, and do things which older people do. They look towards High School where all these older and very mature students go. There are no children in High School now. They are all students. Of course, the students in High School all want to be older as well. They want to look older, act older, and do things which older people do. Sorry, did I just say that before? Anyway, they look towards College or University or work places, where these more mature adults go.
When you are at College or University, or in your first job, you want to be older still, and in a 'relationship'. You don't 'go steady' anymore, you seem to flit about while looking for your prince or princess, and in the process kiss a lot of frogs! Before you know it, your childhood and the innocence of youth has gone, never to be retaken or recovered and you find yourself a parent with bills to pay and (ouch) responsibilities to shoulder. My question is simple. Was the urge to always be older, worth it?
Anyone who has watched the diet of TV programs aimed at young people, will see a very young, no taboos, no barriers, culture of actors who try to keep looking and behaving older than their 'screen image' actually is! Fun is usually poked at the younger and immature characters, who do not act and dress like them. I think young people have their own peer pressures, and unwritten rules, made up by themselves. The result is that childhood is something to be laughed at, and scorned, and never admitted to.
Predators have always been around and at every time in the past. That is nothing new, but am I wrong to think that there are many more than ever before? Predators are usually in the age group above you at least, and this is cause for concern. Since we have the very young now acting and dressing in a much older fashion than previous generations, we open them up to more danger, and yes with the advent of the internet age, bigger risks. Having squandered their childhood and innocence very early in life, I wonder if we, and they, are sitting on a ticking time bomb which may explode in a few years to come. Hard to say, but we will all know the outcome of that by the next generation's behaviour, when it will no longer be a question!
By the time this generation of children reach their own retirement age, they may not even remember the freedom and innocence of their childhood, and that would be sad!
This made me think about the ages of our life. Have you noticed that Primary School children (yes, they are still children, in spite of their appearance) want to be older than they are? They want to look older, act older, and do things which older people do. They look towards High School where all these older and very mature students go. There are no children in High School now. They are all students. Of course, the students in High School all want to be older as well. They want to look older, act older, and do things which older people do. Sorry, did I just say that before? Anyway, they look towards College or University or work places, where these more mature adults go.
When you are at College or University, or in your first job, you want to be older still, and in a 'relationship'. You don't 'go steady' anymore, you seem to flit about while looking for your prince or princess, and in the process kiss a lot of frogs! Before you know it, your childhood and the innocence of youth has gone, never to be retaken or recovered and you find yourself a parent with bills to pay and (ouch) responsibilities to shoulder. My question is simple. Was the urge to always be older, worth it?
Anyone who has watched the diet of TV programs aimed at young people, will see a very young, no taboos, no barriers, culture of actors who try to keep looking and behaving older than their 'screen image' actually is! Fun is usually poked at the younger and immature characters, who do not act and dress like them. I think young people have their own peer pressures, and unwritten rules, made up by themselves. The result is that childhood is something to be laughed at, and scorned, and never admitted to.
Predators have always been around and at every time in the past. That is nothing new, but am I wrong to think that there are many more than ever before? Predators are usually in the age group above you at least, and this is cause for concern. Since we have the very young now acting and dressing in a much older fashion than previous generations, we open them up to more danger, and yes with the advent of the internet age, bigger risks. Having squandered their childhood and innocence very early in life, I wonder if we, and they, are sitting on a ticking time bomb which may explode in a few years to come. Hard to say, but we will all know the outcome of that by the next generation's behaviour, when it will no longer be a question!
By the time this generation of children reach their own retirement age, they may not even remember the freedom and innocence of their childhood, and that would be sad!
Friday 18 June 2010
Due Process
I watched as the CEO of bp, Tony Hayward, sat in front of a US committee looking into the Deepwater Horizon Gulf Oil disaster, and learned a few lessons, I was not expecting to learn. I know in advance that my thoughts are not universal, and may not be accepted, but they are mine and arrived at by reason, not emotion.
Early in the hearing, Joe Barton, a Texan, apologised for the way Hayward had been treated, especially by the President in the White House, and likened it to a 'shakedown'. I confess I had to go and look that one up, and I found it means to extort money with menaces, or in other words bribery and corruption, and in the name of the highest office in the world! His apology was heartfelt, but withdrawn later when he was hustled by the other members of the committee.
The US law system is based on the principle of 'due process', which is the same as the UK basis of being innocent until proved guilty. Now this is where I learned my lessons. The process I saw yesterday was certainly not 'due process'. Guilt has already been established by the US people and their representatives. Now that may be true, and bp may be guilty of a serious breach of numerous safety procedures, but it appeared to be more of a lynch mob than a committee driven by getting the truth. On more than one occasion, bp was referred to as 'British Petroleum' in a deliberate ploy to take the focus away from the USA, in spite of the fact that they also have many rigs which use the same processes. Also, all actions taken were with the agreement of the relevant US safety agencies. Nothing was done outwith the agreed and accepted standards of the industry.
Another lesson learned, is that there was a definite desire to lay blame fully and completely on Tony Hayward. Yes, he is the CEO, and the right person to have in the dock, but it is illogical and unreasonable to assume that he holds the key to all the answers, and knows everything about other peoples emails sent up to 7 years previously. I'm afraid due process and reason went out of the committee room as they all lined up to take the knife and plunge it repeatedly into a person who has not been found guilty of any crime. It became routine that the same things were asked, which appeared to be incriminating, by every member, some of whom could hardly put two words of a sentence together, as they passed the knife to each eager person. Mind you, when the lynch mob is throwing the rope over the branch of the tree, you don't have to be fluent in any language.
My perception of the US legal and judicial system has disappointed me recently, as has the behaviour of the President of the greatest gas and oil guzzling nation in the world. I also listened as I learned that every other oil company (bar none!) has the same safety processes in place should any deep water explosion or blowout happen. These other companies must be very happy that they are not being held to account, well, not yet! The phrase, "There but for the grace of God, go I", springs to mind.
Having said all that, I am NOT saying that bp is innocent of all charges. It may be guilty, and certainly should pay heavily for the coastal damage caused. The lives lost, however, will never be brought back, and are lost for ever. It saddens me to see that the core of the accusations from the committee focussed on the environmental damage. Only some small references were made to the lives needlessly sacrificed on the high altar of our global need for oil and gas. For me, the only good which might come of all this, is that the USA will waken up to the need for energy systems which do not rely on the love affair with for oil. Other nations would quickly follow. On that score, we are literally "out of our depth", and it is beginning to show!
Early in the hearing, Joe Barton, a Texan, apologised for the way Hayward had been treated, especially by the President in the White House, and likened it to a 'shakedown'. I confess I had to go and look that one up, and I found it means to extort money with menaces, or in other words bribery and corruption, and in the name of the highest office in the world! His apology was heartfelt, but withdrawn later when he was hustled by the other members of the committee.
The US law system is based on the principle of 'due process', which is the same as the UK basis of being innocent until proved guilty. Now this is where I learned my lessons. The process I saw yesterday was certainly not 'due process'. Guilt has already been established by the US people and their representatives. Now that may be true, and bp may be guilty of a serious breach of numerous safety procedures, but it appeared to be more of a lynch mob than a committee driven by getting the truth. On more than one occasion, bp was referred to as 'British Petroleum' in a deliberate ploy to take the focus away from the USA, in spite of the fact that they also have many rigs which use the same processes. Also, all actions taken were with the agreement of the relevant US safety agencies. Nothing was done outwith the agreed and accepted standards of the industry.
Another lesson learned, is that there was a definite desire to lay blame fully and completely on Tony Hayward. Yes, he is the CEO, and the right person to have in the dock, but it is illogical and unreasonable to assume that he holds the key to all the answers, and knows everything about other peoples emails sent up to 7 years previously. I'm afraid due process and reason went out of the committee room as they all lined up to take the knife and plunge it repeatedly into a person who has not been found guilty of any crime. It became routine that the same things were asked, which appeared to be incriminating, by every member, some of whom could hardly put two words of a sentence together, as they passed the knife to each eager person. Mind you, when the lynch mob is throwing the rope over the branch of the tree, you don't have to be fluent in any language.
My perception of the US legal and judicial system has disappointed me recently, as has the behaviour of the President of the greatest gas and oil guzzling nation in the world. I also listened as I learned that every other oil company (bar none!) has the same safety processes in place should any deep water explosion or blowout happen. These other companies must be very happy that they are not being held to account, well, not yet! The phrase, "There but for the grace of God, go I", springs to mind.
Having said all that, I am NOT saying that bp is innocent of all charges. It may be guilty, and certainly should pay heavily for the coastal damage caused. The lives lost, however, will never be brought back, and are lost for ever. It saddens me to see that the core of the accusations from the committee focussed on the environmental damage. Only some small references were made to the lives needlessly sacrificed on the high altar of our global need for oil and gas. For me, the only good which might come of all this, is that the USA will waken up to the need for energy systems which do not rely on the love affair with for oil. Other nations would quickly follow. On that score, we are literally "out of our depth", and it is beginning to show!
Wednesday 16 June 2010
The Bottle For 50??
Moves are afoot in UK government circles to look at reducing the drink driving limit from 80mg to 50 mg per 100ml, and no sooner has the word got out, than there is an outcry. Who from, you ask? Well the publicans and the drinks industry of course.
It is calculated that this reduction would save 160 lives in the first year in the UK alone! Once again we are up against the powerful drinks industry. They couldn't agree on minimum pricing in Scotland, because they claimed there was no link which proved that lives could be saved, and I fear we are all on that merry go round again. Remember the tobacco industry said similar things about the smoking ban in public places? They are very quiet now, because the medical society was right all along. Once again, we have the medics lining up against the drinks industry, and they will trot out the same tired old stuff again.
The vast majority of European countries are already using the 50mg level, and we would be in line with them, no different, and not any stricter. I fear we will get bogged down in statistics again, and forget the 160 lives which could be saved in the first year. It seems that 160 deaths are not enough to sway the opinion, or the balance sheets of the big alcohol companies. I wonder how many lives it would take?
The Scottish Government stalled at the introduction of the minimum pricing bill, and it failed amongst parties each blaming the other for the failure. Please let's not hesitate again when we have another chance of facing down the breweries. We have a UK and Scottish drink problem, and everyone knows it. This is a 'no brainer' and needs to be implemented to save lives, so let's all stand against the other so called educated, well spoken 'no brainers' who will try to rubbish the worth of a life!
It is calculated that this reduction would save 160 lives in the first year in the UK alone! Once again we are up against the powerful drinks industry. They couldn't agree on minimum pricing in Scotland, because they claimed there was no link which proved that lives could be saved, and I fear we are all on that merry go round again. Remember the tobacco industry said similar things about the smoking ban in public places? They are very quiet now, because the medical society was right all along. Once again, we have the medics lining up against the drinks industry, and they will trot out the same tired old stuff again.
The vast majority of European countries are already using the 50mg level, and we would be in line with them, no different, and not any stricter. I fear we will get bogged down in statistics again, and forget the 160 lives which could be saved in the first year. It seems that 160 deaths are not enough to sway the opinion, or the balance sheets of the big alcohol companies. I wonder how many lives it would take?
The Scottish Government stalled at the introduction of the minimum pricing bill, and it failed amongst parties each blaming the other for the failure. Please let's not hesitate again when we have another chance of facing down the breweries. We have a UK and Scottish drink problem, and everyone knows it. This is a 'no brainer' and needs to be implemented to save lives, so let's all stand against the other so called educated, well spoken 'no brainers' who will try to rubbish the worth of a life!
Tuesday 15 June 2010
Gulf Oil Leak - The Blame Game
It seems we have now moved into the serious business of hanging blame for the deaths, accidental oil explosion and massive leak in the Gulf of Mexico. It becomes more apparent that there will be no quick fix for the problem, and nothing to stem the flow until the parallel drilling is completed sometime in August. So, what do we do meantime? We blame, and it all comes too easily to our lips.
President Obama has not been quiet. He feels strongly, and has already said the chief of bp would not be working for him. He obviously wants to lay blame on someone. It should be noted that 40% of all invested money in bp, comes from the USA. Not only that, but there are tens of thousands of employees of bp who live and work in the Gulf area. Oh, and the name of the company has not been 'British Petroleum' since the 80's, when it changed to bp, mainly because of its US, and multi national standing . President Obama's words have already caused millions of dollars to be wiped off the value of shares, both in the USA and across the world. Some people have even called for a boycott of bp and all their subsidiaries. Harsh talk, but is it justified?
It is worth defining the word accident. It is "any unplanned event that resulted in injury or ill health of people, or damage or loss to property", and worth remembering. We are beginning to look and sound like we have a company in the arena, and about to set the lions on them to see if they survive. They will be innocent if they live! Human nature needs, and wants us to blame so easily. It makes us feel in control, and in this case, we are not in control. Not the US President, not the Chairman of bp, no one.
How would we feel if we were judged on those things which we accidentally did? Do we chastise our children when they have accidents? How about those times when they didn't know the full extent of their actions? Do we treat them in the same way as if they had deliberately set out to do wrong? No. What if we carry that same argument to our own judgement? Will God judge us the same as we judge others? I hope not. He 'will give mercy, not justice'. I would not wish to be judged by anyone in this life, and certainly not in the next life, by those things which were accidental wrongs.
Why are we so quick to use a different set of laws in judgement here, when we have already been forgiven so many accidental crimes and sins, by a loving God? Maybe it's a sign of our humanity, and again, maybe it's a sign of our distance from the same God who will judge us some day. I like the verse which says, "Will not the judge of all do right"? I for one, am counting on it.
President Obama has not been quiet. He feels strongly, and has already said the chief of bp would not be working for him. He obviously wants to lay blame on someone. It should be noted that 40% of all invested money in bp, comes from the USA. Not only that, but there are tens of thousands of employees of bp who live and work in the Gulf area. Oh, and the name of the company has not been 'British Petroleum' since the 80's, when it changed to bp, mainly because of its US, and multi national standing . President Obama's words have already caused millions of dollars to be wiped off the value of shares, both in the USA and across the world. Some people have even called for a boycott of bp and all their subsidiaries. Harsh talk, but is it justified?
It is worth defining the word accident. It is "any unplanned event that resulted in injury or ill health of people, or damage or loss to property", and worth remembering. We are beginning to look and sound like we have a company in the arena, and about to set the lions on them to see if they survive. They will be innocent if they live! Human nature needs, and wants us to blame so easily. It makes us feel in control, and in this case, we are not in control. Not the US President, not the Chairman of bp, no one.
How would we feel if we were judged on those things which we accidentally did? Do we chastise our children when they have accidents? How about those times when they didn't know the full extent of their actions? Do we treat them in the same way as if they had deliberately set out to do wrong? No. What if we carry that same argument to our own judgement? Will God judge us the same as we judge others? I hope not. He 'will give mercy, not justice'. I would not wish to be judged by anyone in this life, and certainly not in the next life, by those things which were accidental wrongs.
Why are we so quick to use a different set of laws in judgement here, when we have already been forgiven so many accidental crimes and sins, by a loving God? Maybe it's a sign of our humanity, and again, maybe it's a sign of our distance from the same God who will judge us some day. I like the verse which says, "Will not the judge of all do right"? I for one, am counting on it.
Monday 14 June 2010
Gone Quiet
Have you noticed the silence? Have you listened to the English World Cup football pundits as they lick wounds, and tuck tails between their legs? The English (yes, a bit like the Americans too) are a 'loud and proud' people, and if they are in any group, you will hear them above everybody else. I have now found what silences the English football media, and it's an own goal!
Part of me feels sorry for the goalkeeper, who will be remembered for his blunder, all the rest of his life. It will be replayed all over the world for every world cup competition to come in the years ahead. Robert Green's name will forever be linked with lots of 'butter fingered' headlines, and they will for the most part, be deserved. The football community do not forgive or forget easily. This gaffe may have cost the England team's hopes dear, and may have cost them a place in the semis or even the final!
On the other hand, the England football media camp tone has changed drastically. No one saw this coming. Prior to the blunder by Green, the UK (English) TV, radio and newspapers had their team as invincible, unbeatable, and some even saw them as lifting the World Cup. How proud and arrogant is that? They seem to be unaware of how they come across! It makes you cringe. So now, very quickly, they have had to rethink and regroup, and that has meant they have gone quiet. That is good for us all, but I fear will be short lived, so enjoy it while you can. Will they ever learn to only put their mouths into gear when their brains are engaged? No, I don't think that will happen either.
Quotes, "Let him that thinks he stands, take care lest he fall", or how about "Pride goes before a fall, and a haughty spirit before destruction". How appropriate are these old Bible warnings? Who said the Bible was out of date, and wasn't relevant nowadays?
Part of me feels sorry for the goalkeeper, who will be remembered for his blunder, all the rest of his life. It will be replayed all over the world for every world cup competition to come in the years ahead. Robert Green's name will forever be linked with lots of 'butter fingered' headlines, and they will for the most part, be deserved. The football community do not forgive or forget easily. This gaffe may have cost the England team's hopes dear, and may have cost them a place in the semis or even the final!
On the other hand, the England football media camp tone has changed drastically. No one saw this coming. Prior to the blunder by Green, the UK (English) TV, radio and newspapers had their team as invincible, unbeatable, and some even saw them as lifting the World Cup. How proud and arrogant is that? They seem to be unaware of how they come across! It makes you cringe. So now, very quickly, they have had to rethink and regroup, and that has meant they have gone quiet. That is good for us all, but I fear will be short lived, so enjoy it while you can. Will they ever learn to only put their mouths into gear when their brains are engaged? No, I don't think that will happen either.
Quotes, "Let him that thinks he stands, take care lest he fall", or how about "Pride goes before a fall, and a haughty spirit before destruction". How appropriate are these old Bible warnings? Who said the Bible was out of date, and wasn't relevant nowadays?
Thursday 10 June 2010
Harmless Sporting Rivalry?
Anyone who doesn't know that the football World Cup is being played in South Africa soon, is on some other planet, because love or loathe the sport, you certainly cannot ignore it. There have been many good images shown of the South Africans celebrating the event because it helps push their country onto the centre of the world's stage for a while, and good for them! Good natured singing and dancing in the streets as only the African nations can. It should also be noted that there are 32 teams in this tournament.
That's England plus 31 others, and there's the rub. The UK is a composite country which is home to four distinct nations, English, and the Celtic nations of Scots, Irish and Welsh. I can't speak for the other parts of our Celtic heritage, but the Scots seem to have a real chip on their shoulder when it comes to anything English, but especially where football is concerned. Passions are aroused which seem to be embedded in the battlefields of Bannockburn in 1314, and Culloden in 1745. These battles from 700 years ago feed us with a strong desire to get back at the English in any way, but especially where football is concerned.
This thinking comes across in statements made by the Scots, when faced with their English rivals, like:
"It's all a bit of good natured fun".
"There's no harm in it".
"It's just sporting rivalry".
"I don't mind who beats England".
"I support two teams, Scotland and whoever plays England".
"I don't mind who beats England".
"It's a part of our Scottish heritage".
"Go and watch Braveheart".
...and there are many more which you have heard, some less pleasant, and much more harmful. Have you noticed that they all centre around a very negative mindset? It is who can beat England, and not support of the other teams because of who they are. I now know that the initials ABE are used by some to say "Anybody But England" and that really sums it up for me. In any other debate scenario, we would call that "illogical", "unreasonable", "irrational", or even "racist", and "bigoted". In this sense it is not harmless, and will perpetuate the underlying dislike of the English to our children. And we still think it's a bit of fun. If anyone disagrees, they will be told to "lighten up" and that will make it all ok. Trouble is, it doesn't. What if the same phrases were used in the cases of Blacks and Whites, or Protestants and Catholics? We would call it racial hatred, and that is a crime in our land.
How about these statements to balance out the others given before:
"Love your neighbour".
"Rejoice with those who rejoice"
"Let your love be without hypocrisy".
"Blessed are the peacemakers".
"Let this mind be in you, love one another".
Now I will be the first to say that this is hard to do. You see I am a Scot too, and some of that passion is in me as well, although I am not a football fan in any sense. The thing that gets my goat is the way the UK media portray the English team as if it is the national team, to the exclusion of the other three great Celtic nations. There is a level of superiority and arrogance which goes right against the grain, but the bottom line is, we didn't make it to the tournament, they did, and we should be big enough to understand that. Instead we turn into moaners and groaners, bringing up deep insecurities and our feeling of inferiority. I am a Scot first, but that shouldn't make me anti English, should it? I should be able to support any team I want to, because of who that team IS, and not who they are NOT. As it happens, the first game England play will be against the USA, and I hope the USA win. That's nothing to do with football, that's because I have many happy memories of being in America and meeting up with some great people. However, at the risk of being branded a heretic, or unhinged, I will support England if they progress further. Trouble is, I don't think I could stand the media frenzy if they should lift the world cup, but that's a matter for me and my conscience. It would be the 1966 reruns all over again, and I am not ready for that! Maybe then I hope they do well, but not THAT well :).
Please don't tell me to lighten up. The Scots are a great nation and should not be measured up and compared to the English, or anyone else for that matter. Let's be that great nation again, because we deserve it in our own right, and that can only come about by "the renewing of our minds" (That's another great quote).
That's England plus 31 others, and there's the rub. The UK is a composite country which is home to four distinct nations, English, and the Celtic nations of Scots, Irish and Welsh. I can't speak for the other parts of our Celtic heritage, but the Scots seem to have a real chip on their shoulder when it comes to anything English, but especially where football is concerned. Passions are aroused which seem to be embedded in the battlefields of Bannockburn in 1314, and Culloden in 1745. These battles from 700 years ago feed us with a strong desire to get back at the English in any way, but especially where football is concerned.
This thinking comes across in statements made by the Scots, when faced with their English rivals, like:
"It's all a bit of good natured fun".
"There's no harm in it".
"It's just sporting rivalry".
"I don't mind who beats England".
"I support two teams, Scotland and whoever plays England".
"I don't mind who beats England".
"It's a part of our Scottish heritage".
"Go and watch Braveheart".
...and there are many more which you have heard, some less pleasant, and much more harmful. Have you noticed that they all centre around a very negative mindset? It is who can beat England, and not support of the other teams because of who they are. I now know that the initials ABE are used by some to say "Anybody But England" and that really sums it up for me. In any other debate scenario, we would call that "illogical", "unreasonable", "irrational", or even "racist", and "bigoted". In this sense it is not harmless, and will perpetuate the underlying dislike of the English to our children. And we still think it's a bit of fun. If anyone disagrees, they will be told to "lighten up" and that will make it all ok. Trouble is, it doesn't. What if the same phrases were used in the cases of Blacks and Whites, or Protestants and Catholics? We would call it racial hatred, and that is a crime in our land.
How about these statements to balance out the others given before:
"Love your neighbour".
"Rejoice with those who rejoice"
"Let your love be without hypocrisy".
"Blessed are the peacemakers".
"Let this mind be in you, love one another".
Now I will be the first to say that this is hard to do. You see I am a Scot too, and some of that passion is in me as well, although I am not a football fan in any sense. The thing that gets my goat is the way the UK media portray the English team as if it is the national team, to the exclusion of the other three great Celtic nations. There is a level of superiority and arrogance which goes right against the grain, but the bottom line is, we didn't make it to the tournament, they did, and we should be big enough to understand that. Instead we turn into moaners and groaners, bringing up deep insecurities and our feeling of inferiority. I am a Scot first, but that shouldn't make me anti English, should it? I should be able to support any team I want to, because of who that team IS, and not who they are NOT. As it happens, the first game England play will be against the USA, and I hope the USA win. That's nothing to do with football, that's because I have many happy memories of being in America and meeting up with some great people. However, at the risk of being branded a heretic, or unhinged, I will support England if they progress further. Trouble is, I don't think I could stand the media frenzy if they should lift the world cup, but that's a matter for me and my conscience. It would be the 1966 reruns all over again, and I am not ready for that! Maybe then I hope they do well, but not THAT well :).
Please don't tell me to lighten up. The Scots are a great nation and should not be measured up and compared to the English, or anyone else for that matter. Let's be that great nation again, because we deserve it in our own right, and that can only come about by "the renewing of our minds" (That's another great quote).
Tuesday 8 June 2010
Cause of Atheism?
"The greatest single cause for atheism in the world today is Christians, who acknowledge Jesus with their lips and walk out the door and deny Him by their lifestyle". Brennan Manning. I have to confess that I have not heard of this guy, but what he says is true.
Trying to live your life in the best way, is not easy. It takes a lot of backbone at times, because you tend to find yourself at odds with what is accepted as 'normal' and mainstream. As the quote says, 'we deny Him by our lifestyle'. Oh, don't get me wrong, I certainly don't mean that we should live like Monks and Nuns, although these folks are commendable in their commitment. No, I mean living IN this society, but being noticeably different.
I was brought up (and still attend) a church which in its early years was known by the things they did not do. Now, we have gotten away from that and have adopted a new philosophy of looking for, and emphasising, the positive side of Christianity. This is good as far as it goes, but I sometimes think we have thrown the baby out with the bathwater. Our churches are now full of good people who are no different than any others who are not church goers (and in some cases, worse).
We have started to accept and practice all those things which set us apart originally. I am reminded of the story of the man who asked his friend if he saw him as different in any way, hoping to show the difference to allow him to ask his friend to come to church with him. The other man thought for a moment and said, yes you are different, I can see it, you are a vegetarian aren't you? He had made a good impression, but not the one he wanted.
The best judges of our lifestyle, and if it is Christ-like, are the non church goers. One thing that is never heard now is, 'I thought you were a Christian, and I didn't think you did that'! Now we do anything and almost everything those around us do, so where's the difference now?
Church leaders of all denominations are bemoaning the decline of membership and attendance. Maybe that's because there is so little difference between us all now, and whose fault is that? Answer: the same churches who lowered their standards in the first place. Maybe we need to get back to basics, and that's the stuff that makes us different, not the same. It is not an exaggeration then to say there is a short step from belief to atheism.
Trying to live your life in the best way, is not easy. It takes a lot of backbone at times, because you tend to find yourself at odds with what is accepted as 'normal' and mainstream. As the quote says, 'we deny Him by our lifestyle'. Oh, don't get me wrong, I certainly don't mean that we should live like Monks and Nuns, although these folks are commendable in their commitment. No, I mean living IN this society, but being noticeably different.
I was brought up (and still attend) a church which in its early years was known by the things they did not do. Now, we have gotten away from that and have adopted a new philosophy of looking for, and emphasising, the positive side of Christianity. This is good as far as it goes, but I sometimes think we have thrown the baby out with the bathwater. Our churches are now full of good people who are no different than any others who are not church goers (and in some cases, worse).
We have started to accept and practice all those things which set us apart originally. I am reminded of the story of the man who asked his friend if he saw him as different in any way, hoping to show the difference to allow him to ask his friend to come to church with him. The other man thought for a moment and said, yes you are different, I can see it, you are a vegetarian aren't you? He had made a good impression, but not the one he wanted.
The best judges of our lifestyle, and if it is Christ-like, are the non church goers. One thing that is never heard now is, 'I thought you were a Christian, and I didn't think you did that'! Now we do anything and almost everything those around us do, so where's the difference now?
Church leaders of all denominations are bemoaning the decline of membership and attendance. Maybe that's because there is so little difference between us all now, and whose fault is that? Answer: the same churches who lowered their standards in the first place. Maybe we need to get back to basics, and that's the stuff that makes us different, not the same. It is not an exaggeration then to say there is a short step from belief to atheism.
Football Crazy!
It's football season again. Actually, to be more accurate it's World Cup football time, and that happens only once every four years, but for me that's more than enough. Am I the only person in the planet who is not enthralled by all the activity on and off the field of play, by the top world's football teams?
It is salt in the wound when Scotland didn't even qualify. They didn't ever look close to getting there. Maybe that would have given me a little more incentive to check now and again, how they were doing. I doubt if I would have watched a full match anyway, but I might have had a little more than just a passing interest.
I have been thinking what it is that makes the world so interested and passionate about football, and especially the pinnacle of the World Cup. I have to give it to the teams for their passion, hard work, intense training, teamwork, rivalry, competitiveness, national pride, and all of these things spill over into the supporters.
So what's the other side of this competition? I watched a friendly spat between England and another team, where Wayne Rooney was cautioned for swearing and foul language. That's probably just the tip of a great big iceberg. What will happen when the World Cup starts for real? Now for the down side to balance all those good things said earlier. These 'role models' (and I am especially thinking of our England team) will be seen and heard to be (the media are everywhere), bad tempered, foul mouthed, non-sportsmanlike on and off the pitch (how many Scots want anyone at all to beat England?), petty, argumentative with the ref, foul, dive all over the pitch, pull, punch, kick and drag their opponents if they think they are not being seen, and that's not to mention the tears and tantrums if they get beaten. The closer they get to the final, the worse all of these things will get.
Well, maybe not. After all, according the UK media, our national team, England, have won already anyway, and they haven't even started the tournament yet! There is a certain level of arrogance there! The point of all this is to highlight the fact that this round of world class football will ignite low-life passions in a lot of people, and not all those passions will be good ones. Our national role models will not help our youth to tell the difference between winning and sportsmanship. Should we be worried? I think so.
It is salt in the wound when Scotland didn't even qualify. They didn't ever look close to getting there. Maybe that would have given me a little more incentive to check now and again, how they were doing. I doubt if I would have watched a full match anyway, but I might have had a little more than just a passing interest.
I have been thinking what it is that makes the world so interested and passionate about football, and especially the pinnacle of the World Cup. I have to give it to the teams for their passion, hard work, intense training, teamwork, rivalry, competitiveness, national pride, and all of these things spill over into the supporters.
So what's the other side of this competition? I watched a friendly spat between England and another team, where Wayne Rooney was cautioned for swearing and foul language. That's probably just the tip of a great big iceberg. What will happen when the World Cup starts for real? Now for the down side to balance all those good things said earlier. These 'role models' (and I am especially thinking of our England team) will be seen and heard to be (the media are everywhere), bad tempered, foul mouthed, non-sportsmanlike on and off the pitch (how many Scots want anyone at all to beat England?), petty, argumentative with the ref, foul, dive all over the pitch, pull, punch, kick and drag their opponents if they think they are not being seen, and that's not to mention the tears and tantrums if they get beaten. The closer they get to the final, the worse all of these things will get.
Well, maybe not. After all, according the UK media, our national team, England, have won already anyway, and they haven't even started the tournament yet! There is a certain level of arrogance there! The point of all this is to highlight the fact that this round of world class football will ignite low-life passions in a lot of people, and not all those passions will be good ones. Our national role models will not help our youth to tell the difference between winning and sportsmanship. Should we be worried? I think so.
Saturday 5 June 2010
Mexican Gulf Oil Leak
Oil Leak in the Gulf of Mexico. We can put a man on the moon, but we cannot put a plug in a leaky pipe. Crude analysis (sorry about that)! Apparently BP are doing their best to resolve the problem, but it's not good enough for the President.
Just a thought. Why is it that the biggest oil using country in the world, who want and need oil 'at any price', allow the oil companies to drill deeper than ever before, but (big BUT) when something goes wrong, and the (environmental) price for their oil usage gets too high, they get all filled with righteous anger and indignation? I can't help but wonder if there would have been the same Presidential intervention if the oil company was 'Exxon' or another of the US oil giants?
The USA needs the Gulf of Mexico oil, otherwise it becomes more and more reliant on the Middle Eastern Arab States oil countries, and they would not want that. So, the result? The USA will make a lot of noise over the mistake of a 'foreign' oil company, which is the politically easy thing to do, and when the dust settles, go back to drilling deeper than ever before! And all will be well again, because the USA will have their oil supply back to feed an insatiable appetite. Reducing the need for oil doesn't seem to be an option!
Just a thought. Why is it that the biggest oil using country in the world, who want and need oil 'at any price', allow the oil companies to drill deeper than ever before, but (big BUT) when something goes wrong, and the (environmental) price for their oil usage gets too high, they get all filled with righteous anger and indignation? I can't help but wonder if there would have been the same Presidential intervention if the oil company was 'Exxon' or another of the US oil giants?
The USA needs the Gulf of Mexico oil, otherwise it becomes more and more reliant on the Middle Eastern Arab States oil countries, and they would not want that. So, the result? The USA will make a lot of noise over the mistake of a 'foreign' oil company, which is the politically easy thing to do, and when the dust settles, go back to drilling deeper than ever before! And all will be well again, because the USA will have their oil supply back to feed an insatiable appetite. Reducing the need for oil doesn't seem to be an option!
The Rachel Corrie
The ship 'Rachel Corrie' is on its way to a port in Gaza with supplies and food and medical equipment and building materials, but the Israelis want to intercept it, and in fact did. On the face of things, this is a strange action, but I think we need to ask why? As in everything, there are two sides to every story. This is no exception. Everyone has rights. Everyone, and that includes Israel. Sometimes I think we have lost sight of reason, and reckon that if Israel is involved, then they are automatically in the wrong.
Lets look at some facts. In the past few days, the Israeli military boarded a ship, which was part of a flotilla of ships on their way to Gaza with 'supplies', and carrying peaceful 'activists'. It turned out that some the supplies were not allowed, and internationally illegal. Not all building materials are legitimate. Some were very obviously for weapons building or use. Another point worth remembering is that Israel does allow aid to get to Gaza every week, after checking the content. Who can blame them? On many occasions, they have found material to make weapons which will be used against the ordinary people of Israel. Nine people lost their lives, and others were seriously injured trying to make a political point. Take a look at the word 'activist'. This does not mean supporter, or sympathiser, it means action, and actions of defiance as necessary. All aid was eventually sent to the people of Gaza by the Israelis, by land. So what's the problem?
This ship is making another point. It is more than just taking aid to Gaza, because no matter what happens, the appropriate aid for the people in that land, will get there. But only after it has been checked by the authorities, who also want to protect their own civilian population from indiscriminate rocket attacks. The point is that after the media storm over the boarding of the flotilla ship last week, the activists know that any and all media will be on their side. I believe that these same activists are more interested in the ship being boarded, and the sympathetic benefits they would get for their cause from the media, than the aid getting to the stricken peoples of Gaza.
Gaza is a pawn in a bigger game, and the Palestinians are using this to full advantage. Lets not mince words. The Israelis and Arabs don't like each other. Ok, they hate each other... ok ok they detest each other's very existence. In fact, the basic tenet of the Arab nations is for the 'destruction of Israel' and that's a quote. Oh, another point. There is a common thread in the following words, see if you can tell what it is.... Arab, Muslim, Al Qaeda, Suicide Bomber, Islamic Extremist. It doesn't take a whole lot of thought to know that they all want the annihilation of the Israeli race. Now balance that!
Lets look at some facts. In the past few days, the Israeli military boarded a ship, which was part of a flotilla of ships on their way to Gaza with 'supplies', and carrying peaceful 'activists'. It turned out that some the supplies were not allowed, and internationally illegal. Not all building materials are legitimate. Some were very obviously for weapons building or use. Another point worth remembering is that Israel does allow aid to get to Gaza every week, after checking the content. Who can blame them? On many occasions, they have found material to make weapons which will be used against the ordinary people of Israel. Nine people lost their lives, and others were seriously injured trying to make a political point. Take a look at the word 'activist'. This does not mean supporter, or sympathiser, it means action, and actions of defiance as necessary. All aid was eventually sent to the people of Gaza by the Israelis, by land. So what's the problem?
This ship is making another point. It is more than just taking aid to Gaza, because no matter what happens, the appropriate aid for the people in that land, will get there. But only after it has been checked by the authorities, who also want to protect their own civilian population from indiscriminate rocket attacks. The point is that after the media storm over the boarding of the flotilla ship last week, the activists know that any and all media will be on their side. I believe that these same activists are more interested in the ship being boarded, and the sympathetic benefits they would get for their cause from the media, than the aid getting to the stricken peoples of Gaza.
Gaza is a pawn in a bigger game, and the Palestinians are using this to full advantage. Lets not mince words. The Israelis and Arabs don't like each other. Ok, they hate each other... ok ok they detest each other's very existence. In fact, the basic tenet of the Arab nations is for the 'destruction of Israel' and that's a quote. Oh, another point. There is a common thread in the following words, see if you can tell what it is.... Arab, Muslim, Al Qaeda, Suicide Bomber, Islamic Extremist. It doesn't take a whole lot of thought to know that they all want the annihilation of the Israeli race. Now balance that!
Thursday 3 June 2010
Deceitful and Wicked
Derrick Bird has run a rampage of terror in Cumbria, and right away, we analyse all the actions of a man who behaved in a totally unacceptable manner, and gunned down 12 people, then turned the gun on himself. There is no doubt that this man was deceitful and wicked as the title suggests, and we need to learn from this tragic event.
A crime like this has three elements, the gunman, the gun, and the ammunition. The gunman is out of his mind, and is not thinking clearly, so we need to do some things with the other two. At this point, we need to get rid of the PC Brigade, and the 'We have our liberty to protect' Brigade. People's lives are at risk when a gunman acts in a deceitful and wicked manner. How about these suggestions? I think they are common sense, and don't need a committee deliberating for a year or two, to come up with them.
1. Allow guns to be owned by those who have a legitimate use for them. The military. The police, and farmers for pest control. A taxi driver has no need to own a gun.
2. Keep the guns in a separate place/house from the ammunition.
3. Shut down gun clubs with immediate effect. These wee men with big guns are dangerous.
4. Don't give any gun licence to anyone with a criminal record, and that is anyone!
This guy had two guns, and the proper licences to own them. If we don't learn from this basic lesson, we will go through it all again. Do we really want to become like our American cousins who relish their 'right to bear arms' and will even produce a celebrity to brandish a high powered rifle from a podium in a speech a few yards from the White House to make a point? Lets not wait until it is too late, before we are in a similar position. Remember Dunblane? After that we learned, and changed the laws. Remember Columbine? After that, the federal US government did nothing, and it all happened again... and again....
We cannot stop a person from doing wrong, and yes evil, but we can do something to make it harder for the circumstances to make the gun, and the ammunition too readily available. A gun without ammunition is useless. Now for the PC Brigade... shut up!! Don't give me the crocodile tears while you want to continue to play with your war weapons. Don't forget, that guns have one purpose only, and that is to kill! It's not for target practice, or hunting rabbits, stupid!!!
Oh, I started with the phrase 'deceitful and wicked' relating to the crime, but let me give you the whole quote. "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it"? (The Bible, that book we don't read any more). So we are all capable of doing the wrong thing, and even 'going mental' at times. The human heart is not predictable, and is capable of great good, and unfortunately evil too). That heart doesn't only belong to Derrick Bird, today's maniac gunman. That heart belongs to us too, so let's take care that we remove the means to do evil, from our reach. It's not hard to grasp, just difficult to let go, and do something which will make a difference in our own life, and in our society too.
Let's not be having this discussion again in a few months or years time. Please??
A crime like this has three elements, the gunman, the gun, and the ammunition. The gunman is out of his mind, and is not thinking clearly, so we need to do some things with the other two. At this point, we need to get rid of the PC Brigade, and the 'We have our liberty to protect' Brigade. People's lives are at risk when a gunman acts in a deceitful and wicked manner. How about these suggestions? I think they are common sense, and don't need a committee deliberating for a year or two, to come up with them.
1. Allow guns to be owned by those who have a legitimate use for them. The military. The police, and farmers for pest control. A taxi driver has no need to own a gun.
2. Keep the guns in a separate place/house from the ammunition.
3. Shut down gun clubs with immediate effect. These wee men with big guns are dangerous.
4. Don't give any gun licence to anyone with a criminal record, and that is anyone!
This guy had two guns, and the proper licences to own them. If we don't learn from this basic lesson, we will go through it all again. Do we really want to become like our American cousins who relish their 'right to bear arms' and will even produce a celebrity to brandish a high powered rifle from a podium in a speech a few yards from the White House to make a point? Lets not wait until it is too late, before we are in a similar position. Remember Dunblane? After that we learned, and changed the laws. Remember Columbine? After that, the federal US government did nothing, and it all happened again... and again....
We cannot stop a person from doing wrong, and yes evil, but we can do something to make it harder for the circumstances to make the gun, and the ammunition too readily available. A gun without ammunition is useless. Now for the PC Brigade... shut up!! Don't give me the crocodile tears while you want to continue to play with your war weapons. Don't forget, that guns have one purpose only, and that is to kill! It's not for target practice, or hunting rabbits, stupid!!!
Oh, I started with the phrase 'deceitful and wicked' relating to the crime, but let me give you the whole quote. "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it"? (The Bible, that book we don't read any more). So we are all capable of doing the wrong thing, and even 'going mental' at times. The human heart is not predictable, and is capable of great good, and unfortunately evil too). That heart doesn't only belong to Derrick Bird, today's maniac gunman. That heart belongs to us too, so let's take care that we remove the means to do evil, from our reach. It's not hard to grasp, just difficult to let go, and do something which will make a difference in our own life, and in our society too.
Let's not be having this discussion again in a few months or years time. Please??
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)