Saturday Night Audio Meditation - Bjork, "All is Love."

James: This song by Bjork is a serene meditation complete with mokugyo beats that aid in counting deep, relaxing breaths. I float through the heavy Saturday evening like I was riding upon notes as they rose skyward propelled by their vibrations; twinkling in the minds eye like dancing stars. Soon this moment will fade, and I will ease seamlessly into a dream state. Morning awaits. Sleep well, friends.

Faith and Politics Collide in Kenya

This article comes from John Allen, Jr.'s blog "All Things Catholic" at the National Catholic Reporter.

-----------------------------------------------------------

A Kenyan lesson in faith, politics, and the Christian future

John L. Allen, Jr.

Next Wednesday, Kenyans head to the polls to vote on a new national constitution. It’s intended to ease the political and tribal tensions which erupted in violence in early 2008, leaving more than 1,000 Kenyans dead and some 300,000 displaced. The referendum is being closely followed all across Africa, since Kenya has long been a beacon of hope -- an African society that’s well-educated, economically advanced, and, until recently, stable.

Seen through a religious lens, the interesting point about Wednesday’s vote is that the Constitution appears set to pass despite overwhelming opposition from Kenya’s Christian leaders. There may be an important lesson to be culled from that about the Christian future, especially the intersection of faith and politics. 

From the outside, what most Westerners know about religion in Africa is simply that it’s booming. That’s certainly true in Kenya, where the population is one-quarter Catholic and almost 80 percent Christian. Mass attendance rates among the nine million Catholics are astronomic by Western standards, and Kenya is a net exporter of priests. In 2005, I asked then-Archbishop Ndingi Mwana a’Nzeki of Nairobi to describe his most urgent challenges, and he began with a problem that would be the wildest dream of many a Western bishop: “We have so many vocations!”

Faced with such vibrant religiosity, it’s tempting to conclude that Africa today is what the West once was, before the rise of the various “-isms” of modernity: secularism, relativism, positivism, etc. Yet you can’t step into the same river twice, and Africa in 2010 is not Europe in 1010. In particular, the deep religiosity of Africa doesn’t mean the continent is a theocracy, where Christian potentates can snap their fingers and produce political results -- a point which the constitutional referendum in Kenya may well illustrate.

Kenya’s pan-Christian coalition in favor of a “No!” vote includes Catholic and Anglican bishops, as well as pastors and preachers from a staggering variety of Pentecostal and Evangelical churches. Today, as this column is posted, the Catholic Basilica of the Holy Family in Nairobi is hosting an ecumenical prayer service -- praying, that is, for the referendum to fail.

While Christian leaders have a laundry list of objections, they boil down to two points:

• Abortion: The draft constitution would permit abortion if, in the judgment of a medical professional, “the life or health of the mother” is at risk. Christian leaders complain that language could open the door to Western-style abortion on demand, funded by the national government.
• Islamic Courts: Muslims are about 10 percent of the Kenyan population, concentrated in the southern Coast province. Islamic tribunals, known as “Khadi Courts,” have been in existence since independence, enjoying power over matters such as marriage and inheritance, but the courts were recently declared unconstitutional in a case brought by Christian churches. The new constitution retains the courts and exempts Muslims from a wide range of personal and property rights, as well as laws on marriage and divorce. The bishops assert that these provisions “elevate one religion over another.”

Whatever the merits of those arguments, they apparently haven’t persuaded many Kenyans – who, while certainly not pro-abortion or eager for an Islamic take-over, also seem broadly approving of provisions in the draft for land reform, greater checks and balances for the presidency, and a stronger role for local governments. A mid-July poll from the market research company Synovate found that almost 60 percent of voters support the new constitution, a level essentially unchanged from two months ago.

Hence the apparent paradox, at least for those who presume that deeply religious cultures are obliged to follow pre-modern European patterns: While three-quarters of Kenyans are Christian (the vast majority active, practicing Christians), two-thirds appear poised to vote against the advice of their clergy. African observers say the explanation is actually fairly simple. The millennium-long European tradition of churches dictating the political allegiances of their members is basically extraneous to Africa, where people are more accustomed to taking their political cues from their tribal leaders, not their pastors.

Now for the truly intriguing question: Is this something for Christians to rue, or to embrace?

On the one hand, if Christian leaders in Kenya are unable to mobilize public opinion -- especially in defense of core values such as the sanctity of human life and religious equality -- that failure could be interpreted to suggest undeveloped social capital in African Christianity, meaning an inability to evangelize culture, which is supposed to be part of the missionary dimension of the church. In theory, a relatively weak political role for Christian churches could leave African societies more exposed to secularizing pressures from Western governments and NGOs, as well as their own cultural elites. It also means, of course, that Christian leaders are unable simply to impose desirable social outcomes to which they are ostensibly committed, such as ending war or curbing corruption. 

There is, however, a more positive way of looking at things.

Even the most pious Christian historians in Europe today would concede that the legacy of theocracy is a strong ingredient in popular anti-clericalism, which breeds a kind of “payback” mentality in many secular circles. (Ask church officials in Belgium or Ireland, for example, what it’s like to be on the receiving end of centuries of accumulated resentments.) One could argue that some anti-Christian blowback in Europe today is a Newtonian, equal-and-opposite reaction to centuries of exaggerated power and privilege. If African Christianity is able to develop free of this historical baggage, any eventual process of secularization may not carry the same anti-clerical edge.

In other words, a certain political impotence may be no bad thing.

Of course, that doesn’t mean Kenya’s Christian bishops, pastors and preachers are wrong in their substantive objections to the new constitution. If they do indeed lose, however, it could at least offer some consolation, and maybe some food for thought.

Editor's Note: Another NCR columnist wrote about Africa and Christianity this week. Read Bill Tammeus' column Reaping what we sow: evangelizing Africa.

[John L. Allen Jr is NCR senior correspondent. His e-mail address is jallen@ncronline.org.]

"Welcome to the ConDemNation"

This video is well, well worth a view. An edited snap shot of the recent political history of this nightmare government and the hypocrisy of its leadership.

Hat-tip to my new Facebook friend of 20 minutes Jase-deb Cridland – check out original on YouTube here.

I love the song of course!

Pete Seeger Touches On BP

LINK

H/T - Left In Alabama

ADL Takes Idiotic Stance (Again)

Today The New York Times is running this report on the stance taken by the Anti-Defamation League in opposition to plans for a "planned mosque and Islamic community center near ground zero" in NYC. And here is the blunt and entirely justified retort from the folks at The Economist. Abe Foxman and the ADL are becoming a caricature.

TUC Member Trustee Network Conference: Stronger Stewardship: Trustee Responsibilities in a Changing Pensions Landscape

Hat tip TUC Pension Trustee Network:

"Date Tue, 16 Nov 2010: Time to from 09:30 to 16:30 Location Congress House, Great Russell Street, London

Cost: The cost for attending remains frozen at the level of earlier years and is £50 Unions, £75 Education, Public or Voluntary Sector; Commercial £250. Payments can be by cheque payable to ‘Trades Union Congress’ or by card.

Description: The theme of this year’s Member Trustee Network conference is ‘Stronger Stewardship’ and the conference will take place in Congress House. Delegates will be able to hear from a range of speakers, including the Pensions Minister Steve Webb, about the latest developments in pensions policy. There will also be a choice of workshops.

A buffet lunch will be provided. Please indicate any access or dietary requirements.

The conference will be followed by an early evening reception.

Accessibility Congress House is an accessible building.

Register interest or request more information

If you wish to attend please contact, trusteesATtucDOTorg.uk"

(Picture is of early trade union pension trustees)

Conservatives with Guns and their Fantasies of Revolution

"When American men talk like this, they are usually giving voice to fantasy. Only in fantasy, after all, are governments overthrown by men trained to do nothing more than shoot long-distance targets in a controlled environment. Some of these men seek out unlikely battlefields, where they can be warriors of the future, warriors of the imagination or reluctant warriors in waiting who are passing their time on the Internet. The power of a gun to take a life is not so much a threat as a talisman connecting these fantasies to the real world."

In The New York Times you can find this article on the 'Appleseed Project' which is (despite the preposterous disavowals) a right wing project meant to prepare 'regular Americans' to take up guns in defense of liberty. I find the impulse to own guns pretty inscrutable, sort of like liking Lima Beans. As I've said here several times, I just don't get it. I also have said before that I find the conservative mind pretty much misguided. These folks are not just gun owners, they're paid up subscribers to the rigid, paranoid conservative style [1] [2] [3]. Combine that style with guns and things start to get worrying - even though the reporter from The Times has done his best to persuade us that it's all just magical thinking. Fantasies can be dangerous too.

Best Shots (124) ~ Rena Effendi

(151) Rena Effendi ~ "She was dying," Baku, Azerbaijan (29 July 2010).

Nick Clegg's strangeness to the truth

More evidence (if really needed) of the shame faced hypocrisy of our new Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg. 

In this pre-election letter to electors in Kingston he claims that "Voting Labour will only help the Conservatives win". 

I love the stuff about "most people remember the damage the last Conservative government did to our country. Record unemployment, cuts to front line services and politics riddled with sleaze...Today's Conservatives haven't changed...funded by billionaires and city bankers...helped cause the economic meltdown...Conservatives want to cut taxes for millionaires while giving the rest of us a VAT rise (yeah)..a vote for Lib Dems will mean lower taxes...investment in schools(!!!)...

The ironic thing is I think that there are many Liberal Democrats who are genuinely ashamed of their Party's alliance but "Orange Book" Clegg is of course clearly not one of them.

Hat-tip thingy Col. Roi

Is the Swastika a "Universal" Symbol of Hate?

The swastika now shows up so often as a generic symbol of hatred that the Anti-Defamation League, in its annual tally of hate crimes against Jews, will no longer automatically count its appearance as an act of anti-Semitism. “The swastika has morphed into a universal symbol of hate,” said Abraham Foxman, the national director of the Anti-Defamation League, a Jewish advocacy organization. “Today it’s used as an epithet against African-Americans, Hispanics and gays, as well as Jews, because it is a symbol which frightens.”

James: There is no doubt that in the western hemisphere the swastika is seen as a symbol of hate and intolerance but what most westerners don't know is that Adolf Hitler and the Nazis stole it from the Hindu and Buddhist religions and perverted its meaning. Ironically svastika is Sanskrit for "all is well" and is seen throughout Asia today--including emblazoned upon Buddha statues around the world. Thus, it was intended to be a message of harmony and well-being to all those who gazed upon its satisfyingly balanced shape. In Buddhism it is almost always seen pointing left, whereas the Nazis used it facing right.

I understand the aversion toward the swastika in the West but to say it is universally a symbol of hate could create more intolerance, not less. That's because it is a statement based in ignorance, and ignorance always breeds suffering. Their statement branding the swastika as universal symbol of hate excludes an entire half of the world where it is seen positively. In doing so this organization could possibly cause misunderstanding between Westerners and Easterners. What are less informed Western tourists going to think when they see a swastika painted upon a Buddhist or Hindu statue? What kind of conspiracy theories or misinformed opinions will they hatch out of ignorance propagated by a well-meaning organization? And just imagine the suffering that could be stirred up because of an ignorant tourist clinging to the Anti-Defamation League's wrong perception that the swastika is a universal symbol of hate. Of course you can't control how anyone is going to interpret something; nor should we seek to control it but I think the ADL owes it to the seriousness of this subject to educate to help prevent fear based ignorance from causing unintended consequences.

They were fine to remind everyone of the swastika's hateful past and that people are still using it to terrorize others. However, their mistake was in stopping with that statement, which is clinging to the hateful side of it. This could have been handled as a "teaching moment" as we say in America today. They could have gone on to educate the public that the symbol also means harmony and well-being. Then they could have advised us to stay vigilant toward intolerance and hatred but to not forget the original meaning, which we should embody instead of hatred and intolerance. This reminds us that all symbols have many meanings that can be interpreted one way or another based on our perceptions.

It is a great reminder of how much suffering our perceptions are to our lives. In the end though we have to let go of all perceptions. Even the perception that we are justified in hating those who hate us. As distasteful as this sounds we have to come to the realization that even those who flash the swastika in hate are doing so because of fear, ignorance and delusion. Thus, they too are suffering immensely and if possible having some compassion for them might help us overcome our hatred for them, which is only causing us additional pain. Hanging onto that hatred is like reminding ourselves of how painful that razor blade cut was a few weeks back by slashing your arm with it again. Or as Buddha said, "Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; its you who gets burned."

I'm not anywhere near at a place where I have been able to let go of all my perceptions, fear and ignorance (delusions) but I know the path to freeing ourselves from their suffering resides in letting go of their power. It doesn't mean that we ignore hatred, justify hatred, or stop educating people of their reality but it does mean that we should remember that our perceptions aren't usually completely accurate; and they can be damaging despite a well-meaning motivation. When we realize how interconnected we are there is often a natural widening of our mind and a greater awareness of the world around us, which enriches our lives and brings a deeper understanding of how we all work together.

~Peace to all beings~

Reading Around

"If words fall into disrepair, what will substitute? They are all we have." ~ Tony Judt

That is an ironic observation for someone like me who is committed to the importance of photographic images as tools of communication. You can find the NYRB essay where Judt issues it here. And, for two examples of smart women masterfully using words to probe and decipher our political predicaments, you can find essays by Rebecca Solnit on Louisiana post-Deepwater Horizon here at the London Review of Books, and by Suzie Linfield on genocide and the agony of 'reconciliation' here in Guernica.

William Cuffay - "Britain's Black Revolutionary"

While driving to a meeting with HR today I listened on Radio 4 to former T&G General Secretary (now Lord) Bill Morris describe the extraordinary life of Chartist Movement leader William Cuffay. Bill explained that as the first GS of a major trade union he is often described as the “First black leader of the Labour movement”.

Yet over 160 years ago William Cuffay (another Bill) who was the son of slaves (and also physically disabled) was a leading trade union and national political activist.

But Cuffay is now as Bill explained almost “entirely forgotten” yet at the time of the Great Chartist petition of 1848 he was one of their foremost organisers and orators. After the (relative) failure of the “moral force” Chartists in 1848 Cuffay became disillusioned with such protest and became involved in a “physical force” plot to overthrow the government. He was betrayed, arrested and transported to Tasmania. He was later pardoned but chose to remain in the colony and died there still fighting for social justice aged 82.

The early 19th century chartist campaign was described in the programme as the British civil rights movement. There was immense opposition and repression towards the Chartists at the time by the rich and the powerful. Nowadays nearly all their demands for Parliamentary reform are now fully accepted as being the democratic norm.

This is a great story and you can listen to it here again for the next 7 days on BBC IPlayer. Picture is of William in jail before he was transported which was probably used to make prints and raise funds for his wife to later join him in Tasmania.

This picture (left) of the mass meeting of Chartists on Kennington Common in 1848 which I think is the first ever photo of a political protest meeting?

The Vatican and Chinese Episcopal Appointments

This article comes from Chiesa.

-----------------------------------------------------------

China.  Seven New Bishops Do Not a Summer Make

By Sandro Magister

ROME, July 26, 2010 – Twice in the span of a few days, "L'Osservatore Romano" has given extensive coverage to two new episcopal consecrations that took place in China, the first on July 10 and the second on July 15.

The texts of both new stories, because of their delicacy from a diplomatic point of view, were not composed in the newsroom but directly in the offices of the Vatican secretariat of state.

Both, in fact, demonstrate a shift in the sequence of episcopal ordinations in that country.

In recent years, episcopal ordinations in China have seen fluctuating fortunes, between openness and rigidity on the part of the communist government. In 2005, all the new bishops were ordained with the approval of both the pope and the Chinese authorities. In 2006, however, in reaction to the nomination as cardinal of Hong Kong bishop Joseph Zen Zekiun – a nomination seen as hostile by Beijing – the Chinese government resumed ordaining bishops without the pope's mandate. In 2007, the year of Benedict XVI's letter to the Catholics of China, the bishops were again consecrated with the approval of Rome. The new bishop of Beijing was also installed with the agreement of the pope.

But starting in December of 2007, everything came to a halt. For more than two years there was not a single new ordination, in spite of the fact that a very high number of dioceses in China are vacant, or headed by very elderly bishops.

The impasse was broken on April 18 of this year, when in Hohhot, in Inner Mongolia, 47-year-old priest Paul Meng Quinglu was consecrated bishop.

Since then, new ordinations have resumed at a brisk pace. And always with the approval of both Rome and the Chinese authorities.

On April 21, Joseph Shen Bin, age 40, was ordained bishop of Haimen, in the province of Jiangsu. On May 8, Joseph Cai Bingrui, age 44, was ordained bishop of Xiamen, in the province of Fujian. On June 24, Joseph Han Yingjin, age 52, was ordained bishop of Sanyuan, in the province of Shaanxi.

Moreover, on April 8, another bishop ordained in 2004 with the sole mandate of the Holy See, Matthias Du Jiang, was installed as head of the diocese of Bameng, in Inner Mongolia, with the official reco.

The Vatican made no public announcement of the four appointments and official installations listed so far here. It preferred to wait for further developments. But the news did not escape observers. The latest issue of the international magazine "30 Days," printed in Rome and required reading for both Vatican diplomats and Chinese authorities in the field, dedicated an entire article to precisely this "change of pace" in relations between the Holy See and Beijing. "30 Days" pointed out, among other things, that for the first time in the history of the People's Republic of China, one of the participants in the ordination on May 8 was a bishop from Taiwan, Joseph Cheng Tsai-fa.

For the other two episcopal nominations that took place in July, however, the Holy See provided ample publicity, evidence that it believes the new course is in a consolidation phase.

In both of these cases, the news published in "L'Osservatore Romano" specified not only that the new bishops enjoy the twofold approval of Rome and Beijing, but also that this was the condition of all of the bishops who participated in the consecration, listed one by one.

The bishop ordained on July 10 in Taizhou, in the province of Zhejiang, is Anthony Xu Jiwei, age 75. From 1960 to 1985, he spent much of his time in prison and forced labor. In recent years, he spent periods of study in South Korea and Europe. The diocese in which he assumed leadership had been vacant for 48 years.

The bishop ordained on July 15 in Yan'an, in the province of Shaanxi, is John Baptist Yang Xiaoting, age 46. His is coadjutor with right of succession to the elderly and ill bishop of the diocese. He has an unusual educational background. From 1993 to 1999, he studied in Rome, at the Pontifical Urbaniana University, receiving his undergraduate and doctoral degrees in theology. In 2002, he also received a master's in sociology of religion from the Catholic University of America in Washington. After returning to China, he founded a center for formation and research. He is dean of studies at the seminary in Xi'an, where he continues to teach. His episcopal ordination was attended by more than six thousand faithful, with 110 priests and 80 sisters.

*

At the Vatican there is a cautiously optimistic view of this batch of episcopal appointments made with the twofold approval of Rome and Beijing.

Naturally, Vatican diplomats know that new strictures on the part of China are always lying in wait. Above all, they know that this kind of solution is not at all optimal, neither for the Church nor for religious freedom in general. In the world today, it is only in Vietnam that the requirement of the state "placet" for every new bishop is suffered by the Church in obedience to written accords with the regime. There is no accord of this kind in China, and none is expected anytime soon, but it is exactly what is now happening in practice. While for the bishops still not recognized by the government, life is miserable, full of arrests and harassment. Just as the activities of the officially recognized bishops, and of their respective dioceses, is subjected to asphyxiating control.

But the prevalent impression, at the Vatican, is that the idea that prevails today among the Chinese authorities is to leave behind the religious policy of the past, which required Chinese Catholics to break off relations with Rome and join a sort of "patriotic" Church, with bishops appointed solely by the government.

In the view of Vatican diplomats, the factors that led the Chinese authorities to this change of stance are pragmatic in nature. They were illustrated early this year in "30 Days," in an interview with the influential scholar Ren Yanli, a member of the Chinese academy of social sciences and of the institute of research on world religions, who for decades has followed the affairs of the Chinese Church and relations between China and the Vatican.

After pointing out that "the faithful will never listen to pastors who are elected and consecrated autonomously, without the pope's consent," and that "the latest bishops appointed without pontifical mandate remain isolated, and no one wants to receive the Eucharist from their hands, during Mass," Ren Yanli continued:

"The government has realized that if it wants the bishops to be pastors who are esteemed and followed by the faithful, and not viewed as isolated functionaries imposed from the outside, appointment by the pope and full communion with him are indispensable elements, which cannot be omitted. This means that, in fact, the idea of imposing on the Chinese Church an independence involving separation from the pope and from the universal Church is being set aside. The process that leads to an increasingly explicit affirmation of the communion of the Chinese bishops with the pope – and of everything that this involves – is irreversible. There can be no turning back on this road."

*

But the cautious optimism of the Vatican diplomats is contrasted by the more pessimistic view of other churchmen who are closely following the evolution of the Chinese situation.

One of these is Cardinal Zen, a Salesian like Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, secretary of state and therefore head of Vatican diplomacy, but who has often found himself in disagreement with him.

The differences between Bertone and Zen are in many ways the same that divide two international media outlets that are very informed about and dedicated to the Chinese question: on one side, the magazine "30 Days," closely aligned with Vatican diplomacy, and on the other "Asia News," the online agency directed by Fr. Bernardo Cervellera of the Pontifical Institute for Foreign Missions.

In a commentary for "Asia News" on July 23, released in Chinese as well, Fr. Cervellera presented the reasons that might lead one to doubt China's real willingness to open up a future of freedom for the Catholics of that country.

Not only the "clandestine" bishops, in fact, but also the bishops who have the twofold approval of Rome and Beijing are not free to exercise their ministry. In fact, the bishops have two authorities they must obey, that of the Church and that of the state: a state, however, that reserves for itself the power to decide in matters that should belong exclusively to the Church. Often, therefore, the two forms of obedience show themselves to be incompatible for reasons of faith. And those who refuse to join the Patriotic Association, the government agency that controls the Church, can pay dearly for this decision.

At the beginning of this July, the ministry for religious affairs brought dozens of bishops to Beijing for four days of indoctrination on the government's religious policies. The communist authorities are working to make one of their puppet bishops – Ma Yinling of the diocese of Kunming, one of the very few Chinese bishops who do not have the pope's recognition – the president of the two bodies with the most control over the Church, the Patriotic Association and the Council of Chinese Bishops, an imitation episcopal conference, both of which have been left vacant by the death of the two puppet bishops who headed them.

All of this is keeping the tension high between the two components of Chinese Catholicism: the "underground" communities and the officially recognized ones. The letter that Benedict XVI wrote to Chinese Catholics in 2007 to show them how to restore unity clashes with the desire of the Chinese authorities to keep these divisions alive and exploit them for their own advantage. And in fact, the papal letter is still forbidden in that country, and is circulating with difficulty.

So while at the Vatican the latest diplomatic moves are studied and every word is carefully chosen, in the "underground" Chinese communities many are complaining that they feel "forgotten" by the Church of Rome.

The Vatican rarely raises its voice to ask for the liberation of the Chinese Catholics in prison. Two "underground" bishops have not been heard from for years: James Su Zhimin, of Baoding, and Cosmas Shi Enxiang, of Yixian.

Last July 7, Jia Zhiguo, the "underground" bishop of Zhengding, was liberated after being held captive by the police for fifteen months. Cardinal Ivan Dias, prefect of the congregation for the evangelization of peoples, wrote him a "welcome back to service" message.

Fr. Cervellera comments:

"Maybe Cardinal Dias thought that it was not yet time to also include the word 'prison' or 'isolation' to make the world understand that the bishop had not returned from a vacation, but a period of abolition of his rights."

You Left Hand Isn't Superior to Your Right.

The sound in this video is of poor quality so you'll want to turn up the volume.

James: I call Thich Nhat Hanh my teacher for many reasons: He's straightforward, uses simple explanations that explain deep concepts, has a knack for knowing how to teach the western mind, has a great sense of humor and is very kind and compassionate. His left hand, right hand analogy was a revelation to me when I was first studying Buddhism because it really helped me see the big picture of interdependence, interconnection and no self. I hope you enjoyed it too!!

~Peace to all beings~

Clegg outlines DFID’s vision for International Development

Yesterday, on the final day of official business before the House of Commons rises for the summer recess, the Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, paid a visit to the Government’s development department and after meeting the Secretary of State outlined its vision for international development.

Mr Clegg, who will represent the UK at the UN MDG Summit in September, has seemingly made it a personal mission to champion the goals both in Government and internationally and outlined a new departmental reform plan to ensure the UK achieves all of its MDG commitments.

Most notably, the plan includes a pledge to put women at the "front and centre" of delivered aid with a new emphasis on girls’ education and family planning, but the plans also sets out two important deadlines:

The Government should publish its 'Malaria Evidence Paper and Business Plan' detailing how the Department will spend up to £500m per year on fighting malaria by December, and in March 2011 publish “specific DFID MDG objectives” to honour the UK's international commitments.

Furthermore, a review into the ‘effectiveness’ of Bilateral and Multilateral Aid should be completed by February 2011, in time for the first full budget of the coalition government although the departmental budget enjoys the unique status of being ‘ringfenced’.

The launch of an Independent Aid Watchdog, as previously announced by Andrew Mitchell, is pencilled in for June 2011, and DFID aim to begin publishing full information on all new DFID projects over £500 from January, according to the plan.

The DFID Structural Reform Plan identifies six key priorities, which read as follows:

1. International Commitments:
   Honour the UK’s commitment to spend 0.7% of national income on overseas aid from 2013 and enshrine this commitment in law.
   
   
2. Value for Money:
   Developing more results-based aid and cash on delivery contracts.
   
   
3. Wealth Creation:
   Developing new projects on property rights, investment and microfinance.
   
   
4. Afghanistan, Pakistan, conflict and stabilisation:
   Improve the join-up and performance of British development policy in conflict countries, with particular focus on Afghanistan and Pakistan.
   
   
5. Role of Women:
   New programmes to get more girls into primary and secondary education; to promote economic empowerment of women and pilot new approaches to eliminate violence against women.
   
   
6. Climate Change:
   Help poor countries to take part in international climate change negotiations.

“We must stand firm by our commitments to help the poorest people in the world,” Mr Clegg said at the announcement. “Economic times are tough, and no-one is suffering more than those already living in poverty.”

“Our decision to ring fence the aid budget is not only morally right but in our national interest – having a knock-on effect on security, migration and trade. This government will be a champion for development. The UK can lead the world in its work to combat poverty.”

Catholic Bishops and the Arizona Immigration Law

This article comes from the National Catholic Register.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Not Preaching to the Choir?

Bishops Struggle to Air Their Views on Immigration

By Joan Frawley Desmond

WASHINGTON — Arizona’s controversial immigration law takes effect July 29 — unless the Obama administration succeeds in blocking it. 

The law is expected to complicate efforts on Capitol Hill to pass comprehensive immigration reform this year — a longtime legislative goal of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

But even if the president’s legal challenge is successful, the nation’s Catholic bishops hope Arizona’s plight will be a wake-up call for legislators in Washington, D.C.

“The Arizona law is the result of growing levels of frustration and fear that have developed within the state,” acknowledged Bishop Gerald Kicanas of Tucson, who also serves as the U.S. bishops’ conference’s vice president. “But the bishops of Arizona do not believe this bill is the answer. The real answer is comprehensive immigration policy at the federal level.”

Last week in a Phoenix federal district courthouse, Judge Susan Bolton reviewed sharply opposing arguments by the Justice Department and the state of Arizona. But she has yet to issue a ruling, which could come at any time.

Attorney General Eric Holder hopes to secure a preliminary injunction against Arizona’s S.B. 1070, which he criticizes as both an untenable challenge to the federal government’s traditional role in setting immigration policy and a problem for U.S. foreign policy. If Holder obtains the preliminary injunction, legal experts predict the judge will ultimately strike down the state law.

Arizona’s Republican governor, Jan Brewer, however, contends that the state has been forced to act because federal immigration laws have not been effectively enforced. If the measure stands, it will be a violation of state law to be in the country illegally; police engaged in routine law enforcement will be permitted to investigate the immigration status of anyone they suspect to be in the country illegally.

Whatever the law’s fate, polls confirm its broad popularity, not only in Arizona, but across the country. Support for the law reflects mounting public frustration with the real and perceived issues linked to illegal immigration during a time of economic crisis.

During testimony this month before the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security and International Law, Bishop Kicanas argued that voters want real solutions to a “broken” system and that the Arizona law should revitalize the push for immigration reform in the nation’s capital.

“The message is to break the partisan paralysis and act now,” Bishop Kicanas stated in his testimony. “Without congressional action on immigration reform — sooner rather than later — other states will pass similar laws, to the detriment of our nation.”

He added that he witnesses “the human consequences of our broken immigration system in my diocese’s social service programs, hospitals, schools and parishes.”

Political Will?

President Obama signaled his interest in addressing immigration reform in a July 1 speech, but even immigrant-rights groups agree that Capitol Hill isn’t prepared to work out a compromise during an already contentious election year.

“The situation in Arizona has brought national attention to the crisis in the immigration system. But it will be difficult for Congress to act before the election,” said Clarissa Martinez, director of immigration and national campaigns for the National Council of La Raza, an advocacy group for Hispanics in America.

“The administration seems not to be anxious to advance legislation unless there were some assurance that 60 senators would support it,” noted Archbishop Thomas Wenski of Miami, a longtime Catholic leader on immigrant issues. “Unless there would be some action during a ‘lame duck’ session of Congress after the November elections, it seems that we are far away indeed.”

Republican senators say border security must be stepped up before they address divisive issues like legalization for illegal immigrants. But the USCCB’s director of migration policy and public affairs, Kevin Appleby, questions the logic of narrowly focusing on enforcement issues.

“Since 2000, the U.S. government has spent more than $100 billion on immigration enforcement,” Appleby wrote in the July 4 edition of the Register. “During the same period, the number of undocumented persons has grown from 6 million to 12 million, and border communities continue to see drug-related violence. Since 1998, nearly 5,000 migrants have died attempting to cross the American desert.”

“Comprehensive immigration reform, as supported by the U.S. bishops, would help achieve the seemingly incompatible principles of a secure border and a generous immigration policy,” Appleby continued.

The USCCB seeks passage of a number of measures, including an expansion of a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented persons in the country and the creation of a new worker program, which would permit unskilled migrant laborers to obtain visas to come to the United States legally and work under certain conditions.

A recent USCCB-sponsored poll concluded that “69% of Catholics supported a path to citizenship for the undocumented, provided they register with the government.”

Prudential Judgments

But the bishops’ support for immigration reform has also sparked considerable debate and a measure of antagonism. Bishops who have used their own Internet blogs to criticize the Arizona law have received a flood of overwhelmingly negative comments.

“Some Catholics, on hearing Catholic bishops speak on social doctrine and social issues, can’t help thinking that the bishops embrace pious visions but avoid real messiness and costs and low probabilities of success,” said Michael Novak, the prominent Catholic thinker and an occasional critic of USCCB policy positions.

“Regarding immigration, there are probably hundreds of legitimate prudential judgments among Catholics about which are the most moral and realistic policies to support,” Novak observed. “Some of these judgments seem a lot less naive than others.”

Asked for his response, Archbishop Wenski acknowledged some “legitimate concerns regarding the rule of law — and so sometimes an immigrant’s ‘illegal status’ does not win him sympathy.”

But the archbishop also suggested that believing Catholics should take the Church’s social teaching to heart. Catholics in America “should not be divided on this issue. And the bishops, in our pastoral letter, ‘Strangers No Longer: Together on the Journey of Hope: A Pastoral Letter Concerning Migration from the Catholic Bishops of Mexico and the United States,’ give clear teaching that good Catholics should be open to receiving.”

The archbishop vowed that Florida’s Catholic bishops would be “vigorously opposed to any attempt to pass a Florida-specific law, as was done in Arizona. Such an attempt would prove, I fear, divisive and counterproductive.”

In Arizona — the “epicenter” of an increasingly volatile immigration debate — Bishop Kicanas has echoed the Church’s consistent concern for the social needs and human rights of migrants.

But the bishop also has looked for opportunities to clarify the USCCB position, disputing common mischaracterizations of the bishops’ stance, and he has initiated public forums where all points of view are aired.

“Some people believe the Church is supporting open borders, but the Church does not support open borders, and it doesn’t support amnesty,” said Bishop Kicanas. “What the bishops are asking and pressing for is an earned pathway to citizenship. Illegal immigrants could come out of the shadows and wait their turn.”

“But we have legitimate policy concerns, like family reunification,” he added. “The Arizona law could force mothers or fathers or young people, who never lived outside this country but do not have proper papers, to leave the United States.”

Earlier this year, Bishop Kicanas presided at the funeral of Rob Krentz, the Arizona rancher whose still unsolved murder fueled support for the Arizona law.

Initial reports suggested that Krentz had been killed by an illegal immigrant, but state law enforcement officials have yet to confirm the identity of the rancher’s assailant.

“Krentz’s murder cries out for justice,” said the bishop, noting that the Church’s stake in the immigration policy debate was not limited to the plight of migrants, but also the plundering of Arizona ranches and the safety of border patrol officials.

“The Church has been criticized for getting involved in politics,” he said. “But it’s actually concerned with public policy — how we live together in a community.”

Joan Frawley Desmond writes from Chevy Chase, Maryland.

Holy See Sends First Nuncio to Russia

This article comes from Zenit.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Holy See Sends 1st Nuncio to Russia

Relations Upgraded to Full Diplomatic Ties

VATICAN CITY, JULY 27, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Archbishop Antonio Mennini, until now the Pope's representative to the Russian Federation, is now the Holy See's first apostolic nuncio to the country, the Vatican is reporting.

The archbishop presented his letters of credence to Foreign Affairs Minister Sergej Lavrov on July 15 in a ceremony that was followed by a "cordial" meeting, reported the Vatican press office.

Last December, Benedict XVI and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev agreed to upgrade relations between the two sides to full diplomatic ties, which raises the level of representation to apostolic nuncio and embassy.  

The two sides have maintained representation below the rank of ambassador since 1990.

In an address to the new nuncio, Alexander Krusko, the vice-minister of Foreign Affairs, reviewed the development of bilateral relations between the Russian Federation and the Holy See. He noted that the relations between the two were "characterized by a growing understanding and spirit of collaboration," reported L'Osservatore Romano.

Krusko also assured Archbishop Mennini, on behalf of the Russian president, of "a fruitful collaboration in the great moral and ethical challenges posed to man today."

For his part, the archbishop transmitted the Pope's greeting to the Russian president, assuring his "collaboration for a further reinforcement of relations with the government, as well as for the spiritual and moral growth of the Russian people."

This ceremony brought to an end the exchange of embassies, which began on June 26 in Rome with the presentation of the letters of credence of the first Russian ambassador to the Holy See, Mikolaj Sadlichov.

"Hope Not Hate" exposes the EDL as thugs

Unite nominates Ed Miliband as Labour Party Leader.

No surprise to anyone that I was very pleased to hear yesterday that the Unite Executive confirmed that they had overwhelmingly agreed to support Ed Miliband as the new Labour Party leader.  This followed a similar "overwhelming" vote by its national political committee. 

What matters now of course is turning this commitment (and that of UNISON and GMB) to "urge its one million members eligible to vote in the Labour leadership contest to make Ed Miliband their choice for leader of the Labour party" into actual votes. 

Ed Miliband has received the endorsement of the "big 3" affiliated trade unions. The press seem here to be trying to make out that there is some sort of smoke filled room deal by so called "union barons" to make Ed the their choice.  This is complete rubbish.  Now I accept that I have openly supported Ed for a while so what I am about to say could be a bit suspect but I have been pleased at the degree of genuine grass roots support for Ed Miliband amongst trade union activists. The reason is I think because being activists they have either seen him at a hustings, read interviews about him or even checked out his website.

We want someone who has the passion, personality and politics who can change the Party and still defeat Cameron and his CONDEMS.  Ed is the best candidate to do this.

What needs to be done is firstly get Ed in front of as many non-activist members as possible - get him talking to them and answering their questions either in person or via our media. Secondly to encourage activists to talk to their members about the election and about Ed.  Finally the unions must support turnout and encourage members to vote. Simple endorsements by union national political committees will not be enough.

(picture credit Dan McCurry at the West Ham CLP hustings)

Changing Conventions in War Photography (2)

So, I thought perhaps I was being too hasty in talking about the emergence of a new convention in war photography, one that places a premium on the 'human interest' aspect of American troops. You know, shots of the military personnel being just guys. So I had a quick, admittedly unsystematic look. The top two images below made it into the pictures of the day at the Lens blog at The New York Times last week. The top one, though, I lifted from The Washington Post who had also published it. The rest were easy enough to find on-line. Note - three different agencies, a half dozen different photographers. And we end up with the soldier in tee shirt and shorts, again.

Life in a war zone can mean improvising, including for exercise,
as illustrated by a U.S. soldier from the 1st Squadron, 71st Cavalry
at a forward operating base in Kandahar Province in Afghanistan.
The number of U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan is expected to
peak at 150,000 in coming weeks. July 19th, 2010
(Manpreet Romana/agence France-presse Via Getty Images).

A U.S. soldier watches an Afghan movie on TV while relaxing at
Combat Outpost Nolen, an outlying base for the 2nd Brigade of the
101st Airborne Division, in the volatile Arghandab Valley, in Kandahar,
Afghanistan, Wednesday, July 21, 2010. (AP Photo/Rodrigo Abd).

A United States Marine from Bravo Company of the 1st
Battalion of the 2nd Marines eats watermelon as he rests
following a gunbattle as part of an operation to clear the
area of insurgents near Musa Qaleh, in northern Helmand
Province, southern Afghanistan, Friday, July 23, 2010.
(AP Photo/Kevin Frayer).

U.S Army First Lieutenant Sean Snook from Concord,
Massachusetts, and Alpha Company, 4th Brigade combat
team,1-508, 82nd parachute infantry regiment tees off
at FOB Bullard in Zabul province, southern Afghanistan,
February 12, 2010. (REUTERS/Baz Ratner ).

A U.S. Marine throws a football at Delaram base in
Nimroz province, southern Afghanistan January 24,
2010. (REUTERS/Marko Djurica) January 24, 2010

Spc. James Lollis, right, who was on his way to the gym, and an unidentified
soldier from the 2nd Battalion 12th Infantry take cover as incoming fire
hits inside Command Outpost Michigan at the Pech River Valley
in Kunar Province, Afghanistan, Saturday, Dec. 19, 2009.
(AP Photo/Dario Lopez-Mills).

There are, of course, many, many pictures of American troops, mostly in full combat gear, on patrol - sometimes they are engaged in firefights, sometimes they are menacing Afghans of various descriptions, sometimes they are talking to groups of kids or even kicking a soccer ball with them. These images are familiar enough. So the sorts of images I've lifted here are not exactly crowding out those more 'standard' images. However, with the exception of the occasional photograph of marines mourning the death of a colleague, images of death and destruction - the actual consequences of war for Afghans and the U.S. military - are exceedingly rare. In fact, other than the image of Joshua Bernard that generated so much controversy last fall, I don't recall seeing any. That may not be intended by the photographers who are covering the war, but it surely is politically convenient.

New Book: Were You Born on the Wrong Continent?"

Labor lawyer, activist, and (sadly unsuccessful) Congressional candidate, and all around smart guy Thomas Geoghegan has written a new book* in which he basically seeks to convince Americans that everything they think they know about European Social Democracies is mistaken. The point seems to be that we ought not to prefer the social democratic polities for this or that high-minded moral reason but because, in the first instance at least, we'd all generally be better off ourselves. You can find an brief excerpt/essay that serves as something of an advert for the book here at In These Times.
__________
* Thomas Geohegan. 2010. Were You Born on the Wrong Continent? New Press.

World Cup Buddhist.

Phayul, July 10, 2010

Dharamsala, India -- Barcelona and Spain defender Carles "Tarzan" Puyol who scored the only goal of the semi final against Germany to send his country into the first ever world cup final has a keen interest in Buddhism, according to his friend Ven. Thupten Wangchen of the Casa del Tibet, Barcelona. Ven Wangchen told VOA that Puyol's interest in Tibetan culture and Buddhism started after reading Sogyal Rinpoche’s book, The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying which helped him deal with death of a family member. Puyol, Ven. Wangchen said, has a Tibetan tattoo on his left arm which reads “Power is inside the Mind. The strong can endure.”

Puyol, also an admirer of the Tibetan leader has met His Holiness the Dalai Lama during the latter's visit to Barcelona in 2007. Ven. Wangchen said Puyol has also expressed his interest in helping the Tibetan national football team in the future.

James: I was thrilled like millions around the world to enjoy the football mega-tournament, the World Cup recently in South Africa. I think sports are a great way to connect with people from around the world to remind one another that we are all essentially the same. We all want to be happy, or as the Dalai Lama says, no one wants to suffer. It was great to see all the different cultures represented from around the globe and I especially enjoyed hearing all the unique national anthems play before each match. It really was a coming together of the world and I was overjoyed to be apart of it.

As to this article, I am mostly excited about the idea of a Tibetan national football team!! Go Puyol!! How cool would it be to see Tibetans play in the greatest game the world has ever played!! But the footage I'd love to see the most would be the Dalai Lama kicking around the hexagonal ball. Maybe surprise us with his stretching skills from years of meditation and go for a bicycle kick? That would be epic. I also happen to know that the 17th Karmapa has the bug for football/soccer and followed the World Cup. Besides I just think it would be cool to see a monk in robes blast a ball into the back of the net by way of a bicycle kick. I just think that dueling imagery would be cool to see. Ancient robes bustling in the air while a very modern game (football) is being played by the monk wearing those robes.

~Peace to all beings~

Remember the Tory Years

Yesterday I went to Wales for a quick visit and updated my Face Book profile so - and was then reminded by one FB friend about the former SoS for Wales - dear old John Redwood.  I remembered this Youtube video - and yes, the Tories are still singing the old same tune.

How Not to Argue Against the Boycott of Israel

A Jewish settler (right) and a Palestinian demonstrator shout at
each other during a protest against an illegal outpost near the
Israeli settlement of Kharsina in the West Bank city of Hebron
on May 22, 2009. (HAZEM BADER/AFP/Getty Images)

In the most recent Newsweek you can find this diatribe by Jacob Weisberg against the ongoing cultural and academic boycott of Israel. At times Weisberg describes the thinking behind the boycott as merely "wrong" and "unacceptable," but he also rises to the bait, using terms like "repellent" to describe the campaign, accusing those advocating the boycott of "bad faith." He claims that the campaign is "not only intrinsically vile but actively counterproductive." And, eventually, he comes around to asserting that "this kind of existential challenge is hard to disassociate from anti-Semitism." As far as I can tell Weisberg barely makes the effort.

I do not support the boycott for reasons I have laid down here repeatedly. Having said that, Weisberg's screed is more or less wholly incoherent. Here are some problems with the case he presents:

(1) Weisberg categorizes Israel among "democratic societies, where other means of peaceful protest exist," contrasting it explicitly with "authoritarian societies" such as Cuba or the former East Germany or "China or Syria or Zimbabwe—or other genuinely illegitimate regimes that systematically violate human rights." Where has Mr. Weisberg been? He seems to have missed the past decade or so of Israeli policy toward the Palestinians. That policy can be fruitfully summarized as one that systematically violates their human rights. Those in the west - including many Jews - support the boycott precisely because they see Israel as adopting authoritarian policies. And I would remind Weisberg that that is not simply the view from abroad - there are Israelis (e,g., Neve Gordon, David Shulman) who make the very same case. Does Weisberg have something like a response to such criticisms? Moreover, did he raise his voice - even in private - when American donors threatened to withhold financial support from Ben Gurion University where Neve Gordon teaches because of his outspoken criticisms of the regime and its policies? I suspect not.

(2) I think the boycott will be counterproductive in ways that Mr. Weisberg suggests; it may well simply reinforce a bunker mentality among Israelis. That said, Weisberg claims that "cultural sanctions on their own are more inconvenience than lethal weapon." How then, does the boycott rise to the level of an "existential threat" - how, that is, does it constitute "a weapon designed not to bring peace but to undermine the country" - and so provide evidence of "antisemitism"? Among the reasons I think that public argument is the most useful reply to the Israeli repression of the Palestinians is that it treats the Jewish population just like everyone else. It thereby subverts kneejerk complaints of antisemitism. Mr. Weisberg is an advertisement for that approach. Here is my challenge to him: stop hiding behind charges of antisemitism and provide a coherent argument to justify the systematic, ongoing mistreatment of the Palestinian population, including not just official repression by security forces, but the ongoing harassment by Jewish "settlers" in Palestinian territories. Those are the issues that give rise to the boycott campaign. You do not so much as mention them in your essay.

(3) Israel is indeed. as Weisberg insists, "a refuge for Jews persecuted everywhere else." In part that is why those who many of those who support the boycott are so disappointed in the Israeli treatment of Palestinians. The policies of the regime and the actions of many (not all) Israelis run counter to the putative ideals of the nation itself. That is the problem here. This is not simply about posturing celebrities. It is about real politics. Weisberg mocks the "sort of sheeplike, liberal opinion [that] once reflexively favored Israel." He is right to do so but perhaps not for his reasons. No country aspiring to be democratic - here we can include both Israel and the U.S. - should rest content with unthinking support. Weisberg insists that the "case against a cultural boycott of Israel is based on consistency, proportionality, and history." He overlooks the policies that lead advocates of the boycott to see their campaign as wholly consistent and proportionate. And he neglects to see that it is precisely the history that Israel is meant to embody that make its repression of Palestinian populations appear especially damning.