The Saudi Ministry of Education

Jews are monkeys and Christians are pigs, and they will all go to burn in hellfire; this, along with other hate-filled nonsense, is what is included in material produced by the Saudi Ministry of Education for use in Muslim schools in Britain. I've just stumbled across this excerpt from a BBC Newsnight broadcast that refers to a case involving the King Fahad Academy, an institute responsible for the education of six-hundred children and which recieves four-million pounds a year from the Saudi royal family. I'm not a fan of the BBC's news output, but kudos to Jeremy Paxman and the Newsnight team for this one. I'm particularly impressed by the way Paxman refuses to let the Saudi woman teacher off the hook when she starts quibbling about the Arab translations, blathers on in the familiar way about context or "interpretations", and then refuses to give clear and straight answers about the offensive material. Astonishingly, the Saudi woman teacher then reveals that she still thinks the books in questions have their uses within the school, notwithstanding the hate material they contain.

It is relevant to point out that the Koran itself refers to Jews and Christians as monkeys and pigs, and frequently exhorts violence gainst them; but don't expect an open and honest discussion about this by the mainstream media any time soon. As the philosopher Roger Scruton has said, "In the presence of Islam, we all feel, you have tread carefully, as though humoring a dangerous animal" (see the original article by Roger Scruton containing this quote here).

If you can stomach it, take at look at this Youtube film where a wacky Syrian Islamic scholar uses the Koran to suggest that Jews are the offspring of pigs and apes; absolute hate-filled insanity, and the Middle East is awash with it.

Turkey at the Crossroads

Turkey stands at the geographical, and cultural, crossroads of Europe and Asia. Crossroads are often dangerous places. Turkey also presently stands at a crossroads in its destiny; it has the choice of moving forward to develop as a state with an Islamic cultural heritage, but one with a secular and enlightened outlook, initiated so spectacularly and successfully by the brilliant and humane Kemal Atatürk nearly a century ago; or it can continue to revert back to type and become a stagnant fundamentalist backwater much like the Islamic Republic of Iran has become. The signs from the ruling AK Party under prime minister Tayyip Erdogan, as well as the swing back to conservative Islamic traditions within the country, are not encouraging. There is also the question of the present administration's warm relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Iran, another country with a rich cultural heritage, similarly once had the chance to develop and move forward, but the 1979 revolution put pay to that; or at least for the time being. Moreover, the former Shah, whilst being infinitely better than Khomeini and his ilk, was certainly no Kemal Atatürk.

At present, there are definitely forces at work in Turkey that wish to turn the clock back, and Iran is most willing to assist them. Turkey would be most welcome to join their club. The recent manufactured confrontation with Israel is extremely relevant in this respect. It is certainly no coincidence that the Gaza strip, under Hamas, is in effect Iran's Islamist beachhead in the Mediterranean.

All We Are Saying Is Give Israel A Chance

I am not Jewish, but for as long as I can remember I have had strong feelings about the problem of anti-Semitism. I have never visited Israel, but I have long noticed that Israel is treated unfairly by much of the world's media and opinion makers as well as by many so-called intellectuals. There can be no doubt that many people do not demand the same standard of behaviour from Israel as they do from other nations; the default position nowadays seems to be that Israel must be at fault even before the full facts are known, and that Israel has no right to defend itself.

The European Union has defined what it regards to be a manifestation of anti-Semitism; this includes:

• Denying the Jewish people their right to self­-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
• Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
• Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
• Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
• Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.

The recent case involving the Israeli commando raid on the so-called aid flotilla to Gaza is a case in point. Much of the news media, many politicians and commentators, and even sadly even people who should have known better, rushed to condemn Israel out of hand. The event was talked about as if the Israeli commandos had simply landed on the vessels and started shooting unarmed peaceful activists. But, as revealed in the recent BBC Panorama documentary, Death in the Med , the reality of the situation was not at all what the shrill Israel-haters would have everyone believe. The Israeli commandos had not launched an unprovoked and gratuitous attack on unarmed non-violent aid workers delivering much-needed aid to Gaza. The truth of the situation was quite the opposite. And it is all the more telling that it was actually the BBC, an organization not exactly known of late for being overly sympathetic to Israel - quite the opposite in fact - who provided the documentary proof that a hard-core element of the so-called peace activists had set out with the sole intention of manufacturing a violent confrontation at sea; a confrontation that was manufactured so that it could provide more anti-Israeli propaganda.

Some of the so-called peace activists were shown to be akin to drunken sailors, intoxicated by their desire to be shahids, or Islamic martyrs; driven on by their pure hatred of Israel and Jews. The documentary showed footage of some of the activists chanting hateful comments about Jews. Also shown was evidence that some activists on the Mavi Mamara used cutting equipment to extract metal railings surrounding the ship's deck to be used as weapons in preparation for the desired violence . And indeed, the sharp and heavy metallic railings were later used to attack the Israeli boarding party, in some cases nearly to lethal effect. Metal chains, a form of medieval weaponry, was also used by some of the activists against the Israeli commandos. The attacks were all captured on film.

If it wasn't for the fact that some of the activists did have some human decency, the badly injured Israeli soldiers would have been beaten to death as they lay wounded by some of the frenzied hate-filled activists; I found this aspect quite moving, and felt encouraged that a few of the activists acted this way. One injured Israeli commando later commented that it was clear the activists were divided into two groups: one hard-line and the other relatively moderate. It should also be noted here that Israel had offered to deliver the so-called aid to Gaza; this was clearly not what was wanted by the hard-line activists.

Following the airing of the BBC's Panorama programme on the Gaza raid, there was a predictable outcry that it was "all lies" from the usual suspects: the Israel-haters as well as Islamic and far-left extremists (who now feel very comfortable in each others company, since they have a common feature uniting them for the time being: a hatred of Israel). Incensed that the truth was now being revealed, the extremist Israel-haters tried to hold a demonstration outside the BBC's offices claiming that the programmed was "biased". Looking at pictures of the demonstration, I noticed that some of the demonstrators were ironically holding up copies of the far-left newspaper, The Morning Star, whose headline was about the supposed bias of the BBC's Panorama programme. Given that The Morning Star is a newspaper - if one can call it as such- which slavishly reported Soviet communist propaganda during the era of the Soviet Union then pots and kettles spring to mind.

It is depressingly easy to find on the internet truly hateful sentiments directed against Jews and Israel in general. And hatred of Israel, some of it downright shrill and irrational, seems to be getting worse. I find this extremely worrying and believe that it does not augur well for for the future of mankind; it certainly doesn't augur well for the future of the Jewish people especially given the tragic events of the past century. Apparently even Fidel Castro voiced some concerns about growing anti-Semitism; the apparent target being Iran's lunatic holocaust-denying president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Israel, like every other nation state past or present on the face of this earth, is not perfect; it sometimes makes mistakes. When Israel does get things wrong, it is rightfully criticized; and much of this criticism comes from within Israel itself, because it is, after all, an open and democratic society with a free press and a transparent legal system; all of which stands in stark contrast to almost all those nations who have enmity towards Israel.

Isn't it strange how armed-terrorist organizations, Islamic thugocracies and pseudo-democracies in the Arab and Islamic world effectively get a free pass from many Israel haters in the West; the same people who seem to spend all their time bashing Israel whilst practically ignoring genuine injustices in the world. The double standards and hypocrisy when it comes to treating Israel are truly breath-taking.

Some cowardly and unprincipled left-wing academics in the UK and elsewhere, much to their eternal shame, have pushed for an academic boycott of Israel. This type of action is manifestly unfair in the way Israel is singled out; but as was pointed out earlier, this obsessive focusing on Israel is one tell-tale sign of the true anti-Semite. Israel is an important member of the international scientific community; it carries out, for example, important medical research. How galling is the possibility that some important breakthrough in the treatment of, say, cancer could potentially be jeopardized because the likes of some otherwise useless, bearded-goofball-Guardian-reading sociology lecturer has a monomaniacal dislike of Israel whilst maintaining at the same time a starry-eyed admiration of Hamas? Sadly, there are truly people like this.

Jewish people have always made outstanding contributions to mankind in all its endeavours, from the sciences to the arts. In the sciences, one just has to look back at the previous century to see how many important intellectual figures were Jewish. Albert Einstein, for example, was Jewish; and whilst he was a non-religious Jew, he certainly was a Zionist who supported Israel's right to exist. It is well-known that Einstein was once invited to be the president of Israel. The list of Nobel Prize winners in science reveals that a staggering proportion are of Jewish origin.

The fact that a small minority of misguided and obstinate people, in some cases downright eccentric, also of Jewish origin chose to play the role of useful idiots by joining in on the banshee chorus calling for Israel's death does not detract from anything said here; all societies have such people.

Many Israel haters, including high-profile ones in the UK such as the Glasgow blowhard, George Galloway, and the former Taliban-hostage and convert to Islam, Yvonne Ridley, have openly given moral and material support to anti-Semitic terrorist organisations like Hamas, as well as to the openly anti-Semitic and holocaust-denying regime in power in Iran. For people of this ilk, no hyperbole is too hyperbolic when it comes to whipping up anti-Israeli hysteria; they have no qualms about turning a blind eye to the excesses and crimes of those they support as Israel's enemies.

Another grotesque slander against Israel is that it is doing to the Palestinian Arabs exactly what the Nazis did to the Jews during World War II. I have personally heard this said by otherwise perfectly sane and well-educated people. It is such an utterly stupid thing to say, insulting and patently untrue, monstrous in fact, that it is difficult to really know how to react.


So, how about a picture of Miss Israel (who is, incidentally, an Israeli Arab).







Or perhaps, a picture of an Israeli banknote (note the Arabic script).






I'd like to conclude with:

Shalom aleichem
עֲלֵיכֶם שָׁלוֹם
السلام عليكم

The Dark Light Years

It has been many years since I have read a science fiction novel. Whilst browsing in a second-hand bookshop I happened upon "The Dark Light Years" by Brian Aldiss. The blurb on the back cover of this slim novel, published in 1964, describes it as difficult and one of Aldiss' best. Both my recollection of Aldiss as an accomplished science-fiction writer and some nostalgic recollections from my childhood made me decide to buy this book.

However, I almost gave up reading the novel after a few pages; the reason being that the initial setting is so bizarre, and yes, alien, and one has to make a real effort to comprehend the "Utods"; ungainly six-limbed creatures who enjoy wallowing in their own faeces, not to mention also having a penchant for slapping the stuff over each other. In addition, we are faced at the outset with the Utod's "middensteads" (i.e. homesteads made from dung), their salad beds, and their strange modes of communication involving the use of use of mouths, anuses, and other orifices. Then there is the problem of trying to figure out the significance of the presence of the elderly exile, Ainson, amongst the Utods. Ainson is a human who, after several decades amongst the Utods, has learned enough of the their language (something like a simplified pidgin form) to be able to tell them he is popping indoors for a lie down. Thankfully, it does all become clear after a while.

The irony of what I have just said in relation to comprehending the Utods is that this turns out (I believe) to be the central theme of the novel: the two life forms, Utods and humans, each of them with complex languages, highly-developed emotions and advanced space-faring technologies, just cannot figure each other at all. The Utods feel no pain, are completely passive, have difficulty with the concept of something being "bad" and do not look upon death with horror (this is merely seen as "progressing to the carrion stage"). Needless to say, humans are not like this, and so you can be in no doubt as to which life form you will end up rooting for in the end, notwithstanding the Utod's aversion to cleanliness. In fact, you becomes so sympathetic towards the Utods that when trigger-happy unconscionable humans decide to shoot some of them on a game hunt it creates a feeling of repulsion much like you would expect to feel if you witnessed a panda hunt. The vivisection of some Utods, who can't comprehend why the humans are slicing them up, also makes for uncomfortable and disturbing reading. One might be tempted to think of the novel as a metaphor for imperialism, but this only works to a certain degree because we don't here have a technologically-advanced civilization encountering and forcing itself on a relatively primitive one; this encounter is more like the exact opposite to a meeting of minds.

A large portion, if not most, of the novel takes place on the planet earth in the early part of the twenty-first century. This aspect of the novel shows how notoriously difficult it is really to predict the future, especially in terms of technological, social and political developments. Apparently, people still send letters as their main form of long-distance communication; Britain is at war with Brazil, and London at least feels little more than a very polluted version of 1950s Britain with some space-age gizmos thrown in for good measure. Moreover, the Soviet Union still exists, and so at least George Galloway would be happy. Some things, however, are quite plausible; for example, that that long-distance space travel is accomplished not by propulsion, but by the manipulation of the very fabric of space and time; most scientists agree that this is certainly the only way to consider crossing the vastness of inter-stellar space.

The novel is pessimistic, but is not without its lighter moments: On landing on a new world, and after opening a hatch on their spacecraft, a high-ranking Utod claims ownership of the new world for his species by saying, "I pronounce all this to be land belonging to the Triple Suns. Let defecation commence." Not quite Neil Armstrong, but this novel does represent one giant leap for imagination; I thoroughly recommend it, but be prepared to be disturbed and maybe even a little upset.

This Demon-Haunted World

The imminent prospect of the ninth anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks and the depressingly predictable response we can expect following the Koran-burning ritual promised by the Florida pastor, Terry Jones, on that anniversary has reminded me of how apt is the late great Carl's Sagan's description of this world as demon-haunted. This world truly is haunted by the demons of irrational and anti-human religious belief.

In my youth, I attended Sunday school at my local church. One day, the Church organised a visit to a local mental hospital. As a rather callow youth, the experience truly shocked me. Anyway, one part of the visit that I can still recall decades later concerned a particular patient at the hospital who looked and sounded quite rational on the surface; he was polite, friendly and did not show the slightest symptoms of someone with mental-health problems until he introduced us to his office. He then explained to us visitors that he was the Pope's private secretary and it was in this office that he carried out all his correspondence with the Pope. I can't recall how the hospital had set aside a small room for his office, maybe it was a broom cupboard, but I can still picture his school writing-desk with its piles of envelopes, pens and letters of correspondence. I felt distinctly uncomfortable when the nurse, or mental-health worker, who was showing our party around began to humour his delusion by publicly back up his story; she asked him to show us his latest communication from the Pope. He proudly showed us the letter he had recently received in which the Pope outlined his secretary's duties for the coming week. I have no exact recollection of those particular duties, but I'm fairly sure that they included helping out with some of the menial tasks within the hospital. Notwithstanding his normal appearance and evident sociability, the poor soul was completely lost in his delusion. And even if they could have, it was fairly obvious that no one at the hospital was going to disabuse him of it.

Now my mind jumps forward another fifteen years or so to 1985; I am attending a public lecture entitled "The Search for Who We Are" given by Carl Sagan at the Boyd Or lecture hall at the University of Glasgow. At the end of Carl Sagan's enthralling and pellucid lecture, presented with his characteristic mellifluous delivery, he asked the audience if they had any questions they would like to ask him. One member of the audience was ready, and his arm shot up like a ramrod; I recall he was siting just a few rows behind me. "Would you consider the prospect that Jesus turned water into wine possible?" was the question he was immediately posed. A non sequitur, if ever there was one. "No. Next question; yes, the man over there" was Carl Sagan's snappy response. I can't say if Carl Sagan was peeved that such an irrelevant question had been put to him, but I suspect that he was. I cannot recall any of the other questions, but I do recall that a certain section of the audience had strongly-held religious beliefs and were there not so much to discuss the subject of his lecture but rather to challenge him for his opinions on religion. Nevertheless, Carl Sagan dealt with them calmly and rationally saying that further discussions in this vein were futile because, as he put it, "You will spin your wheel and I will spin mine."

When it comes to beliefs, religious beliefs especially, or the lack of them, there is definitely an argument for allowing the other party to keep spinning their wheel as long as it causes you no physical harm; but equally so, there is also an argument for trying to disabuse someone of a belief that is patently insane or harmful. I'm not sure if convincing the patient at the mental hospital that he wasn't actually the Pope's personal secretary would have improved the quality of his life. I am quite certain, however, that the constant pandering and kowtowing of the West to the prickly medieval religious mindset prevalent in a significant portion of the Islamic world is unhealthy and dangerous.

Blood Secrets by Craig Jones

I'm an enthusiastic reader of crime fiction, mysteries, penny dreadfuls or whatever you care to call them. Anyway, about one week ago, I came across a rather tatty-looking paperback book in a hotel library with a rather lurid title and an even more lurid cover. The title of the book was "Blood Secrets" by Craig Jones. And you know what they say about a book and its cover; well the old cliché certainly rang true in this case: this book is most certainly no pot boiler. In fact, I would go as far as to say that it is a veritable literary masterpiece; something that has the potential to be regarded as classic; a book that you can certainly never forget once you have read it.

A quick Google search on the web of other people's comments about this book will backsup my claims. On one website, a person notes that even though they read this book some twenty years ago, and have read a great deal in between, they have never forgotten this incredible book. In fact, it is a mystery in itself as to why this book, published in 1979, is no longer in print; moreover, it is almost unbelievable that the tale contained within has never been made into a film.

Set in United States in the late 60s during the Vietnam-war era, the story begins with the unlikely pairing of a brilliant and beautiful female student, Irene, with a gawky, bookish, and rather unattractive post-graduate student Frank. Despite Frank's off-putting manner and avoidance tactics, not to mention the advice from her friends to leave him well alone, Irene is intrigued by Frank's aloofness. Eventually, they do become a couple and marry. At the wedding, Irene discovers that Frank refuses to have anything to do with his own family. Frank's insistence that the married couple should have nothing to do with his family both disturbs and puzzles Irene. Eventually, the pair settle down to a happy and contented married life and have a daughter whom, at Frank's suggestion, they name Regina. As Regina begins to develop as a person in her own right, problems begin to surface both in her and in Frank. The behaviour of both daughter and husband becomes a considerable cause for concern for Irene.

At this point, I will stop outlining the plot; in fact, on the back cover is something I've never seen on any other book: a warning not to reveal the plot to anyone; this may sound a liitle melodramatic, but given the way the tale moves remorselessly to an utterly horrifying and totally unforeseen conclusion with several twists and turns on the way it is entirely understandable.

So, why should this book be considered a masterpiece.? Well, firstly the style writing is superb; the language is vivid, laconic and it moves the plot forward masterfully. The novel is not divided into chapters, and on some occasions several years pass between one sentence and another; but this approach works well; brilliantly in fact.

Secondly, the story told is entirely plausible, whilst at the same time genuinely perturbing, in fact, horrifying, but without any involvement of the supernatural (in case you're wonderingm this isn't Stephen King). The pace begins to quicken about three-quarters of the way through, and the reader suddenly finds himself being cognizant of the fact that something truly awful in relation to Frank and his daughter is unfolding. The denouement is absolutely disturbing, and is crafted masterfully and convincingly, with a great deal of suspense, especially considering that contrived and unsatisfying endings are often the undoing of novels of this genre; here, however, there is most definitely no deus ex machina.

Put simply, I think this novel is a work of genius; it deserves to be more widely read. and recognised. As for author, Craig Jones, I can't find out anything about him except that he published one further novel in 1986. There doesn't seem to be anything else by him available. I really wonder what became of him? I believe he has, or had, a remarkable talent as demonstrated by this novel, which is one of the best I have read in the last couple of years or so.

Blog Resurrected

I've decided to resurrect my "Count of Monte Cristo in a Bubble Car" blog. Unfortunately, I have had to start again from scratch rather than simply maintaining my original blog (of more or less the same name) because I have forgotten: (a) my password to the blog; and (b) my password to the e-mail account associated with the original blog; hence, I am completely unable to access my original blog account.