GAZA -- WHAT HAPPENS IN 25 YEARS?

 The pictures of starving children.  Israel shooting into starving crowds.  Macron now declares that France will recognize the Palestinian state.  Labour Prime Minister Starmer announces Britain will do the same.

Meanwhile Hamas continues to lead Gaza.  It has not really surrendered, not has it given up all the hostages.  80 years ago this month, suppose reporters had shown the world photos of recently bombed Hiroshima?  How could America be so cruel, to men, women, and especially children?  Such terrible deaths. Ja[an did not surrender when the A bomb was dropped.  Japanese troops still occupied much of China, Burma, Indonesia, Malaya, and most of French Indo-China.  The A-bomb simply showed the cruelty of America, and why Japan should carry on the fight.  [May France might think of joining the Japanese, if Macron had been its leader then.]  No it took a 2nd A-bomb, intervention in the war by Stalin, to get the Japanese to unconditional surrender.  And the 2 A-bombs were worse than the food problems in Gaza.  Once Japan surrendered, then, and only then, could the US begin to try to rebuild relations between our nations, rebuild them so we have had peace.

The Palestinians have NOT surrendered.  Hamas still has Israeli prisoners.  Now it will have more nations recognizing it.  Their surprise attack against Israel last year is still yielding gains.

In recent years, Mid Eastern wars began when Muslim nations attacked Israel.  Secret attacks.  If they lose this round, in 25 years, Hamas will try again.  The Muslims, can lose, this round, the next.  But when they win, it will mean death to Israel, from the river to the sea, Israel will be destroyed, and every Jew in the are murdered.  If the Muslims win once, that is the end.  The end of the little devil Israel, and then they will plan to exterminate the big devil.

I say, there is a better solution.  Remove the Palestinians from Gaza.  There must be about 40 Muslim nations on earth.  Surely, the 2 million Palestinians could be divided up to go to various Muslim nations; Gaza would be absorbed into Israel, just as the Soviet Union took some of Poland, and Poland took some of Germany at the end of WWII.  When you lose a war, expect to lose some territory.  If the Palestinians are not removed from Gaza, there will be another war, probably much worse, in about 25 years.  NO 2 state solution, for that is no solution.  That is set the clock for another war.  For the sake of peace, remove the Palestinians from Gaza.---Hugh Murray

From RT - Includes a video from Le Monde showing football fans in Ukraine

 

Ukrainian soccer fans filmed performing Nazi salutes – media

The incident reportedly took place during a match between the football clubs Dynamo Kiev and Veres Rivne

©  Telegram / @stranaua

A video showing a crowd of Ukrainian soccer fans repeatedly performing a Nazi salute during their team’s match against a rival club has been published by a Ukrainian outlet Strana.ua. The short clip shows numerous men, mostly dressed in black, repeatedly chanting: “Glory to the nation!” and “Ukraine!”

The people in the video were identified by Strana.ua as “ultras” of the Veres Rivne football club. Photos and videos showing “the same people wearing the same clothes” were published on the social media pages of club fans, the outlet reported.

Veres hosted Dynamo Kiev on Saturday with the home club suffering a 0:1 defeat. There have been no reports of the Ukrainian authorities reacting in any way to the video showing Nazi salutes that has emerged on social media.

Moscow has long condemned Kiev’s elevation of Nazi collaborators to national hero status and has accused Western governments of deliberately ignoring continued neo-Nazi activity in Ukrainian ranks.

In June, French outlet Le Monde reported that Nazi symbols were prevalent in the Ukrainian military. The newspaper identified nearly 350 Ukrainian troops posting neo-Nazi imagery online, including Nazi salutes, swastika tattoos, Black Sun emblems, and Totenkopf insignias as part of its investigation.

READ MORE: Nazi symbols prevalent in Ukrainian military – Le Monde

In April, three Ukrainian youths were photographed giving Nazi salutes at a Holocaust memorial in the northeastern city of Kharkov. The incident occurred at the Drobitsky Yar memorial site, where up to 20,000 Jews were executed during the Nazi occupation in World War II.

[Hugh Murray -- Unfortunately, when I copied the RT article, the video did not copy to this site.  It was 20 seconds and most of that crowd in the top photo, in unison giving the old fascist salute, while shouting something I assume in Ukrainian.  It may have been simply, Go Team.  Putin prefers to forget that Stalin's decision to collectivize agriculture in the 1920s and 30s led to the deaths of millions of Ukrainians.  When Nazi troops entered in 1941, many saw them as liberators.  There were 2 major monsters fighting in WWII.  Jews had no choice; they had to choose one or die.  Others chose the 2nd monster.  Can we move on beyond the monsters?]   RT stresses the Nazi symbols often used in today's Ukraine; yet its leader, Zelensky is Jewish.]

FREE EXPRESSION: THE STORY OF AMERICA'S FREEDOM OF RELIGION

 I watched an excellent PBS documentary tonight on religious freedom in America.  It hit all the main points, or ?  This short essay is a critique of that fine program, but I am using speculation, and possibly bad memory.  But I think it did miss a very important point.

The film mentions that when some English Quakers arrived in New Amsterdam/s Flushing section, locals stood up to defend the strange religion, signing a petition on their behalf.  But the film omits how the Puritans of New England, expressing their religion, a fundamentalist Christianity, when the first Western baby was born in the new colony, they checked the date when the couple married aboard the ship, and discovered the baby emerged too soon.  The couple must have fornicated before marriage.  To celebrate the first babe born, they had the parents whipped!  Later they executed the many witches that seemed to have come to the colony.  They kicked out Baptist leader Roger Williams and sent him packing to Rhode Island, and when Quakers came to preach, they too were executed.  The Puritans had free expression, but that did not extend to others in their colony.

But I am more interested in another period not covered by the documentary - 1803-1812.  The Justinian Code, which was the source of much of the groundwork for law in Europe, assumed most people would be Christians.  There were discriminatory provisions for Jews and pagans.  When Martin Luther stood his ground, and was not executed for his new heresy, the Roman Catholic Church now had a major challenge to its dominance in much of Europe.  Germany soon had to endure the 30 Years War, in which Catholic monarchs warred against various Protestant leaders.  While Swiss Cantons were more tolerant, still you could not express open defiance of the ruler's chosen religion.  A similar solution in divided Germany.  Henry VIII made himself the leader of a revised church in England, the Anglican.  Attempts to expand Protestism in France culminated in a massacre of Huguenots.  Bottom line - Catholics and Protestants tended to kill each other.

The English colonies in North America were being populated by various Protestant sects; the government happy to see a larger population in the colonies, and probably also happy that some of these dissidents left Britain.  There was one colony, Maryland, founded for Catholics who had been persecuted in England, but in 40 years, Protestants composed a large majority and introduced some discrimination against Roman Catholics.  Virginia and all the southern colonies had the Anglican as the established church, and other British colonies in America had other dominant Protestant  denominations.

During the 7 Years War (French and Indian War), France and Britain battled against each other in India, North America including Canada, and elsewhere.  With defeat France lost Acadia (Nova Scotia), and the inhabitants expelled, with some making it to Louisiana to become Cajuns.  France also lost the area around Pittsburgh, Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, and Ouisconsin.  Not that many French had settled. there; and it would take some time for the Brits to do so.

1789 Bastille Day.  A revolution far more radical than ours.  A time of great invention, hot-air balloons, 

a humane device to execute by Dr. Guiuetine, the abolition of the Christian calendar, the Year I of the Revolution, and it was decimal, with a 10-day week.  The Jacabins in parliament vote to end slavery in Haiti, and the party leader, Robespierre, dressed in a toga, turns Notre Dame into a temple to the goddess of wisdom.  However, Robespierre is soon guitined himself, and a young military man, Napoleon comes to power.  He will restore the French Empire in the New World.

Unfortunately for Napoleon, when the Jacobins lost power and failed to free the slaves of Haiti, the slaves decided to free themselves.  Slave rebellion.  Napoleon who had won many battles in Europe, and would soon be in Moscow, he did not count on the slaves being formidable.  True, slave revolts almost never succeed, but the Haitians defeated the French troops sent by Napoleon.  Yellow fever may have contributed to the French losses.

France still held from New Orleans up to Minnesota, the Dakotas, Montana, and to some, Idaho, Washington, and Oregon.  And a slew of states going down to Arkansas.  America, the new nation, sought to purchase New Orleans only, as who controlled that city on both sides of the Mississippi, would determine the trade.  Before rail, water was the cheapest way to ship goods.  But with the failure of French efforts in the 7 Years War  France gave Louisiana to Spain, an ally, and it would keep it from British hands.  During his exploits, Napoleon put his brother on the Spanish throne, so no big deal.  When Jefferson sought to buy New Orleans, his team was surprised to buy all of Louisiana.  The French then took over Louisiana for a short time, and transferred it to the USA.  As part of the deal, Jefferson pledged to treat the dominant Catholic population of Louisiana as equal citizens.

In all the huge Louisiana territory, there was not one legal Protestant church!  Normally, Catholics and Protestants killed each other.  This would be an interesting experiment.  Can RC's and Prot's live together as equal and in peace.  The treaty was signed in 1803.  Louisiana became a state in 1812.  By 1840. New Orleans was the 3rd largest city in the US (a wiki article on La history, but I think it exaggerates).  Most of the population of New Orleans was RC.  Indeed, the new territory did not even absorb English Common Law, but used the French Revolution's improved revisions of Justinian's, now called the Napoleonic Code.  The church I attended was originally Presbyterian, but the minister was found guilty of heresy.  He made it a Unitarian Church, the 2nd Protestant church in NO, and possibly in Louisiana.  Money problems, but financial help came from a merchant in NO, Judah Touro, who helped with the Touro Synagogue in NO, and one in Rhode Island.  Unlike most of the South, there was a sizable FPC population, Free People of Color.  The program spoke of the growth of Catholic Schools, but I am sure they already existed in New Orleans, and some for the FPCs.  When the Irish famine caused many to flee the land and come to America, quite a few came to NO.  It may not have been ideal, for St. Louis Cathedral is still one of the symbols of Jackson Square in the French Quarter.  But about 20 blocks away, it what was then called the American Quarer, stands St. Patrick's Cathedral.

I do not mean that there was no friction between Catholics and Protestants or Jews.  But it was subdued.  The only horror on the religious front, but probably had nothing to do with religious differences, occurred in the 1890s, when 11 men were lynched in one swoop.  They were not black; they were Italians, and apparently members of the Black Hand, which seems to have been an early version of the Mafia.  The new united nation of Italy protested this to Washington, DC, and Washington told NO, stop lynching Italians.

My point, normally RC and Prots have long histories in many countries of killing each other.  I think the religious experiment in Louisiana worked quite well.   This was written quickly, and there may be some errors, but I think it overall accurate.   HUGH MURRAY

      THE GREAT EXPERIMENT IN AMERICA, AND ONE THAT                                  WORKED WELL

     I may be wrong, if so tell me.  Going back to the Justinian Code, Christianity was given special privileges.  Pagans and Jews were recognized, but restricted in their worship and in their rights.  They were clearly 2nd class citizens.  And the Christian Church was not a cacophany of voices, it was one true church, with doctrines approved with the Nicaean Creed.  In time, there would be 2 centers, Rome in the west, and Constantinople in the East.  Heresy was worse than the false religions, and heretics were punished.  This, with variations became the basic law on religion in the West  from the 6th century until the French Revolution.  The revision of Justinian's Code gave citizens the right to be Protestants, Jews, and possibly other faiths.  When Napoleon took Louisiana from Spain, the new law went to Louisiana as the Napoleonic Code.  (It also followed Napoleon's armies through Europe, so Jews could leave the ghettos in Germany, and dissidents might practice a faith other than the local duke's or rulers'.

Jefferson, a Christian perhaps for reasons of being a politician, but sometimes a Deist, and generally a strong believer of separation of church and state.  He bought Louisiana, a vast territory without a single, legal Protestant church.  The capital, New Orleans was Catholic, overwhelmingly so.  But Jefferson pledged to treat the Catholics with the rights of all American citizens so they could openly practice their religion.  All the other states and territories of the US were Protestant, overwhelmingly so.  Ever since Luther succeeded in breaking the unity of the Roman Church in the West, when RCs and Prots both sought to openly practice their faiths, there would be hostility, murders, and wars.  Everyone knew, the two versions of Christianity could NOT live in peace.  Wars and massacres had followed the Reformation.  Did Jefferson make a mistake in buying a territory that could not be absorbed into Protestant America???

    Soon there were at least 2 Protestant churches in Catholic New Orleans, and Touro Synagogue.  A port city, many sailors who came were not necessarily looking for churches; the French Quarter has been around a long time.  Many of the American farmers who came down the Mississippi with their goods to sell, surely Protestants, unloaded in New Orleans, where some goods would might be shipped abroad, or to the east coasst of the US.  As far as I know, there were no religious riots.  In 1812 Louisiana was admitted to the union just like any other state, even though it did not have English Common Law, but the Napoleonic Code as basis for law.  There were Catholic schools, and some FPCs were educared the same as whites.  Aside from bouts of Yellow Fever, the city grew and thrived.  The WORLD LEARNED THAT ROMAN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS AND OTHERS COULD LIVE IN PEACE AS CITIZENS WITH THE SAME BASIC RIGHTS.  I do not believe this had occurred before the Louisiana experiment.  I know nothing of Canadian history, and it is possible, when Britain conquered Canada, it allowed religious freedom there too.  But the British cruel expulsion of the Acadians from Nova Scotia, makes me suspect it may not have gone so smoothly in Canada.  If Canada ran the same experiment in religious freedom for RCs and Prots, it would have been about the same time as the Louisiana experiment.  We know it worked in Louisiana.  And not just minority Prots and Jews, we had vodoo too.  One more innovation of freedom in the New World.

A QUESTION ABOUT THE AMERICAN CIA BEING IN BED WITH THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY

You might begin with the previous post about the fake Russia Gate charges against Trump.  Though these charges were vehemently denied in the conservative media, the mainstream media often reported them as if they were true.

     However, one example illustrates both the unified efforts of the CIA-Democratic Party alliance to smash Donald Trump.  Just before the 2020 election, the New York Post broke the story of Hunter Biden's laptop, with photos of him with what seemed to be prostitutes in China, drug usage, and texts about the Bidens receiving millions of dollars from Chinese companies (related to the Chinese Communist Party?) -  It should also be noted, that a few years later, when Hunter Biden went to trial in connection to corruption revealed on his laptop, no one questioned the validity of his laptop in the court.  So much for the integrity of 51 of America's leading intelligence leaders..

     At the time Antony Blinken was foreign policy advisor to the Biden Presidential election campaign.  Blinken quickly reacted to the Post story - writing one of his friends in the CIA.  The election was in early November, and action had to taken immediately.  That friend, contacted others and in other intil agencies.  Soon 51 American intelligence agents, including the chief of the CIA, signed a letter pretending that they had examined Hunter's laptop, that it was a fraud, and the entire allegations were Russian disinformation.  With their influence, they were able to ban the Post story from the internet, while the major media news programs dismissed it as Russian   In disinformation,  In effect, they white washed the allegations against not only Hunter, but Joe Biden in the week before the election.  How many people might have voted for Trump if they had been allowed to read the Post story?

      Despite the much larger crowds at Trump rallies in 2020 while Biden campaigned from his home, or on one occasion before supporters inside their autos (probably fewer than 300) the media declared Biden the victor in the popular and in the Electoral vote.  Many Trump supporters simply did not believe the results.

      At a Trump rally in Washington, DC, on Jan. 5, 2021, many marched from there to the Capitol.  Some were intent on trying to change the electoral vote so Trump could resume the Presidency.  Others were being urged to take over the Capitol by individuals who may have been agents of the government, or hired by agents to do so.  There was some violence, some physical battles, but the only person shot was a Trump supporter, a woman, 5'2'' unarmed, shot dead by a DC policeman.

    VP Pence refused to go along with Trump's demands to challenge the count, and Biden was elected.  The Capitol Police and other agencies went all out to apprehend and convict all those who entered the Capitol.  The city, which usually votes about 95% Democrat. with anti-Trump judges and jurors, the Trumpers arrested generally got harsh sentences.

      Meanwhile Rep. Pelosi headed a Congressional Committee to investigate the "insurrection."  Unlike regular committees, she refused to allow the Republican leaders to choose the Republican members of the committee.  Instead, Democrat leader Pelosi would choose the Republican representatives.  When it cam to Trump, this was simply an anti-Trump committee; no defense allowed; no questioning of witnesses that might challenge the Democrat and (CIA) prosecution.  This was a kangaroo committee, a Stalinist type trial.

     According to Steve Bannon, Rachel Maddow announced on her tv program, if Trump would now retire, enjoy his fortune, all could be forgiven;  but if Trump were to re-enter the Presidential race, for 2024, they would go after him.  Trump chose not to retire.  According to Bannon, Atty. Gen. Garland began to work with various attorneys in various states, to make sure Trump could not run again - put him in prison for as long as possible; go after him on charges that no one else would be charged with; who cares about the details.  Go after his friends, impoverish Rudy Giuliani, Mayor of NYC during the terror attack on the former World Trade Center, bankrupt his allies, put Bannon in jail, and his economic advisor, Peter Navarro, get banks to refuse to work with conservative organizations.  The Democrats seemed to have one victory after another.  Finally, they could announce, Donald Trump, Convicted Felon!  That could keep him off the ballot in some states and weaken him everwhere.  But in the police photo, Trump is defiant.  Moreover, I noted that Martin Luther King was a convicted felon, as was I, as were many in the civil right movement who had violated Democratic Party unjust laws.

     And other courts began to question these political trials.  In the end, the people would decide in the 2024 election.  The CIA/Democratic Party lost to Trump.

     My speculation: If the CIA, which is rather good at overthrowing other governments, and maybe even distorting election results in other lands, did they also make sure Trump lost in 2020?  Could our agency get into the voting machines?  distort numbers?  give Biden votes?  I have no proof, but I would not put it past them.  I suspect they gave us the disastrous Presidency of Joe Biden.  Not since the government involvement in the 2 coups of November 1963 - November 2 in Saigon, November 22 in Dallas - and the counter-coup that removed Nixon a decade later, has there been such disregard of democracy, the popular views; instead we were given a bitter taste of Stalinist legal practices, etc.   My view, we came too close to a total dictatorship of the Intelligence Agencies and their Democratic plundering allies during the destructive Biden Presidency.

     Trump has to rebuild the nation while fighting an entrenched group who could proudly defy the law and the popular will to aid and abet a foreign invasion of millions during Biden's sad attempt to break America.  The damage that man caused is all round us.

      I will not agree with everything that Trump will have to do to rebuild and heal America.  But, at least, the bleeding has stopped, and we are generally headed in the right direction.                         HUGH MURRAY

FROM RT - HOW THE CIA HELPED THE DEMS TO DEFEAT TRUMP - THE STORY AVOIDED BY NBCBSABC, etc

 

Russiagate was a ploy to ‘screw Trump’ – CIA boss

The Obama administration’s top spies manipulated the probe from the onset, according to John Ratcliffe

FILE PHOTO: CIA director John Ratcliffe. ©  Global Look Press / CNP / Chris Kleponis

A US intelligence report on Russia’s alleged interference in the 2016 presidential election, commissioned by then-President Barack Obama, was nothing but a deliberate manipulation, CIA Director John Ratcliffe has said, citing his agency’s recent internal review.

Known as the 2016 Intelligence Community Assessment on Russian Election Interference (ICA), the report kickstarted the Russiagate conspiracy, prompted special counsel Robert Mueller’s inquiry, and “ate up the first two years” of President Donald Trump’s first term, Ratcliffe said in an interview with the New York Post published on Wednesday. The new CIA head ordered an internal review of the report in May.

Obama ordered the ICA just six weeks before leaving office. According to the CIA review of its drafting and rushed release, declassified on Wednesday, then-CIA Director John Brennan, FBI Director James Comey, and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper were unusually and “excessively involved” in the process.

“The rushed timeline to publish both classified and unclassified versions before the presidential transition raised questions about a potential political motive behind the White House tasking and timeline,” the review said, calling the work on the report “chaotic,” “atypical,” and “markedly unconventional.”

The CIA review found that Brennan effectively directed the compilation of the ICA and particularly insisted on including the later discredited Steele dossier. The dossier – a compilation of unverified rumors about Trump and his alleged links to Russia – was compiled by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele and reportedly funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign.

READ MORE: Trump declassifies FBI files on Russia probe

“This was Obama, Comey, Clapper, and Brennan deciding, ‘We’re going to screw Trump,’” Ratcliffe said, commenting on his agency’s findings. “It was, ‘We’re going to create this and put the imprimatur of an IC assessment in a way that nobody can question it.’ They stamped it as Russian collusion and then classified it so nobody could see it.”

“Brennan and Clapper and Comey manipulated [and] silenced all the career professionals and railroaded the process,” the CIA director added.

American public opinion was further manipulated by constant media leaks and unnamed officials cited by The Washington Post, The New York Times, and other mainstream outlets.

“Before work on the assessment even began, media leaks suggesting that the IC had already reached definitive conclusions risked creating an anchoring bias,” the review noted.

READ MORE: Hollywood l Oliver Stone blasts ‘Russiagate lies’

The ICA, as well as the FBI’s 2016 ‘Crossfire Hurricane’ investigation and the subsequent Mueller inquiry, cast a long shadow over Trump’s first term, with allegations of “Russian collusion” persisting in the media even after Mueller’s report found no evidence to support them. Moscow has also repeatedly denied any election interference.

You can share this story on social media:

NEWSER STORY ON SALLY RIDE, FIRST AMERICAN WOMAN TO WALK IN SPACE, AND HER HIDDEN STORY

Newser had a story on Sally Ride and it brought many comments.  Mine is below, and then Buckoux attacked my view in a powerful, and thought-provoking manner.  I replied.  I must admit I am no attorney, and I may be wrong on some of this.  Maybe all of this.  But I hope it stimulates thought on the part of readers.---Hugh Murray

Why Sally Ride Hid Her Sexuality

humura 11 hours ago edited

When I was young, homosexuality was a crime, and a sickness. In the daily newspaper's crime notices, so-in-so was arrested for a crime against nature. with their name and address revealed. Job loss, humiliation, and relatives might try to have the guilty party committed to an insane asylum. Many people destroyed.
The evil repercussions of a an ancient tale of 2 cities was literally a death sentence for nearly 2,000 years for gays, with widespread influence of the Justinian Code. Three cheers for the French Revolution and its revision of the laws into the Napoleonic Code, which freed Protestants, Jews, and gays.

 

Buckoux

"Three cheers for the French Revolution and its revision of the laws into the Napoleonic Code, which freed Protestants, Jews, and gays."

No. The Magna Carta and the evolution of bottom-up English Common Law is far superior to the top-down of Civil Law from the Napoleonic Code. Civil Law countries have no juries of one's peers, only judges and no grand juries, once again of ones peers. The poor countries of this world, especially Latin America, suffer the injustices of their corrupt governments due to their Napoleonic Code of law brought by the Spanish, Portuguese and French to the New World.

 

humura to    Buckoux18 minutes ago edited

One can argue English Common Law is more democratic than civil coded law. My point is that the Justinian Code embodied the prejudices and hatred of the late Roman Empire, and so the laws included restrictions on pagans, Jews, homosexuals. Continuing the trend begun by Constantine, pagan temples could become Christian churches, Jewish services had to be in the vernacular language, and could be cancelled if interfering with the Christian calendar services; and the penalty for sodomy was death, preceded by torture for both men involved.  That code, spread to influence most of Europe, meant centuries of persecution for Jews and gays and religious non-conformists. The French Revolution, which at times was a war against the Roman Catholic Church, even abolishing the Christian calendar, and replacing it with a new scientific decimal system. The 10-day week was unpopular and did not endure. The Cathedral of Notre Dame was converted into a temple for the goddess of reason, as Robespierre, wearing a toga, sought to restore some of the old religion,- but when he fell from power, and his head fell into a basket, some experiments came to an end. His Jacobin party did vote for the abolishment of black slavery in what we call Haiti, probably the first effort to free black slaves en masse, but that parliamentary effort ended with Robespierre's death also. The idea was however taken up by the black slaves themselves, who began a black rebellion in Haiti, one of the few successful slave rebellions in history. Napoleon sought to suppress it, gave up, and gave up the idea of a French empire in North America. So he took Louisiana from his brother whom he had put on the Spanish throne, and sold Louisiana to the new USA.
Another thing, if English law is so superior, how come it did not spread to neighboring Scotland, where NOT Napoleonic but civil code is still used? The French Revolution and the new Code freed Protestants in France, Jews, and gays, not only in France, but where Napoleons armies conquered. I think it was the 1850s when Victoria's Britain criminalized homosexuality in India. That did not occur in  French Indo-China and the French colonial world. And around 1900 with the conviction of Oscar Wilde, many English bachelors were seen booking ships to France and away from one aspect of English oppression.

(As much as I detest Justinian's views on gays, I must admit, I admire his governments construction of the Hagia Sophia, the church in Constantinople with the large dome, vast space inside, and few pillars to hold things up.  It took only 5 years to complete.  In the 1400s, Muslims conquered the city, and, like in the past when Christians took over pagan temples, now the Hagia Sophia became a mosque.  After WWI, a new, secular leader, Ataturk demanded women not wear the hijab, and the Hagia Sophia became a museum.  Under Turkey's recent leader Erdogen, the Hagia became a mosque once again.)

CONDESCENDING POLITICALLY CORRECT ACADEMICS - FROM NEWSER, MY COMMENT

 

Is this article in Science meant to enlighten or confuse? It praises ancient Amerindian agricultural accomplishments, AD 1000 to 1600. ANCIENT? Egyptians, Sumerians, Chinese, Indians were probably producing foods sufficiently or in abundance for their empires in 3000BC. That is ancient. 1600AD and Elizabeth I is on the throne of England, beginning to nibble at the world wide Spanish and Portuguese empires.
The climate changed greatly between 1000, the era when Vikings first settled a warm, green  Greenland and the grape growing area of Canada (Vinland), but by 1350 AD the thriving Greenland colony was wiped out by the little ice age, and the Canadian settlements wiped out by hostile skrellings. The Greenland settlement was once large enough with a European way of life with cows, and several thousand people, AND a bishop recorded in records in Rome.
This article seems like affirmative action DEI history. Over praising the legitimate accomplishments of a group.  Not all people advanced at the same rate. In 3000BC England was probably no more advanced than the Menominee Amerindiaans of Michigan and Wisconsin.  Both were far behind Egypt or Babylon or India. But things change.  Around 1600 England survived the threat of the Spanish Armada, and by 1900 Britain ruled one quarter of the earth. Of course, by 2000AD the British Empire has shrunken to the Falkland Is. and a few other islands.  The much warmer period around 1000AD was not caused by automobiles, airplanes, coal fires, or bar b q grills.  The Menominee may have developed some agriculture in a difficult clime, but that is not the same as creating a major civilization.----Hugh Murray

TO BE OR NOT TO BE/ OR TO KILL OR NOT TO KILL, THAT IS THE QUESTION

A  TEEN DRAMA WHERE FAMILY VALUES ARE TAKEN SERIOUSLY

This is a rare review by me of a television series, “The Sea Beyond” or as it appeared a few years ago when first televised in Italy, Mare Fuori.The series began in 2021 and four years of the series have been shown, while the 5^th series is about to begin. My review covers only series 1 and a few episodes into episode 2. I watched it on Netflix, with English subtitles and English voices. I shall discuss why I think this off-beat serial is important. It takes place in a juvenile detention center in Naples, southern Italy.

Much of the action concerns two new inmates to the Center, one is a young, tall, talented pianist, with long fingers, Filippo. His parents are wealthy and reside in northern Italy in Milan. He is on a vacation trip to Naples with friends and they are high and goofing around with locals. The group gathers round Filippo, picks him up, grabs his legs, and dangles him over a high railing. They quickly pull him back to safety, and then he wants to do the same to one of them – and proceeds to do so. He alone is holding the boy by his legs over the edge when, opps! He drops him. The young guy dies. Filippo is now considered a murderer. By contrast, Carmine is from Naples, knows the city and its ways. He is born into a crime family; indeed his mother is now the capo(capa?) of the Di Salvo family. In the series, Carmine is first seen on a roof top at a table speaking with another young man. The other guy is from a rival crime family, and the discussion quickly turns to economic conflict when Carmine accused the other gang of moving in on Di Salvo territory. The other lad pulls out a pistol, aims at Carmine, and shoots. His gun misfires. From the back of his shirt Carmine now pulls out his pistol, aims at the other guy, shoots, and then shoots a few more times to be sure. They had probably been friends before, for now Carmine puts his arms round the dead youth and hugs him.

Both Carmine and Filippo are sentenced to the Naples Center. Because they are the only 2 murderers among the inmates, they are placed in a cell together, one further down the hall from the more common inmates. Carmine may be a new to the inside, but he feels he knows the rules. He seems to be Mr. Macho, calm and cool. Filippo has never been in such an atmosphere, and hopes for early release, after all, it was not intentional, it was more like an accident. What Filippo did now know is that the youth he dropped was connected to another crime family, and they will do all to prevent an early release for the Milano. In addition, Filippo speaks northern Italian and has trouble even understanding some inmates in the Detention house. He is a fish out of water, and looks to Carmine for clues on how to survive.

While Filippo may think Carmine is on an easy street, Carmine knows better. He will not be getting out early; he will be in prisons for 20 years. He has a girl friend, already pregnant, - what kind of life can they have now? Also, Ciro is the top dog of the other inmates, and Ciro is no friend of the Di Salvo group. Filippo may think Carmine is well adjusted in the Center, but Carmine calls himself a dead man walking. But unlike Shakespeare's Hamlet, Carmine is not contemplating suicide. He is not asking To Be, or Not To Be, even though he is fully aware of life's slings and arrows. Just to walk down the hall, many of the other inmates purposely bump into him, not hard, but so he'll know he is a low man in the ranking system. Life's slings and arrows. But the sharpest arrow hits Carmine not from one of the inmates, but on visiting day.

There is a large room with tables to seat 4 scattered about, and lawyers, friends, and relatives come to see the inmates. Carmine's brother had already visited and they argued. Today, the big arrow came, his mother. She asks if it is true he does not want to do what his brother instructed him to do. Carmine squirms, “Mom, I just can't do it. I can't.” She pushes, demanding that Carmine kill a man in the Center, one who is a threat to the Di Salvo family. Again, Carmine says no. She slaps him hard. Some other tables look. Then she stands over Carmine, seemingly so sweet, and says to him softly but with an edge of disgust, “Be a Man!” and leaves.

With Hamlet, to be or not to be. Carmine has to endure the slings and arrows of living, the bumping in the hall, the minor insults. But Carmine is not thinking of suicide. To be or not to be – a man, does that mean he must kill? Carmine's question is, not to be on not to be; but to kill or not to kill.

Filippo would sometimes try to follow Carmine's advice, but sometimes he would or could not. At first, he thought he might buy good-will of the other inmates, having things purchased for them, but that did not work. They often held him more in contempt, or simply wanted more. Ciro basically forced him to join his group, and Filippo had little choice. But in following Ciro's orders, he got Carmine in trouble with a packet of drugs, for which Carmine stoically took the blame. When Filippo thought he needed a weapon, he stole a razor blade, for which some of the blame ended on Carmine. At one point a bully chokes Filippo and demands he jerk the bully off. This is not porn, and you barely see anything below the belt, but you hear the aggressor say “jerk it faster.”   Things in prisons.  On the other hand, there is a piano in a section of the Center, and Filippo's playing becomes a hit But it is not easy adjusting to confinement, and one morning Carmine sees Filippo on the floor spaced out from drugs. Carmine tries to assure him that he is better than that, the sinking into the world of addiction.

There is one administrator who takes an interest in Carmine, the Commander. He looks upon Carmine as a son, trying to disentangle him from past problems. The Commander also knows, when younger, he saw a man kill another, and the murderer was a member of the Di Salvo group. The commander was able to get Carmine to the hospital to see his pregnant girlfriend when she was getting pictures of the fetus in her stomach, the child of Carmine. The commander encourages the relationship of Carmine with Nina, his girl, to continue, even though Carmine sees a long-term confinement ahead.

One day some heavy supplies have unloaded, and Carmine is pulling the heavy cart toward a storage room inside. He is accompanied by a burly delivery worker. Once inside, the worker grabs Carmine by the throat, choking him. “Why haven't you done it? What's your plan? If you don't do it soon, we'll get you!? Coincidentally, Filippo enters the area, and sees the worker choking Carmine; “What's going on?” The worker walks away. “Carmine, tell me what happened? He was choking you.” “ Nothing happened,” the usual answer of most inmates to all questions. This time Filippo is not in the mood to hear a bull sh*t answer. “Carmine, if you don't tell me, I'm going to go to the commander.” Carmine reacts: “ You're going to go to the commander. You're going to do that. If I want to live, I have to kill the commander.” Carmine starts to cry. “To live, I have to kill the commander.” Filippo, “What are you saying?” Carmen, crying - “I don't know what to do.” as he grabs Filippo's shoulder and begins to cry on him; Filippo hugs Carmine in response. Carmine's Macho cool is washed away in his tears. To be or not to be? No, the real question here is to kill or not to kill.

In most films, this is not a question. In super heroes, if they are to save the world from Mr. Freeze, or the Joker, or the many other mighty film villains, the super heroes must be willing to kill to save the earth. How else can they save the world? Old war films, if the question is raised, it is answered in a few minutes with a bullet. There are 2 old films where this is an important question, both American films made after WWII. In 1952 “High Noon” was shown with Gary Cooper as a Sheriff in the old West and Grace Kelly (who would later be royalty in Monaco) starred. In the film, she was a Quakeress, opposed to killing, and he was to meet a criminal who threatened to kill him for sending him to jail in the past. The criminal would arrive on the train at noon. She decided she could not marry a sheriff who shoots people. Great pressure on the sheriff. What will he do? To kill or not to kill. Another film of that era, released in 1956 was “Friendly Persuasion,” with Gary Cooper again, Dorothy McGuire, and Anthony Perkins, as the young Quaker in the American Civil War. Should he take up a rifle? Should he kill? But the issue seems to have been solved long ago in Hollywood. Of course, you kill. You kill to save the world. I see far fewer films today, but I think it is a non-issue in Hollywood. That is why I am rather surprised to see the issue flare up in a serial from Italy. Also important, if you watch about 3 minutes of this serial where Carmine is choked, and finally cries “To live, I have to kill the commander, I don't know what to do.” To kill or not to kill, this scene in a serial is far more powerful than most actors in Hamlet declaring to an audience “To be or not to be, that is the question.'' Carmine's plea is far more urgent, far more immediate.  And the young Italian actor whom I had never heard of, makes his point more powerfully in 3 minutes than most Shakespearean actors as they mull over the philosophical pluses and minuses of living or suicide.  Carmine has to make a decision SOON.  Hamlet can afford to ham it up over the centuries. Carmine is played by Massimilano Caiazzo. In the early parts of Series 2 of the Serial, Carmine gets married, then has a mental breakdown, and begins to look like a shorter Luigi Mangioni with a bad haircut. As the series goes on, it becomes more of a regular teen drama, who is dating whom, etc. But the first of this series I found provocative and entertaining. Unfortunately, questions do not end with, to kill or not to kill. The next question is too often, Kill or Be Killed.

                                              Hugh Murray

WARNING! VIEWING "THE SEA BEYOND" ON NETFLIX MAY BE ADDICTIVE!

CIA v. USA?

    The recent attack by Ukraine deep into Russia raises many questions.  First, it was amazingly successful.  About a third of Russia's strategic bombers were attacked on the ground, safe Russian ground, remote from any borders.  Drones were the culprits, we are told.  Ukraine takes the credit.

   War inspires invention.  The American Civil War produced an early submarine that damaged a larger ship.  The Gatling gun, an early version of the machine gun, gave a preview of what later versions would do in WWI to provide great advantage to the defenders, resulting in the widespread use of trench war fare, and huge losses of men to capture small areas of territory.  The use of hot-air baloons to lift observers to better see the surrounding terrain was used in varous 19th century conflicts, but was now being replaced by airplanes, which began to add guns so they could do more than observe.  Poison gas killed on both sides.  Zeppelins bombed enemy cities.

   The tanks moved ahead despite the machine guns, and the static war of trenches was replaced by the lightning (fast) war of tanks in WWII.  Planes could shoot more and bomb more, radar helped, and bombs grew in size.  U-Boots  could hide under water longer. The Russians developed a heavier, beter armored tank with heavier fire-power, the Germans lost the Battle of Kursk, and the war in Europe.  The A-Bomb swept rhe Japanese Asian Empire into a vast nuclear cloud of death.  The war in Ukraine saw tanks of both sides stopped by drones.  What else could they do?  Recent tanks, recent fighter jets, disabled by cheap drones!  Apartment houses defaced and usually a few tenants killed by drones.

   Both Russia and Ukraine sent their drones into the territories of their opponents,  Then the REAL SURPRISE attack by Ukraine destroying rail bridges and Russia's strategic bombers.  Could Ukraine have done this alond.  Steve Bannon asserts that American intelligence services must have been involved to provide information on Russian bomber whereabouts.  American intelligence services and devices would have been required.  In taking out so many of Russia's strategic bombers, in one swoop, this, argues Bannon, was an act of war; and our intelligence was deeply involved.

   Did Trump know about this planned sneak attack?  Was he informed?  Did he approve?  Trump had been calling for the end of the war; he ran for President speaking of ending the war quickly.  The American intelligence agencies are usually globalists, anti-MAGA, pro-Democrats, as exposed by 51 leaders of the US intelligence community signing an over lie just prior to the 2020 Presidential election; they said that the Hunter Biden laptop was Russian disinformation.  This was meant to let Hunter, AND JOE BIDEN off the hook of sizable corruption with China, implications.  The agencies urged Google and other big tech corporations to discount the laptop story, thereby helping Biden defeat Trump.

   Was the Ukrainian drone raid simply meant to show that the Ukraine was still capable of fighting?  Or an attempt to sabotage Trump's peace efforts?  It is possible Trump had become with Putin's delays of negotiation and therefore Trump gave his approval of the drone killing the bomber plans.  OR Trump may have been ignored or even defied; if they went ahead without his green light.

   Who runs America?  We elect Presidents and Congress; but who makes the final decisions?  It is not a new problem.  The agencies had their say in 1963 in Dallas.  Trump has had to survive a Butler, PA, assassin, and another in Florida with Ukrainian connections.

   One hopes Trump will bring Peace to Ukraine and other areas, and peace and prosperity to America.  One hopes the agencies will not stage another coup.

   Trump is an admirer of Israel's Iron Dome that protects the small nation from missiles from Iran, Yemen, and other hostile nations and territories.  Trump wants a Golden Dome to protect from Greenland to Alaska, Canada and the USA, a vast defensive dome to prevent missiles coming in to destroy our defences and cities.  Question - with drones a new and effective method of war, can drones simply slip in below the Dome and do all the damage they want???  Are Domes practical defences any more?  In the new age of the drone, can America rely on a Dome??  Hugh Murray