14 posts tagged “peace”

Prayer_2007_1t

More money will soon be approved for spending on housing in an illegal occupation of a disputed area in Jerusalem. All the while, a cease fire continues to evade residents in the disputed areas.

This is according to a report in the New York Times published this Christmas Eve and written by Isabel Kershner entitled Israeli Housing Plan Casts Pall Over Peace Talks.

Read more ...

Image Source: JAI

US Christians Apologise [read]
A Call to repentance and resistance (Feb. 2003) [read]
Warcast for Catholics [listen]
Pastor Steve Brown [read]

The featured address is based on the speech delivered by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., on April 4, 1967, at a meeting of Clergy and Laity Concerned about Vietnam, at Riverside Church in New York City. [read text]

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.” (J.F.K., 1962)

AkungLaksono

Indonesia Emphasizes Justice as Pre-requisite to Peace
Speaking at the 2nd General Assembly of the Asian Parliament Assembly (APA)
November 19th, 2007
Tehran

The Indonesian Parliament Speaker welcomed the Iranian President's emphasis on justice in international affairs during his inaugural speech today morning in Tehran at the 2nd General Assembly of the Asian Parliament Assembly (APA), as the cornerstone of maintaining peace in the world. Agung Laksono said that like Dr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad he believed that without justice peace is impossible.

He reiterated that in line with this viewpoint, Asian countries should comply with their commitments to maintain peace in the world, especially in the Middle East region by resolving the issues of Palestine, Lebanon, and Iraq.
The Indonesian parliament speaker said traces of poverty are evident in Asia, similar to the experiences of the African nations, which warrants Asian countries to come up with due investment projects to tackle the social problems gripping this resourceful continent.

The 2nd APA General Assembly began work in Tehran with speeches by President, Dr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the Speaker of the Iranian Parliament, Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel.
MPs from 39 countries, including speakers, are attending the meeting to study ways of more convergence among Asian countries. [text source: irib]

Chavez_ahmadinejad_tehran

Also in Tehran, Venezuelan President Chavez headed a five minister delegation to Iran. The Venezuelan president is to review the latest regional and international developments as well as further expansion of economic and political relations between the two countries with Ahmadinejad. Both Chavez and Ahmadinejad had been attending the OPEC summit in Riyadh, where Chavez warned oil could hit $200 a barrel if the US was "mad enough to launch a military attack on Iran".

Iran has strongly been cultivating its ties with Non-Aligned allies like Belarus, Bolivia, Nicaragua, Syria and Venezuela. [text sources: irib & alalam]

As some of you know, i am a confirmed Catholic, and have chosen also to raise my children in the church. Nevertheless, my heart is at all times with all believers in the last Day, Hebrews, Christians, and Muslims. Indeed, with all believers in good will. There is also something which I feel unites us all under these faiths, and that is the way we should greet one another. "Peace be with you", "Shalom", "Salaam". In the eastern traditions, this custom is also nurtured with Namaste or Sawaadieka. Yet how many of us have fallen into the modern trap of thinking that these greetings are "uncool" or "so not done"? In my experience, it is my Muslim brothers and sisters in God who remain most faithful to this beautiful tradition of greeting one another "in remembrance of Allah".

Having never learned more than the opening prayer in Arabic and not having learned to read Arabic, I am often at a loss as to how to properly greet other believers. I recall being told by one disturbed person that "no one says peace anymore (I will spare you the rest of what he said about me)", I decided to research this greeting of "(God's) peace be with you" and found these notations written by Adil Salahi 03/01/2003

It isn't surprising that efforts on the part of Iran have been met with narrow minded responses by US government officials.

On the positive side, the United Nations has received a gift from Iran (hand-woven carpet) with appreciation.

I am sure that many people haven't had the opportunity to see these videos, so I am posting them here for you. The most important one I will post separately as the President has been misquoted so many times about that.

The first is the press conference at the UN last year. The entire video is available at the UN Video archive. In Iranian manner, similar to African culture, it takes some time for the speaker to get to the main points. We tend to set the mood first, so viewers are advised to watch the entire clip to understand his intentions.

This next video is part 1 of 4 parts. Those who have little time can scan the shortened speech I have typed out below.

Text extract of speech
It is evident that the behaviors of some powers constitutes the greatest challenge before the security council, the entire organization, and its affiliated agencies. The present structure and working methods of the security council, which are legacies of the second world war, are not responsive to the expectations of the current generation and the contemporary needs of humanity. Today, it is undeniable that the security council, most critically and urgently, needs legitimacy, and effectiveness. It must be acknowledged that as long as the council is unable to act on behalf of the entire international community, in a transparent, just and democratic manner, it will neither be legitimate, nor effective. Furthermore, the direct relation between the abuse of veto, and the erosion of the legitimacy and effectiveness of the council, has now been clearly and undeniably established.
We cannot and should not expect the eradication or even containment of injustice, imposition, and oppression without reforming the structure and working methods of the council. Is it appropriate to expect this generation to submit to the decisions and arrangements established over half a century ago? Doesn't this generation or future generations have the right to decide themselves about the world in which they want to live?
Justice and democracy dictate that the role of the General Assembly, as the highest organ of the United Nations, must be respected. The General Assembly can then, through appropriate mechanisms, take on the task of reforming the organization, and particularly rescue the security council from it's current state. In the interim, the Non-aligned Movement, the Organization of the Islamic Conference, and the African Continent, should each have a representative, as a permanent member of the security council, with veto powers. The resulting balance will hopefully prevent further trampling of the rights of nations.

And amidst all the terror they have created, they lie and lie and lie and lie......
This New Zealand interview shows the legendary reporter, Robert Fisk explaining his reasons for retiring. A seemingly broken man. The inhumanity he has witnessed in 30 plus years, has not turned him into a sub-human, but it may have nearly broken a very good man.

If he doesn't return to his job, his legacy will certainly live on in the journalists who follow his footsteps. This interview brings me to tears. I have long last seen the film called the Road to Guantanamo, and seeing these news clips in the video remind me why I have often turned the film off midway. I apologise for the language in the title, but I couldn't use the"F' word, so we will have to make do with the word "bastards".

Shame on you Bush and Blair and all your cronies. Shame on all who support these lies against all reason. Those who howl down the voices of reason and civilization, and continue to support these tyrants. History will not deal kindly with this generation. Shame on us all, for we have not done enough.

The debate began Aug 23rd when a blogger posted an  interesting item entitled Score one, ... for who actually? The item dealt with illegal immigrants in the USA. My sentiments were that the statements were xenophobic. I have since been proven totally wrong in my initial argument, at least as far as the comments left on Scio's blog may be considered. The debate has somehow taken a turn since the mention of "criminal immigration" and my response thereto. I was making  the point that the term "criminal" should be used with caution.

The debate has now turned to the criminality or otherwise of the war in Iraq.

Scio is a catholic voxer of some note, a confessed conservative, and in my opinion, a lot of other potentially significant things. But, I guess people in glass houses like myself shouldn't throw stones.

Which brings me to another point, to repeat the now cliched term made famous by the British TV series, Monty Python's Flying Circus:

AND NOW FOR SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT!

I have been considering of late, how terribly BOXED in one starts to feel at VOX. Perhaps it's my location in the far east, where the word "vox" is pronounced as "box"? Or perhaps it's merely my psychotic tendency to form loose associations between essentially unrelated issues? On a serious note, i should be careful for in the event some intelligent life form out there is also in profound disagreement with me, with a tendency to act with aggression, i may be in serious trouble. For my associations may be a dead give away to those who would really give it some thought. But then again, perhaps the producers of those great American TV shows like CSI are nothing more than figments of some writer's imagination, bearing no resemblance at all to personages in reality, drawing profiles and following leads as they do.

Enough about CSI then, what am i on about here? Well, paranoid-driven, i have set about trying desperately to think outside the BOX. Feeling claustrophobed by the complimentary comments, the conservative one hand washing the other, the liberals scratching one back and getting a complimentary scratch in return. I have an issue with adding friends to one's VOX who agree with me. I tend to seek out those who disagree and invite them instead, as a way of ensuring I don't become stale in my blogging efforts. The groups so often have this sort of claustrophobic feel to them as well. "If you aren't gay, don't come in". The group managers are bouncers ready to bounce your head on out there as soon as you post something they define as "outside the VOX". "If you don't always make the sign of the cross, then don't dig or del.ico.us.irise Gregorian chants". Blogs and groups become i scratch your back, you scratch mine affairs.  In this respect, i somehow see the logic of Aput's blog mentality of "sitting on the fence". The danger in this of course is that one viewpoint becomes superimposed over another. One voice being silenced into submission. One voice howling the conservative view, the other seeking acceptance at all costs. If this is the end result, then damn that route. Either VOXers are too polite, or we vox in a time of self-imposed censorship? I maintain of someone voxes something, he is seeking comment. If they were private thoughts that were not seeking comment, then they would have been hidden, unblogged, not voxed. For me, voxed is the antithesis of boxed.

I am interested to find out other's views on this matter. Be that as it may be, i am blogging at several other sites, just to get out of the Vox-Box so to speak. Trying to employ the causes and groups at Facebook, though this seldom seems to work, as social networking tools in this ilk, are often merely glamourised and modernised popularity runs, to see who get's the most friends before the pyramid falls flat. My other reason for being so many different monkeys with AK (a keyboard), is once again my paranoia that this blog will be shut down. My constant hope is that I will be that famous one day. Truly, it would be an honor to be shut down for more than merely exposing my more private aspects.

To end off, i will give readers a definition of blogging that i read in a comment on an Azanian blog, made in reference to the Thought Leaders blogging forum (an initiative of the Mail & Guardian). The person referred to blogging as "wanking with an audience". My Catholic persona rejects wanking as a total waste of time and good DNA. My other personae (one of me does a daily roll call) rejects the notion that all blogs fall into that category, just as all of us are not wankers. Some of us seek to utilize our DNA for what it was intended.

  I would ask the question about the reasons behind the high figure associated with US soldier suicides, especially among soldiers who have already returned home. What is the role of the church (Roman Catholic) in ensuring that wars are fought based on moral grounds? Surely the separation of religion and politics should not be enforced here? Wouldn't it be better if men and women being sent to fight in a war, hear the voice of morality as they are sent into battle? Is it not their right to hear such a voice? There is something qualitatively different between hearing one's military commander speak some moral word, but how about one's priest, and from time to time, the Vatican as well.

 This war is having serious psychological impact on those at the front-line, and those at home as well. All of us sitting in the comfort of our homes, following the war as vicarious victims thereof. I am sure the war is mentioned in the odd homely, but hearing it from the top would do so much to set all of us at ease, the lines being so blurred as they are.

 Furthermore, should not religious leaders be ensuring that treatment of those who are the target of military actions is humane? Should they not also be engaged in defining and monitoring of codes of engagement, in the case of any war? Surely this may go some way toward ensuring that fine Catholic and other Christian young men and women, find the moral, psychological and social support long after they return from combat?

The US military has confirmed that rate of committing suicide among the US army soldiers in Iraq has alarmingly increased. Psychologist, Nahi Abuza, in an interview with al-Alam TV network on Saturday said the US military has confirmed an increase in suicide among its occupation troops in Iraq.He added that the recent US wars in the Middle East have had the most negative mental and spiritual effect on the US occupation forces and coupled with a decline in general services to the occupying forces, the problem of suicide has increased.According to the US military, during the past year there has been 99 cases of suicide among American soldiers, of which 30 occurred in Iraq, and the other 69 after returning home.Statistics also show that one out of every 4 American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan is prone to suicide.According to the report, 88 US occupation soldiers committed suicide in 2005.It said the main reason behind the US soldiers’ committing of suicide is the prolonged stay in Iraq and Afghanistan, in addition to lack of sagging morale.

This post is based on a completely uncorroborated report
apparently revealed in an al-Alam Television interview
URL: IRIB World Service