Voices from Russia

Monday, 29 May 2017

“Americans Aren’t Always on the Wrong Side of History”

________________________

On Memorial Day, it’s important to remember the tragedy of working-class people dying in rich men’s wars. We should strive for a world without war, profits, and empire. However, let’s not forget that during the Civil War (Second American Revolution) and the Second World War (Global People’s Anti-Fascist War) the USA was on the right side, standing against the forces of darkness, slavery, fascism, and reaction. One can argue that mistakes and opportunism took place during these wars, but remember that Americans aren’t always on the wrong side of history. There’s a progressive, democratic, peace-loving, and revolutionary spirit buried deep within the American people, and I’m confident that it’ll soon reawaken in these tough times.

29 May 2017

Caleb Maupin

Facebook

Jeremy Corbyn Outshines Theresa May in the British General Election

________________________

British Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn’s impressive speech on foreign policy and the West’s failed “War on Terror” illustrated an unreported truth about the current British general election… Corbyn is cutting a far more impressive figure during the election than Prime Minister Theresa May is. Before discussing this, I wish to make one important qualification about Corbyn’s speech. Corbyn bravely made the connection between the Manchester terror attack and the West’s foreign policy… enthusiastically supported by the British political class… of waging régime change wars across the Middle East. However, it’s essential to understand that these wars have exacerbated the problem of Jihadi terrorism because they don’t target it, but rather the Arab governments such as those in Iraq, Syria, and Libya that fight it.

Afghanistan is no different. The war in Afghanistan isn’t against al-Qaeda… the Jihadi terrorist group which the USA said carried out the 9/11 terrorist attacks… but against the Taliban, an entirely different group, which though Salafi in ideology, never sought to wage a terrorist Jihad against the West before 2001, or has done so since. Suffice to say, the USA identified none of the 9/11 hijackers as an Afghan. I’d add that prior to the US attack on Afghanistan in 2001, some Taliban leaders and the Muslim clergy in Afghanistan pressed Mullah Mohammed Omar… the Taliban’s erstwhile leader… to expel Osama bin Laden and his followers from Afghanistan; in fact, there was a proposal to hand him over in return for international recognition of the Taliban’s government and on condition that his trial would be in an Islamic court.

I always believed that, with care and patience, a diplomatic solution that might’ve resulted in Osama bin Laden’s arrest and trial was possible, whilst the Taliban’s two international supporters… Pakistan and Saudi Arabia… lobbied hard for such an outcome. Needless to say, had that ever happened, the history of the following decades would’ve been completely different. In the event, the US attack on Afghanistan in 2001, whether intentional or not, meant that this never happened, leading to the disastrous “War on Terror” Corbyn spoke about today. Putting all this aside, Corbyn’s speech showed him ready to challenge Britain’s failed foreign policy orthodoxy, in ways that no other mainstream British politician seems able to do. Of course, he’s done it for years, ever since the so-called “War on Terror” began.

However, foreign policy is only one area where Corbyn cut a more impressive figure during the election than May did. Not only did Corbyn campaign and interact with the media and the public in a genuine way… in contrast to May’s controlled and ritualistic meetings and her stilted language of clichés… but he’s also produced a manifesto that, although left-wing, is coherent and close to voters’ concerns. By contrast, May’s manifesto looks cobbled together, mating contradictory messages of One Nation Toryism with Thatcherite Free Market policies. Unsurprisingly, May has already made an embarrassing U-turn, dropping a manifesto commitment that would’ve introduced costs for the elderly, something that (to my knowledge) never happened in a British general election before.

All this partly reflects a truth about Corbyn… he’s a far more serious and experienced politician than the British political class and news media care to admit. However, it also reflects an important truth about May. Quite simply, she isn’t the strong and decisive leader her supporters in the Conservative Party and the media repeatedly say. On the contrary, what the election campaign did is expose once more her indecision and insecurity, and her lack of ideas. By way of example, May never provided a truly convincing explanation of why she called the election in the first place, despite previously repeatedly ruling the option out. The best she came up with is that she needs a strong mandate from the British people to negotiate a good Brexit deal. That might have been convincing if May had a Brexit negotiating policy to put to the British people for them to support. However… as I’ve repeatedly pointed out… in reality, she has none. The result is that she’s unable to keep the election focused on the issue, allowing Corbyn to move the debate onto ground closer to his own.

The reality, of course, is that May called the election not because she wanted a mandate to negotiate a good Brexit deal, but because she thought she’d win it. That’s a perfectly good and valid reason for a British Prime Minister to call an election. A genuinely strong Prime Minister… Thatcher, for instance… wouldn’t have hesitated to say it and would’ve laughed off criticism of it, saying she had a right to change her mind. May would’ve saved herself a great deal of trouble and would’ve looked a lot more convincing had she said it. However, as long been obvious, she’s temperamentally incapable of saying it.

As it is, I still expect Theresa May to win. Although the latest opinion poll shows her once-stratospheric lead collapsing to 5 percent with two weeks of the election campaign still to go (Conservative 43 percent, Labour 38 percent). I suspect that some British voters presently drawn to Corbyn will switch back to May as polling day approaches rather than face the actual prospect of a Corbyn government, for which I don’t think Britain is ready. There’s simply no precedent in Britain for an electoral upset on the scale that a Corbyn victory would require, and I can’t believe in the end it’ll happen. My guess is that as polling day approaches, the Conservative lead will start to widen again. However, if I were wrong, then, whilst the credit for such a truly astonishing turnaround would have to go to Corbyn, the major cause would be the failure of May to explain convincingly to the British people what point there is in her being Prime Minister.

26 May 2017

Alexander Mercouris

The Duran

http://theduran.com/corbyn-outsines-theresa-may-general-election/

29 May 2017. What Does the REAL Church Teach?

“Everyone needs to carry their cross”… do remember what our Lord Christ said of such sorts. Pharisaism didn’t die in the First Century, sadly enough…

________________________

I’ve seen rightwing priests (usually konvertsy, but not always) put up new barricades around the Eucharist to “protect” it. From whom? Ordinary sinful-ginful Christians? I know of a young priest who always pridefully announces at every liturgy that communion is only for those who’ve prepared… then, he communes people who haven’t made a confession in months! Some priests deny the Mysteries to those who didn’t go to the evening services the night before. The REAL Church is more forgiving… see the following:

Священник не имеет права отлучать или лишать причастия ИСКРЕННЕ КАЮЩЕГОСЯ ЧЕЛОВЕКА без разрешения своего епископа. Он может только посоветовать не приступать к причастию в определённых ситуациях или однократно не допустить (например, если человек не подготовился должным образом).

Указы Святейшего Синода РПЦ

1722, 1734 года

A priest doesn’t have the right to excommunicate and deny communion to a SINCERELY PENITENT PERSON without the permission of his bishop. He can only advise not to proceed with communion in certain situations or tell them once to avoid it (for example, if a person didn’t prepare properly).

Decree of the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church

1722 & 1734 

Священник не имеет права отлучать от Причастия или называть блудниками супругов, живущих в законном, но не венчанном браке.

Определение Священного Синода РПЦ

1998 года

A priest doesn’t have the right to exclude someone from communion or call people immoral, if they have a legal, but not sacramental, marriage.

Definition of the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church

1998 

I gave the Russian originals as they’re normative, not the English translation. Note well that these are synodical declarations of the Church… that is, they’re binding on us as disciplinary nomocanons. Most of the arrogant rightwing clergy out there have no clue as to what the Church has actually said “as Church”. All too many are recent converts ordained before they were ready, and some only have a heterodox formation, with no real Orthodox clerical formation. The REAL Church is fond of oikonomia… the “protectors” of the Eucharist are fond of strictness. You can see the difference, can’t you?

The Church is a Welcoming Haven for Sinful-Ginful Humanity… the konvertsy want a Pure Conventicle of the Righteous Pious. You can have one or the other. Choose wisely…

BMD

29 May 2017. Holy Writ on the Republican Programme and Ideology

________________________

And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common. And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all. Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, and laid them down at the apostles’ feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need.

Acts of the Apostles 4.32–35

That sure isn’t the Republican platform and ideology, is it? They call themselves “Christian”… according to the above citation, they lie…

BMD

Next Page »

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.