Middle East - Objective Reporting?

Well done to the BBC for its objective reporting of the border clashes in the Middle East on Radio 4’s Today Programme this morning. John Humphrys reported that there was great anger among Palestinians in the Middle East over how Israel reacted when Palestinian demonstrators massed on Israel’s borders yesterday: twelve were shot dead and many more were injured. The demonstrations were timed to mark the 63rd anniversary of the creation of the state of Israel. Some of the demonstrators crossed the border into Israel and some of the demonstrators were throwing stones. We also learned from an interview included in the BBC’s report that Lebanese forces also opened fire.

By comparison, other reports have referred only to Nakba Day with no mention Yom Ha'atzmaut.

This is the Guardian:

Demonstrators commemorating Nakba day, marking the 1948 war in which hundreds of thousands of people became refugees after being forced out of their homes, were met with live gunfire, rubber bullets, stun grenades and teargas.

And here is how it should have been done (from The Times):

During protests to mark the 63rd anniversary of the founding of the state of Israel, described by Palestinians as the Nakba, or “catastrophe”, unprecedented numbers turned out at the three hostile frontiers in scenes that quickly turned to carnage.

Trident

The Times wins on best front page of the day (with the Telegraph’s splash on the prolonged flight ban finishing a close second). It has run with the Trident question, which cuts clear divides between the three main parties’ politics. Inside, they have printed a letter from four army generals asking whether the Cold War missile is actually value for money.

The generals question: ““Is the UK’s security best served by going ahead with business as usual; reducing our nuclear arsenal; adjusting our nuclear posture or eliminating our nuclear weapons?”

And they make the point: “It may well be that money spent on new nuclear weapons will be money that is not available to support our frontline troops, or for crucial counterterrorism work; money not available for buying helicopters, armoured vehicles, frigates or even for paying for more manpower.”

It does seem like an obvious way to reduce the country’s deficit. But the Times’ leader column cautions: “The only real alternative would be, therefore, to abandon our nuclear capability — and with it our nuclear expertise. That decision would be irreversible. It should not be taken lightly in a flurry of cost-saving, nor because it seems like an easy option in a politically charged debate. The generals are right to argue that Trident should be included in the Strategic Defence Review. The detail would surely make the case for its retention.”

Surely, there would be ways around Britain retaining its nuclear expertise if Trident were scrapped: strategic partnerships between states with experts working collaboratively, for instance. Besides, it is not as there isn't any talk of viable alternatives:

(From the Times' article): “General Lord Guthrie of Craigiebank added his weight to the debate last night, saying that a cheaper option to Trident should be considered, particularly as Britain strives for a world without nuclear bombs.

“Do we really need the kind of effective weapon we had in the Cold War? There is quite an argument to say we do not,” he told The Times. He suggested that nuclear-tipped missiles launched from the land or by air were possible alternatives.”

David Cameron On Theology

Ruth Gledhill (The Times) has done a fun breakdown of the David Cameron/Johann Hari interview, which was originally printed in Attitude magazine.

http://tinyurl.com/yaldzgq

I notice how David Cameron’s take on theology is rather, er, “traditional”. Take a look at this for instance:

(David Cameron) was asked if the Tory party still has a problem with homophobia in its ranks.

“Honestly, conservative parties do always include some people of very strong religious faith, and that is true in the Conservative party. I think it's also true in some parts of the Labour party too, actually. It's always been the case, but I think the idea now is that there is a shared consensus bedrock view that this is a party for equal rights whether you are male, female, black white urban rural straight or gay. Actually I could find you quite a lot of relatively religious conservatives who totally agree that we must never go back.”

So a person of “very strong religious faith” is meant to translate as “bible literalist”. By this rationale, a liberal believer is “relatively religious” and less of a believer in God. That’s nonsense. Just because someone is a liberal it does not mean that s/he is less of a believer than a creationist. And isn’t the Tory party supposed to uphold liberal values? Someone should have a quiet word with Mr Cameron.

Turner Prize Review

A rose is a rose is a rose.

No no no.

Rachel Campbell-Johnston's Turner prize critique in today's Times is a joy to read: http://tinyurl.com/y8l8zll

Chief Rabbi Sir Jonathan Sacks and The Theos Lecture

The Times has taken a bold line on Chief Rabbi Sir Jonathan Sacks's lecture at the Theos debate last night:

“Chief Rabbi Lord Sacks: Europe is dying from secularism”

I didn’t see Ruth Gledhill there last night (but it doesn’t mean she wasn’t) – she must have downloaded the podcast online. (You can read her piece here: http://tinyurl.com/yfb5tpu)

Chief Rabbi Sacks didn’t say Europe was dying from secularism. What he actually said was: “It may not be religion that is dying. It may be liberal democratic secularism that is in danger.”

He argued that tolerant religiosity needed to be promoted over fundamentalism and that the problem that can occur with liberalism is its inability to defend its own values (i.e. cultural relativism). He also stressed that believers, atheists and agnostics were in this together and that religious people must be prepared to enter into respectful conversation with secular humanists over the nature of society. I didn’t have an argument with any of that. I admired the fact that he laid down some cards rather than holding them back and doing that liberal thing of asking lots of academic questions but never having a stab at the answers.

I also liked the fact that he defined faith as the courage to live with uncertainty. I was less enthused about the reason for his desertion of philosophy: “The search for meaning is in itself meaningless”. Religion is not the only space to discover meaning; love creates meaning, but Rabbi Sacks didn’t touch on that at all.

I also would have liked to have heard some unpacking of why he thought it was that a religious family was more likely to have more children than a secular family. The answer may not have been a pretty one. Also, if Rabbi Sacks was prepared to turn our attention to population decline in Europe and population growth in the world, I think it was a little feeble of him to steer clear of questions concerning immigration.

But, all in all, I liked Jonathan Sacks and enjoyed his lecture.

New Delhi Court Decriminalizes Gay Sex

A New Delhi court has ruled that consensual gay sex is not a crime, The Times reports today. The Delhi High Court ruled that applying the 1860 colonial law, which ranked homosexual intercourse alongside bestiality and paedophilia as “sex against nature” and punishable by 10 years in prison, violated the constitution and international human rights conventions.

One small step for the 21st century and a giant leap for humanity: http://tinyurl.com/mkbshc

There was a stirring article by Johan Hari in The Independent yesterday on the history of gay rights in this country ahead of London’s Gay Pride tomorrow: http://tinyurl.com/mtzuzp

If only the Church would wake up to the 21st century and sanctify civil partnerships. There is a lot of progressive talk at grass roots levels (in the more sophisticated circles of the Christian world, ie: http://tinyurl.com/mhk8o3), but at the decision-making levels there is still much coughing and buck passing. I am not up to speed with what is happening among other faith groups, but I imagine it is very similar. Meanwhile, humanism continues to live up to its name. Long may humanists continue to spread enlightenment.

Matthew Williamson

A big thank you to Time’s 2 for printing this picture of fashion designer Matthew Williamson in Today’s Times 2 supplement:

http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/fashion/article6142156.ece

The Cherwell Exposed

The Times and The Daily Mail have run stories today about the editors of Oxford University’s Cherwell newspaper resigning after producing a racist and sexist parody of the paper.

The "Lecher", the nationals report, mocked the Holocaust, referred to black people in racist terms, superimposed the faces of students and staff onto pornographic images, sexually slurred the Vice Chancellor and made light of date rape. The front page story describes two students abusing and killing babies.

Lewis Iwu, the first black president of the union, has demanded an investigation into the publication and has returned a recent reward he received from The Cherwell. The Oxford Student Publications Limited (OSPL), which publishes The Cherwell, demanded and received the resignation of the individuals responsible.

I have memories of The Cherwell from my time as a student at Oxford. An article I was asked to write about Jonathan Aitken (former Conservative MP), who came to talk to a small group of interested folk about his time in prison, was never run and the panel of public school boys who interviewed me for an editorial position sent me promptly packing. It was quite possible to feel the knife enter your back as soon as you had climbed up the stairs to the Cherwell office and heard the door shut behind you. One of the lines quoted in today’s Times, in which the Lecher refers to The Cherwell as a white, upper-class male commune, is pretty much how it was. I got bored of sticking my neck out for them as a reporter (such as being threatened with arrest after persevering with a story involving security measures at Lady Margeret Hall) and went elsewhere.

The Oxford Student alternative to The Cherwell was thankfully not like that. The Oxford Student boasted a friendly, down-to-earth and supportive editorial team. I hope they still are.