Rob Ayling writes:
"Thom the World poet is an old mate of mine from way back in my history. Even pre-dating Voiceprint, when I was running "Otter Songs" and Tom's poetry tapes and guest appearances with Daevid Allen, Gilli Smyth and Mother Gong are well known and highly regarded. It just felt right to include a daily poem from Thom on our Gonzo blog and when I approached him to do so, he replied with in seconds!!! Thom is a great talent and just wants to spread poetry, light and positive energy across the globe. If we at Gonzo can help him do that - why not? why not indeed!!" (The wondrous poetpic is by Jack McCabe, who I hope forgives me for scribbling all over it with Photoshop)
TIME TO LOOK, EXAMINE & SEE! CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS
Free Speech and Freedom of
Assembly
are mere words unless we are free enough to
practice them.
Religious States enforce Medieval punishments
for those we admire and respect-
bloggers,journalists,brave independent women
get flogged and imprisoned
and we watch from a distance and say
nothing.Sharia law is one issue-cruel
and unusual punishments another.Separation of
Church and State is essential.
Political alliances seem dependent upon
shared cultural values.Cruelty is not one of these.
Nor is selective patriachal injustice.There
is no point in wars ,nor invasions
if we are not aware of the values we treasure
and defend.Rant and petition are both valid poetic forms.
Set these freedom seekers free,and punish
only the punishers..
Sweden’s feminist foreign minister has dared to tell the truth about Saudi Arabia. What happens now concerns us all
Margot Wallström’s principled stand
deserves wide support. Betrayal seems more likely
912 Comments
28 March 2015 Nick Cohen
If the cries of ‘Je suis Charlie’ were sincere, the western world
would be convulsed with worry and anger about the Wallström affair. It has all
the ingredients for a clash-of-civilisations confrontation.
A few weeks ago Margot Wallström, the Swedish foreign minister, denounced
the subjugation of women in Saudi Arabia. As the theocratic kingdom prevents
women from travelling, conducting official business or marrying without the
permission of male guardians, and as girls can be forced into child marriages
where they are effectively raped by old men, she was telling no more than the
truth. Wallström went on to condemn the Saudi courts for ordering that Raif
Badawi receive ten years in prison and 1,000 lashes for setting up a website
that championed secularism and free speech. These were ‘mediaeval methods’, she
said, and a ‘cruel attempt to silence modern forms of expression’. And once
again, who can argue with that?
The backlash followed the pattern set by Rushdie, the Danish cartoons and
Hebdo. Saudi Arabia withdrew its ambassador and stopped issuing visas
to Swedish businessmen. The United Arab Emirates joined it. The Organisation of
Islamic Co-operation, which represents 56 Muslim-majority states, accused Sweden
of failing to respect the world’s ‘rich and varied ethical standards’ —
standards so rich and varied, apparently, they include the flogging of bloggers
and encouragement of paedophiles. Meanwhile, the Gulf Co-operation Council
condemned her ‘unaccept-able interference in the internal affairs of the Kingdom
of Saudi Arabia’, and I wouldn’t bet against anti-Swedish riots following
soon.
Yet there is no ‘Wallström affair’.
Outside Sweden, the western media has barely covered the story, and Sweden’s EU
allies have shown no inclination whatsoever to support her. A small Scandinavian
nation faces sanctions, accusations of Islamophobia and maybe worse to come, and
everyone stays silent. As so often, the scandal is that there isn’t a
scandal.
It is a sign of how upside-down modern
politics has become that one assumes that a politician who defends freedom of
speech and women’s rights in the Arab world must be some kind of muscular
liberal, or neocon, or perhaps a supporter of one of Scandinavia’s new populist
right-wing parties whose commitment to human rights is merely a cover for
anti-Muslim hatred. But Margot Wallström is that modern rarity: a left-wing
politician who goes where her principles take her.
She is foreign minister in Sweden’s weak
coalition of Social Democrats and Greens, and took office promising a feminist
foreign policy. She recognised Palestine in October last year — and, no, the
Arab League and Organisation of Islamic Co-operation and Gulf Co-operation
Council did not condemn her ‘unacceptable interference in the internal affairs
of Israel’. I confess that her gesture struck me as counterproductive at the
time. But after Benjamin Netanyahu ruled out a Palestinian state as he used
every dirty trick he could think of to secure his re-election, she can claim
with justice that history has vindicated her.
She moved on to the Saudi version of
sharia law. Her criticism was not just rhetorical. She said that it was
unethical for Sweden to continue with its military co-operation agreement with
Saudi Arabia. In other words, she threatened Swedish arms companies’ ability to
make money. Saudi Arabia’s denial of business visas to Swedes threatened to hurt
other companies’ profits too. You might think of Swedes as upright social
democrats, who have never let worries of appearing tedious stand in the way of
their righteousness. But that has never been wholly true, and is certainly not
true when there is money at stake.
Sweden is the world’s 12th largest arms exporter — quite an achievement for
a country of just nine million people. Its exports to Saudi Arabia total $1.3
billion. Business leaders and civil servants are also aware that other
Muslim-majority countries may follow Saudi Arabia’s lead. During the ‘cartoon
crisis’ — a phrase I still can’t write without snorting with incredulity —
Danish companies faced global attacks and the French supermarket chain Carrefour
took Danish goods off the shelves to appease Muslim customers. A co-ordinated
campaign by Muslim nations against Sweden is not a fanciful notion. There is
talk that Sweden may lose its chance to gain a seat on the UN Security Council
in 2017 because of Wallström.
To put it as mildly as I can, the Swedish establishment has gone wild.
Thirty chief executives signed a letter saying that breaking the arms trade
agreement ‘would jeopardise Sweden’s reputation as a trade and co-operation
partner’. No less a figure than His Majesty King Carl XVI Gustaf himself hauled
Wallström in at the weekend to tell her that he wanted a compromise. Saudi
Arabia has successfully turned criticism of its brutal version of Islam into an
attack on all Muslims, regardless of whether they are Wahhabis or not, and
Wallström and her colleagues are clearly unnerved by accusations of
Islamophobia. The signs are that she will fold under the pressure, particularly
when the rest of liberal Europe shows no interest in supporting her.
Sins of omission are as telling as sins of commission. The Wallström
non-affair tells us three things. It is easier to instruct small countries such
as Sweden and Israel on what they can and cannot do than America, China or a
Saudi Arabia that can call on global Muslim support when criticised. Second, a
Europe that is getting older and poorer is starting to find that moral stands in
foreign policy are luxuries it can no longer afford. Saudi Arabia has been
confident throughout that Sweden needs its money more than it needs Swedish
imports.
Finally, and most revealingly in my opinion, the non-affair shows us that
the rights of women always come last. To be sure, there are Twitter storms about
sexist men and media feeding frenzies whenever a public figure uses
‘inappropriate language’. But when a politician tries to campaign for the rights
of women suffering under a brutally misogynistic clerical culture she isn’t
cheered on but met with an embarrassed and hugely revealing silence.
No comments:
Post a Comment