What's new?

On the Doorstep

Second Round

By Dwight Swanson


Blood on the Door



Violence came to my doorstep, again. This time I met the victim.

I was just turning off the computer for the night, a little after midnight, when I noticed that the security light at the front door was on. Looking out the upper floor window I could not see anyone, so assumed a passing cat had set off the light. Then the door-bell rang, twice.

The windows looking out on the porch are occluded glass (I think the American term is ‘frosted’), so I could only make out a blurry outline of someone standing at the door. I called out, ‘Who is it, and what do you want?’, in a tone meant to convey suspicion and distrust. The response was, ‘I’m injured, and need some help.’

I looked carefully, to see if there was more than one person, in case it was a set-up. But, the tone of voice sounded convincing enough. I opened the door. A man stood there with bloody hands.

The story I heard in the next few minutes was this: he was walking home from his girl-friend’s house when three black men started chasing him. He finally got away by climbing over a wall just opposite our house—but the wall had barbed wire at the top. Thus, his hands were injured.

I got him in my car, and took him to A&E (ER), just five minutes’ away. It was the simplest thing to do. And, I was home and in bed within fifteen minutes of hearing the doorbell ring.

If you look closely at the picture above, you can see his blood on the door. Not a lot, though. The young man will recover quickly. I lost no sleep.

Ours is a violent world. News reports offer ample evidence every day of this fact. Terrorist acts are common occurrence in some parts; internal war is waged in many parts. For middle-class Westerners like me, this news is part of the morning rituals, alongside the mug of coffee and a flick through the on-line newspapers. The violence happens. I pour another cupful of coffee.

Seldom does it come to our neighbourhoods; certainly not our own doorsteps. Not even 9/11 happened near me.

But, my friend Leo, from the Congo, hears the news stories differently than I do. Violence came to his door one night, and he jumped out a back window to escape it, and ended up in my city, and my church. The tiny streak of blood on my door is nothing in comparison; the pounding came to his family’s door another time, and his wife had to flee for her life. His parents and child still await a time when he can return home, still fear the pounding on the front door.

It seems we do not really sit up and take notice until the blood is at our own door.

---{}---

Life is like this…

By Dwight Swanson



The election is history. People seem to be struggling to move on in life. There is so little to talk about now!

The Editor has not yet offered his post-election analysis. That reflection will come, eventually. But not yet. Because life goes on. Here is what life is like here lately…

Today provided the sort of variety that makes life interesting (not including starting the day off by dropping my wife off at the hospital to have her hand x-rayed). The morning consisted of succeeding appointments to discuss: environmental ethics from the perspective of African creation stories; the problem of interpretation of the holy war motif in the book of Joshua—the command to ‘smite’ all the people of Canaan; barrenness in a society which views infertility as a curse; and how a church can offer a sense of community in a transient society (and why national and city governments, with all their money, cannot).

For an after lunch treat, a seminar on imitation in Greco-Roman literature.

That was just today.

Over the past week there have been other demands for attention. A visit to a church member serving life in prison for murder; putting on a comedy sketch for the church party, celebrating 119 years of life in Manchester; an afternoon with one of my oldest and dearest friends, catching up on the last couple years since we saw each other; listening to a genome scientist explain what his mapping of bits of DNA has discovered; learning from a Nigerian about persecution of fellow Christians in the north of his country, and how church leaders work with Muslim leaders to bring an end to it; following discussion by local church leaders on plans for change in the church structures to ‘empower’ the local churches in working together.

All of this is besides the regular teaching subjects. One cannot complain of a dull routine.

And, there has been little time to worry about Obama.

---{}---

A Farther Appeal to Evangelicals of Reason

Election Reflection 2

By Dwight Swanson

The atmosphere of America regarding this election seems to be apocalyptic. Each side of the political divide appear to view the defeat of their candidate as the likely end of the world. On behalf of TROTW (The Rest of the World) the Editor suggests this is not likely to be the case. Life will go on.

Since the term ‘apocalyptic’, and the worldview based on it, is derived from the Bible, this article will consider the contrasting world-views of the candidates from a biblical-theological perspective.

• Desire for change.

Firstly, a word about Barack Obama’s slogan, which has caught the mood of a large part of the nation, particularly those who have not been involved in elections before. ‘Change we can believe it.’ It is one thing to promise change; it is another to deliver. The Editor is not among those in the US or around the world who believe Obama will be the saviour of humankind. He is a politician who will live within the strictures of his time and place in history. Some perspective can be gained from similar, though less hysterical, expectations of the New Labour campaign of 1997.

Tony Blair caught the same sort of mood on his first election. There was great relief to see the end of the Tory era, and ‘change’ was the promise New Labour made. There was much good will in the first years to allow real change to take place. But, it did not come. The mood shifted sharply against Blair when he got the country involved in Iraq, which then drew attention to the lack of real change in other areas. He had promised much, and delivered only minor change—except in terms of war. And now even the prosperity of his decade is being re-evaluated in light of the financial crash of the past months.

Slogans are difficult to translate into policies. Should he win on Tuesday, Obama will face the task of putting detail to what he means by change.

• ‘Country First’

Turning to the Republican slogan we enter a different worldview. ‘Country First’ can only be seen as a negative statement—the Democrats do not put their country first; they are not ‘real Americans’. It is a remarkable platform to run on: true Americans all vote Republican; all others are…what? Un-American? Non-American? Aliens? Traitors? (more)

---{}---

Reader Response 2

By Dwight Swanson

We published responses to ‘The Rise of American Socialism’ last week. Not all readers were supportive of Gazelle viewpoints, however. Blogger ‘Lovely Cup of Tea’ was unable to post to the Gazelle for technical reasons. Here is what he had to say:

I'm not very left-leaning in my politics (or economics) so whilst I admit I feel a slight sense of schadenfreude over the fate of some of the banks this week, I quite strongly disagree with those in the media making the assertion that socialism and nationalisation are the new way forward for the world. There's nothing new under the sun of course, but I also find myself out of step with a lot of fellow Christians who lean to the left as a result of their theological commitments.

Christianity shares a lot of common language with socialism (think: justice, equality, redistribution, no more exploitation etc) but even despite my misgivings over what it is exactly that these terms mean, I think it is accurate to say that socialist societies have an exceedingly poor track record in providing for their people for a great many number of reasons. I also think it is truthful and accurate to say that capitalism has far outstripped any other economic system in terms of its ability to improve the living standards of large numbers of people, both in terms of actual wealth and high-technology, and this is why I favour it even as the least worst of all economic systems.

Anyhow that's for another day. Here's my comment from The Gazelle:

I think that while some of the more foolish elements of the free-marketeering crowd got their comeuppance this week, I'm not so sure that socialism has any real answers to the problems caused by more rampant forms capitalism. In the short-term, state intervention and bail-out of financial institutions helps, but in the longer term the restrictions that socialism places on the creation of wealth with the intention of reducing inequality and making society fairer means that far less wealth is created in socialist economies but conversely the state needs to spend far more money. The end result is that socialist societies are invariably far less developed and more backward than capitalist ones, as was clear from the economic course of the twentieth century. Liberal democracies and markets trumped socialism and planned economies in every possible sense. It's terribly un-PC to admit it, but there is a plausible argument to suggest that capitalism has brought higher living standards to a higher number of people than any other economic system has even come close to.

I find difficult as a Christian who has less sympathy for socialism than most because the biblical imperatives to help the poor are far harder to implement in the real economic world than working on the assumption that capitalism is the bad guy and that socialism (in some form or another) is the answer. There is a real danger whereby in protesting against the principalities and powers of the market we find ourselves crying out to Caesar to end our woes.

The answer to Naomi Klein's question is also not so cut-and-dried. Morally it would be an amazing gesture to bail out consumer debts and to wipe out people's mortgages, but it would be economically suicidal. The US govt has bailed out banks with tax money on the assumption that these banks will once again be able to lend money to create wealth so that tax revenues will continue to be generated and the state will continue to be funded, but if instead the US govt decided to give the money to those in debt so they could pay off their homes, not only would the money immediately all go back to the banks anyway (since these are the ones to whom the mortgage is owed), but if the banks had not been bailed out and had collapsed, any individual or employer who had borrowed money from a bank to fund their business would immediately find themselves bankrupted and out of a job. Not only that, but if the banks collapsed and could no longer lend money to sustain the economy and create new wealth, tax revenues would also collapse and decimate the social services that the poorest rely on. Starkly speaking, it makes more economic sense to bail out banks (who make it possible to create further wealth) than to bail out those who owe money to the banks.

It's a very difficult issue theologically since we know what we ought to do in some general sense (e.g. help the poor and establish justice) but beyond practicing church-based altruism there are very few plausible economic ideas in the theological academy and difficult questions need to be asked although I'm certain that socialism is not going to be the answer.

(more)

---{}---

Praying Bankers; an Evolutionary Utopia

By Dwight Swanson

Here are some almost random observations on this week’s news:

• ‘Globalisation’ has been a buzz-word for well over a decade now. Free Marketeers invoke it as a good thing; local non-Western economies have trembled at its name; arguably, this—rather than religion—is the cause of 9/11. Multi-national corporations, in America, Europe and Australasia, have been able to function beyond any national government by moving their money and jobs wherever they think fit and where they will pay the least taxes.

Is it not interesting (a loaded term) that it is these same helpless governments and the working people who actually have paid their taxes who now have no option but to save their skin?

When the dust finally settles from this grave crisis, the same governments must continue to work together to reign in these businesses who see themselves as beyond accountability to real people.

• At least it has brought finance people back to prayer.


[http://www.telegraph.co.uk]



• All the British media gave significant attention yesterday to a University College London Professor of Genetics Steve Jones announcement that human evolution is complete [sticking with the Daily Telegraph]. In Jones’ words, ‘If you are worried about what Utopia is going to be like, cheer up – you are living in it now’.



Isn’t this wonderful news? This is as good as it gets! Hitchens and Dawkins should be encouraged to know that humanity has reached the apogee of its violent capabilities and peak of its inventiveness for economic chaos.

Not only that, but Utopian bankers turn to prayer!

---{}---

‘Why do they hate us?’

Do we really want to know?

By Dwight Swanson



Many Americans asked this question after ‘9/11’. The President of the US was among them. Within weeks the President , at least, decided he knew the answer: ‘They hate our freedom and our democracy’. (We knew who ‘we’ were; but, who were ‘they’?) The answer to such hatred was…bomb them out of existence or stick them in a prison from which they will never see the light of day. If they hate freedom and democracy, well then, we just won’t give it to them!

Few people seem to have asked the source of the President’s new certainty. Did he have the CIA phone Bin Laden, posing as Gallup pollsters?

This is the scene, deep in his cave in the mountains of Pakistan. Bin Laden answers his mobile phone: ‘This is the a global poll on the reasons for the destruction of the World Trade Center. Is this Mr Been Laid? Would you mind responding to a few (well, at least one) questions for us? Here is the first (only) one: Why do you think they hate us? Because of our democracy? Because of our freedom? Please answer yes or yes.’ Thinking it must be an Indian call centre (the giveaway is the inability to pronounce his name), Bin Laden hangs up just before a cruise missile hits the cave next door. The CIA agent shrugs his shoulders, and tells his line-manager, ‘I take that as a yes’.

No, this seems a bit far-fetched even for the CIA.

But, that answer continues to be accepted by a large portion of the American public. Now, however, for those who would like to hear a suggested reason from a real, live Muslim (not a member or affiliate of Al Qaeda, thus offering a quiet and calm case) in the shape of a short but powerful little novel, The Reluctant Fundamentalist,link by Mohsin Hamid. The Editor took this along for holiday reading, and would have finished it the first day if not for the desire to spread it out longer.

This is recommended reading for anyone who wants an insight into what the response to ‘9/11’ did to many Muslims who were previously favourable to the US and its values. Of significance is that religion is not even a factor in this book. What is a factor is…well, read it and find out.

It is interesting to consider, on reflection, that ‘we’ managed to do in these past two weeks what the ‘they’, the ‘9/11’ terrorists, hoped but failed to do.

---{}---

Snail Love

By Dwight Swanson


Amazing Colour



This lovely couple got together on the morning of my daughter's wedding. Love was in the air.

Normally when I find a snail in my garden I either step on it, or throw to the next-door neighbour's garden. These were saved through the fact that they seemed to be joining in the joy of the love in the air. It was only after looking at the picture that I discovered the remarkable beauty of their shells, and the stark diversity of their design.

---{}---

The Occasional 136

A Deep Satisfaction

By Dwight Swanson



After Whirlwind Rachel



J R R Tolkien noted, somewhere in his essay On Faery Stories (an article that people who want to produce films of Tolkien’s works should read before filming), that happy stories are soon told. He proved it to himself (at least) when he tried to start writing a continuation of The Lord of the Rings story. His attempt, titled ‘The New Shadow’, picks up some 105 years after the downfall of Sauron, with a new Evil already rising, but disappears down a dark path after just a few pages (see The Peoples of Middle-Earth, Volume 12 of ‘The History of Middle Earth’ edited by Christopher Tolkien). Happiness cannot last long, according to Tolkien’s Augustinian anthropology, and there is not much to tell about it beyond the most unrealistic ‘They lived happily ever after’.

I note this simply to mention to readers that the main reason little has appeared here recently is due to this factor: happy stories are soon told. (Which makes a pleasant change from depression as a cause…)

The happy story? My youngest, my daughter, has married. The day was wholly a joy, from the last minute crises of the morning before the ceremony, to the intimate service, to the last dance by the radiant bride.

And it brought together our children and grandchildren for ten days. As a Trans-Atlantic grandfather, it is difficult to find a joy greater than that of having a 3 year-old throw her arms around his legs, saying ‘Gra-a-and-pa!’; and having her say ‘Tighter’ as we hugged each other good-bye. And, we all sat together evenings, talking around the dinner table (usually the garden round-table, no matter the weather), simply enjoying being together.

And the Groom? He sang a love-song to his bride for his after-dinner speech. He sang of his love for my daughter. I have no doubt of it.

There is no ‘happily ever after’ in real life, if that means life without sorrow or difficulties. But, having just marked 36 years of marriage—going on 40 years of friendship—I can confirm that the deepening of love through difficulties and sorrow does mean there is long-lasting joy in committed love to one person.

May you have ‘joy-ever-after’, my young lovers!

---{}---

Featured article

Christmas Meditation

String Theory, Alternate Universes and Navels

By Dwight Swanson

“Glory to God in the highest,
And on earth peace among people of his favour!”
(Luke 2:14)



This brief angelic chorus offers a glimpse of the universe in true perspective, when (in the words of one of Charles Wesley’s Christmas carols) ‘earth and heaven agree’. What we need to do is try to see it.

• GLORY AND PEACE

Firstly, some definitions. To begin with, think of ‘Glory’ (there will be a lot of capital letters in this story). Glory is the radiance of God, the visible presence. It is what holiness looks like.

‘The Highest’ is where God is. Wherever God is, is ‘the highest’. Or, in common terminology, heaven.

When things on earth are in accord, synchronised, with God’s heavenly Glory, that is ‘Peace’ (Shalom).

‘People of his Good Favour’ is a phrase which comes from Temple worship. When an offering is made to God, he is pleased, and God and Human are reconciled—at peace. People of his Good Favour are a pleasing offering.
This song is a statement of purpose. Peace is what God’s plan in Jesus the Messiah Emperor looks like. It is, in short, what we pray for when we say, ‘Thy will be done on earth as in heaven’. (more)

---{}---

What stories a nation tells…

By Dwight Swanson


Two stories in this week’s news sparked insight into a subject the Editor has been working on in his Day Job as a teacher of Old Testament, which then sparked thoughts on a subject which has appeared in the Gazelle. The common thread is: the stories nations tell about themselves.

Neither story was ‘new’ news. The first comes from the extreme west of China. Over the course of the past centuryfrozen mummies have been discovered in the far east, along the border with Mongolia, which tell a story that contradicts the Chinese national narrative. The Chinese story is that this part of the world has always been Chinese. However, these mummies are Caucasoid, and come from a time-period that both precedes the Chinese, and continues into the period the Chinese claim as theirs.

The second story comes from Turkey. This relates the context of the murder of writer Hrant Dink. Dink, an Armenian Turk, had written about the expulsion of Armenians from Turkey in 1915, accompanied by the deaths of thousands.

The official Turkish narrative is that no such thing ever happened. The Armenian story is that hundreds of thousands died. Dink was murdered because he broke the rules by telling the story.

What is interesting about these stories is the dissonance between the official narrative and uncomfortable facts ‘on the ground’. In the case of China, the facts are not likely to change the story—the Tarim basin of Xinjiang, and the nine million Uighur people are in a cold and remote part of the world that no one else cares about. The Armenian massacres took place in the midst of the First World War when the attention of the world was bogged down in the trenches of Europe. The subject never made front page news then, and finally became submerged under the weight of the horrific genocide of Jews in the Second World War, and the ‘lesser’ ethnic cleansings of the 1990s. (more)

---{}---

An appeal to evangelicals of reason:

Election Reflection 1

By Dwight Swanson

The US election is in its final phase, and The Rest of the World waits with baited breath on the result.

The Gazelle Editor offers these reflections, from a distance, on the matter of Christian virtues and presidential candidates.

The first sentence of Mark Noll’s book The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind (1995) reads: ‘The scandal of the evangelical mind is that there is not much of evangelical mind’ (according to the Amazon version; I am certain my copy—not at hand at the moment—reads ‘…there is no evangelical mind.’). The British media have always liked to look for the most outlandish stories in America for their documentaries, and so it is no surprise that over here we have been treated to large helpings of examples of evangelical Christian evidence which supports Noll’s observation. In search of balance, the Editor has searched the American websites—and has found ample evidence from evangelical sources, themselves, to verify this statement.

Of course, Mark Noll writes as an evangelical, and from a sympathetic evangelical perspective. But, hearing the truth from one of the family is hard to take. This article, like Noll’s work, is written with American evangelicals in mind, hoping to make contact with thinking people.

This headline should really read ‘an appeal to fundamentalists’, who make up the largest proportion of those who identify themselves as evangelical. In truth, they seem to think only they are the evangelicals. The Editor writes as a protesting evangelical, who is frankly embarrassed to admit to the designation due to fundamentalist extremism in politics and ethics.

Observations on how evangelicals vote.


The voting preferences of evangelicals/fundamentalists indicates that there is little correlation between profession of faith and ethics, and that conservative nationalist politics take priority over revealed truth. This article will focus on the first observation; the second will be discussed in a later article.

Before addressing ethics, it is useful to note that fundamentalists don’t automatically vote for fellow evangelicals: Jimmy Carter was the first professing born-again evangelical Christian to run for president, and get elected. Throughout his term of office he not only attended church regularly, but continued to teach a Sunday School class. Yet, he was vilified by Fundamentalists throughout his presidency, and rejected in favour of the nominal Episcopalian Ronald Reagan. All fundamentalists know that Episcopalians are wishy-washy liberals.

President George W Bush has been open about his faith, and makes frequent references to prayer and to God. Only a cynic would question his sincerity in this regard. This, and his continuation of the Republican promise to do away with abortion (without ever doing much about it) have endeared him to evangelicals. However sincere his personal faith may be, he seems to leave the teaching of Christ behind in his actions as president. The Gazelle has already gone on record concerning Bush’s record on torture and illegal ‘extraordinary’ rendition of prisoners, let alone the offensive war on Iraq on the basis of imaginary evidence. The names Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo will be remembered by ‘our enemies’ (to use a favourite phrase of the Republican candidates) for a long time as the policies of a Christian leader.

In this election, the clearest statement of Christian faith has been articulated by Barack Obama. He is unashamed of his faith, and speaks of it frequently. On the other hand, John McCain has been reluctant over the years to talk about his faith. When he has, it has been in the most vague of terms, kept at a distance, and only as recent as his prison years [see links to interviews in Christianity Today]. His is American civil religion at its most basic. Yet, fundamentalists reject Obama’s profession of faith, instead readily believing the anonymous circular emails and blogs of questionable origin that say that he is Muslim. And they don’t even bother to question the source of these libellous rumours before forwarding them to all their friends.

On the other, other hand, fundamentalists who were troubled by McCain’s tentative links to conservatism breathed a collective sigh of relief at the nomination of Sarah Palin for Vice-President. She immediately became America’s Queen Esther, ‘come to the nation for just such a time as this’ (Esther 4:14; the ‘time such as this’ was the planned slaughter of all the Jews in the Persian empire. The only parallel between Palin and Esther that I can discern is that both were beauty contestants at some time). What Christian can fail to vote for a born-again Christian? [Um. See reference to Jimmy Carter above…] Whereas nothing Obama says about his faith can be accepted, no criticism of Palin’s Christian faith can be viewed as other than an attack on all Christians by secular, and godless anti-Americans.

As a Christian and an evangelical with a mind, I find there are serious questions to ask about Sarah Palin’s faith. Here is where there appears to be a disconnection between professed faith and ethics. The most significant and damning instance of this is found in the response to the report on her alleged abuse of power as governor in pursuit of a vendetta against her sister’s ex-husband. The independent investigation (accepted by Palin in advance of the report) found that Palin did nothing illegal. This result should be accepted. However, the panel also concluded that, whereas no law had been broken, her actions were unethical. What was Christian Sarah Palin’s response? ‘I have been fully vindicated.’

Fellow Christians, this is the question: Can a follower of Jesus Christ consider the finding of a failure of ethics to be a vindication?

It seems that Palin thinks anything is ethical as long as it is legal. Here is a disconnection between belief/faith and ethics.

It is surely not too much to look for a Christian candidate for highest office to act like a Christian when campaigning. It is certain that non-believers do. I am not so naïve as to think that Christian politicians do not compromise ideals at some time, nor that they have total control over what is done in their names. But there are examples in this campaign of higher standards: Obama has stayed largely above personal attacks; McCain has resisted pressure to attack Obama’s faith. Sarah Palin, however, has proudly attacked with what can only be described politely as innuendo bordering on libel. She knows as well as anyone in Republican central office that Obama neither supports terror nor is a terrorist. Yet, she draws on the anti-Muslim and Arab venom underlying the campaign by her accusation that Obama ‘palls around with terrorists’.
It is a lie, and she knows it.

What has been the result? Time and again we hear people saying they are afraid of Obama because he is a Muslim or Arab, with the implicit assumption that this equates with being, at the most, a terrorist, and at the least un-American. McCain rebuked one voter for saying it aloud, but it continues to be repeated as fact. The cry of ‘Kill him!’ in one McCain rally could only have happened in an atmosphere where extremists feel it is safe to voice such desires.

Palin has created this atmosphere. It is difficult to see what Sarah Palin’s faith in Jesus Christ has to do with her actions. A thinking evangelical will want to think about this.

There is a saying of Jesus in his Sermon on the Mount, ‘By their fruits you will know them.’ I urge thinking evangelicals to look at the fruit of the candidates.

---{}---

McCain and Obama as Christians:

Evangelical Interviews

By Dwight Swanson



Christianity Today, an evangelical magazine, offers what is possibly the most balanced presentation to be found of the presidential candidates’ Christian backgrounds and beliefs. They can be found here (in alphabetical order):

John McCain

Barack Obama

Promise that you will read them both.

---{}---

Reader Response

As the Sky Falls Around Us

By Dwight Swanson

As the ordinary taxpayer sits on the sidelines and watches the economic collapse with trepidation, Gazelle readers help maintain a sense of perspective.

The article ‘The Rise of American Socialism’ has attracted a record number of readers, and a number of responses came by means other than the ‘comment’ section. For the edification of all readers, the Gazelle offers a glimpse of these responses.

A Russian reader points out another link between the US Republicans and socialism Russian style:



Corporate America on a mission! Interesting times to have money in property.

Another reader responded (rather tardily) to the article ‘The Management Delusion’ (See January 3, 2008) to observe that a Christian denomination of his acquaintance has completed construction of its new world headquarters, now called ‘Global Mission Center’. Hmmm. That rings a bell.



Corporate Christian America on a mission! Great time to get into the property market...

---{}---

The Rise of American Socialism

Economic Meltdown

By Dwight Swanson



There was a man in the first church of which I was pastor who liked to cite the proverb, ‘The Lord helps those who help themselves’. This was in the sparsely populated part of the state of Colorado known as the ‘Western Slope’, in a small town in which its every inhabitant defined the term ‘rugged American individualism’. I hadn’t been there very long, and was trying to adjust to the great distances we had to travel to find basic amenities, when I met an ancient cowboy during a hospital visit who told me he thought it was time to be moving on. ‘Its getting too crowded around here’, he said. Freedom, for him, was large open spaces between him and other people. That’s the West.

And, that proverb epitomises the creed of the West. Most who cite it undoubtedly think it can be found in the Bible. (Which, in case you are wondering, it cannot.)

Westerners also know that socialism is bad. It is difficult to find a dirtier word in the vocabulary than ‘socialism’, other than ‘communism’. But, since they both stand for the same thing, they are about equally egregiously nasty (sorry, I just like the word and have to find ways to use it). Whenever my wife and I mention how glad we are for the National Health Service in Britain, even with its difficulties, the response is, ‘But socialised medicine is…’, and they go into the horror stories of waiting lines that they are fed by the American media and politicians. A relative of ours has no health insurance for his family, because it would take over half his salary, and he would still have to pay $1000 deductible. But, he was horrified at the thought of ‘socialised medicine’. So, his family lives in fear of a medical emergency, whereas when our daughter needed an important heart procedure we had no worries. (more)

---{}---

Russia, Bad; Georgia, Good

Repeat Until Convinced
By Dwight Swanson

The first news reports showed Georgian rocket launchers outside the South Ossetia town of Tskhinvali, aiming into the ostensible capital of the region. The Gazelle Editor has to depend, like the rest of the world, on what the media publish or broadcast; but this was the BBC, which has maintained the most balanced reporting of the major Western network suppliers of news. The reports appeared alongside those of the opening of the Olympics, where the world watched George W (‘W’hat will you do when the phone rings at 3 am) Bush have a little chat with Vladimir S (‘S’o much for Georgia) Putin that obviously resolved matters. At least, ‘W’ must have thought so, because he stayed on to pat the back sides of some American swimmers (so it seems)

It was only the next day that scenes of Russian advances into South Ossetia were seen, followed by scenes of their advances into Georgia, smoke rising over the town of Gori.

Smoke rising over civilian populations is never a reassuring sight.



It was only at this point of the reporting that the Georgian president introduced the explanation that he was responding to a Russian advance. Something seemed a little fishy about this to the Editor. (more)

---{}---

On my own doorstep

The Latest in Crime

By Dwight Swanson



Hardly a day goes by now without news of knife crime. So far this year 16 teenagers have been murdered by knife-wielding youths in London alone. The level of concern this registers is evidenced by the thousands who turned out for a march against knife killings just yesterday. Nowhere are knives more common, sadly, than Manchester.

Slashing out seems to have become the first response to differences of opinion. Showing a knife is certain to ‘gain respect’.

The police rang my doorbell yesterday. It seems that in the early hours of Saturday morning a young man was accosted by another with a knife on the street in front of our house. He was brought onto our property, and made to sit down on our porch steps—at knife-point. And robbed.

No injury. But, the latest crime-fad has found its way to our doorstep. While I was soundly asleep. Should I be afraid? Or, profoundly sad?

An ordinary doorstep.

---{}---