Tony Blair, John Prescott and other “flags of convenience” (Mouth of the ‘Beast’ #7)

In his 2009 autobiography, Docks To Downing Street, former British Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott writes “It would be a mistake to underestimate the effect of 9/11 on the psychology of the Government or Tony Blair.”
In so doing Prescott concedes a point that seems to have not penetrated the consciousness of those labelling Blair a hubristic, blood thirsty war criminal: that is, the fact that he was driven by profound fear, some conscious, most of it probably unconscious, to weld Britain’s fate to that of George W Bush’s terror-traumatized administration.
Blair was psyched shitless, if you will pardon the expression.
He was ‘bricking it’, as some of my neighbors here in Norfolk, England might say.
But in saying that I am not saying Mr Blair was or is a coward.
I am saying I believe he was scared (and scarred) witless subconsciously, because frankly, following 9/11, so was I.
And I would wager so too was Prescott and other members of Blair’s Cabinet at the time.
In the quote above, Prescott concedes as much, if only implicitly.
And Prescott’s recent refuting of that empathising, psychologically perceptive interpretation of Blair’s decision-making post-9/11, presumably including the pious PM’s decision to back the 2003 US led invasion of Iraq, does not alter the intuitive or objective validity of the collective-responsibility-emphasizing Prescott’s previously published opinion of Blair’s and his Cabinet’s state of mind.
The totemic, ‘Thumper’ trade unionist Prescott’s suggestion in a July 10 Mirror article that he and other MPs were deceived by ‘Bambi’ Blair certainly does not change my mind on the matter.
I think his article is not so much about a ‘change of heart’ as it is about a change of strategy.
I think it is more about the war in Lord Prescott’s beloved Labour Party than it is about the war in Iraq or any of its consequences.
Whether Prescott is conscious of this cognitive dissonance himself can be debated.
The ‘fog of war’ being generated by the long-running battle for the soul of the Labour Party may be clouding the former seaman’s judgement.
Whatever Prescott’s intentions, from my standpoint, the article is a “flag of convenience”, much like the misleading, fraud and tax evasion facilitating, ‘false’ flag flying shipping practice that he challenged during his ministerial career.
And I believe his declaration of disappointment and dissent is comparable to the questionable “flag of faith” that Blair has struggled to keep hoisted, as he pursued a political career and discharge history shaping leadership responsibilities guided by what might best be called an “aspirational Christian piety”.
Both men are to some degree guilty of sending “mixed messages”, if you ask me.
But I believe we are in danger of judging them both too harshly if we ignore or do not give adequate consideration to the messages they received.
Life: a ‘game of glorious uncertainties’
Deeply traumatized by the 9/11 theatre of terror myself, I reached the conclusion that it confused and effectively fossilized, fragmented or “froze” Blair’s and others’ powers of reason and decision-making long before I read Prescott’s autobiography.
Nothing Prescott has written in his July 10 Sunday Mirror confession inclines me to change that basic opinion.
I certainly will not be turning from empathy to fear or indignation and turning on Blair angrily, as Prescott appears to be doing now.
Moreover, as indicated above, I question the authenticity of Prescott’s claim of anger at Blair, declared amid the revived, widespread denunciations of the former British PM that followed the publication of the news-headlines-dominating Chilcot Report on July 6.
Observers may legitimately ask “Could Prescott’s post-electoral political ambitions be causing him to confuse fear with anger, in much the same way he, Blair, Bush and others managed to confuse courage and fear in 2003?”
Words attributed to the prophet Jeremiah in the Bible come to mind here forcefully: “The heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked,” says Jeremiah 17:9.
The atheistic Prescott may disagree with me, but I believe that concise, ancient biblical description of the maelstrom that is the human psyche is as relevant today as anything his autobiography offers.

Jeremiah certainly offers an intriguing perspective on Prescott’s notorious gynophobia, self-documented in his autobiography as “always suspecting the Sisters increasing demands” (page 351).

Added to the stereotypically feminine battle with  bulimia that he reported, and the political ‘Bromance’ or, more accurately, marriage of convenience he shared with Blair and other “beautiful people” in the Labour Party, Prescott’s gynophobia might be viewed as a trap door, concealing subterranean urges that the notorious hard-man ignores blissfully.

John Prescott on last day as Deputy Prime Minister, June 2007
John Prescott on last day as Deputy Prime Minister, June 2007
And with the rise of cricket mimicking “glorious uncertainties” around issues of gender and identity that have followed the legalization of gay marriage, the foregrounding of gay parenting, gender reassignment ventures, racial ‘reorientations’ and other seismic identity innovations, the question of human beings’ capacity for self-deception addressed by Jeremiah has taken on renewed significance and urgency.

Add to this the possible election of America’s first female president, Hillary Clinton, a reputedly feeling-fragmented femme or mechanical matrix.
Now there is a heart and conscience that many people seem to think is alienated from itself and shrouded in mystery.
Who is she really, in her “heart of hearts” – or, if I might borrow the title of the well known novella by Josef Conrad, a seaman-turned-novelist with whom Prescott might identify more easily, in her Heart of Darkness?
Might she be a “man” trapped in a woman’s body?
If she wins her battle for the White House, might Americans one day wake up to the news that she has opted for gender reassignment, as the former “Bruce” now Caitlyn Jenner has done, spectacularly?

Might my previous references here to her…or…er…his “Clinterests” one day soon seem a peculiar prophecy?

Note that in that article, I make it clear that “I have in mind both male and female passion and excitability, the clitoris being interchangeable or homologous with the penis in some species, apparently.”

(I am currently being instructed in these matters of faith and “glorious uncertainties” by a Consultant Physician, whom I will simply call Dr G.)
The mainstream media has been focusing on whether or not voters feel that they can trust the former First Lady.
My concern for her, as for Blair and Prescott and indeed all politicians, is does she really trust herself?
Does she know herself, truly?
Prescott, at least, concedes that he is “a mass of contradictions” in his autobiography.
And what about Clinton’s White House seeking rival Donald Trump?
Does anyone actually believe that the ‘hard-man’ exterior projected by him conceals anything other than a 9/11 traumatised, Islam-obsessed ‘inner woman’, possibly echoing his mother’s speech?
And what are the implications of Jeremiah’s psychosocial diagnosis for the Roman Catholic Church if the prospect of an introduction of female deacons that Pope Francis is exploring comes to fruition?
Based on my own experience of the moral ambivalence that lies beyond some Sisters’ equality rhetoric, I have not been encouraged to expect the improvements across Catholicism that Ms Clinton’s and other women’s optimism about the shattering of that ecclesiastical and other “glass ceilings” suggests.
Did Margaret Thatcher’s rise to power usher in a kind of utopia in Britain and the Commonwealth?
Among other things, the fact of the Falklands war suggests otherwise.
But my own suspicions and gynophobic views about women, and the justifications I offer for the same are well documented in my book Women-I-Zen and elsewhere.
As are the empathy with and forgiveness for persons of both sexes, or none(?), that I advise persistently.
Tony Blair in 2014: Is "she" and other 'beautiful people' in touch with their feminine energy?
Tony Blair in 2014: Is “she” and other ‘beautiful people’ in touch with their feminine energy?
Fatherly ‘flags of Convenience’
My primary concern here though, is with the ‘Blair-Prescott identity’ and paternal political inheritances and legacies.
It is with the fog of fear that followed 9/11 and which I believe has come into play again, albeit at a subconscious level, since the publication of the Chilcot Report last month.
I am mainly concerned with the human capacity for self-knowledge and self-trust that is critical to self-forgiveness and empathy with and for others equally.
My focus is the relationship between faith and fear that can become obscured, or even lost, like the fictional Jason Bourne’s sense of self, by trauma and tragedy.
As with my coupling of “sleep-driving” Bin-Lorry-Bin-Ladin trade unionist Harry Clarke and seemingly self-alienated, or at least ‘socially asleep’ socialist Jeremy Corbyn, the embattled current inheritor of Blair-Prescott’s spectacularly dysfunctional party, I am continuing my study of self-destructive, Talibank thinking, essentially.
A key concern is to explore what the Blair-Prescott coupling, like the Trump-Clinton inverted ‘marriage’, (a kind of negative synergy yielding, malformed miracle or mirage, essentially) tells us about the societies that ‘throw-up’ these personalities.
And readers mindful of Prescott’s previously cited battle with bulimia and my previous references to “cognitive cholesterol”, and person’s being “affectively anaemic” will have some sense of both the predictive and retrospective resonances of my reference here to the “throwing-up” of society.
Readers will also want to bear in mind my ongoing study of British, Americans’ and others’ embrace of a self-destructive, suicide facilitating, shallow stoicism.
Like Prescott, I remain keen to expose a “fundamentalist feminist” Kalibank preoccupation with appearances that feeds manipulative mass media managers’ egos and Dylann Storm Roof ‘incarnating and procreating’ vanity and mass murdering violence ( equally.
The ‘alcoholic’, image intoxicated Trump and his feminist visibility vying rival Clinton exemplify a peculiarly unsubtle American manifestation of this reality-television-typical vanity.
The ‘Blair-Prescott’ mental marriage manifests it more subtly.
Their brand of blinkered, splintered and unity fragmenting reasoning is in fact reminiscent of the polished perversity or “shrewd savagery”  of libertarian lawyer Marc Randazza’s defence of the media manipulation ambitions of Trump-backer Peter Thiel.
And Randazza’s American nationality should not detract from the essential accuracy of my assessment of the subtlety of the ‘Blair-Prescott’ psychosocial or political inheritances and legacies.
It does not alter the relevance of my fundamental point any more than Trump’s much hyped heterosexuality alters the validity of anything I have suggested about his backer Thiel’s homosexuality.
Thiel’s nationality merely points to the universalist applicability and relevance of my critique.
And I use the word “universalist” advisedly.

Reggie Williams, Assistant Professor of Christian Ethics at McCormick Theological Seminary knows something of my insistence on the indispensable attention to context that separates conscientious constructive discussion of gender, race, religion or any other matters from the reckless, manipulative, demagogic rhetoric of identity hijackers, pirates and thieves.

I was obliged to challenge professor Williams, via Twitter, about certain assertions he made about the extent to which people are ‘seeing whiteness’ as normative, in an article published by The Christian Century.

That kind of opportunistic “universalism” or proximate “plagiaristic” appeal comes to the fore more prominently in the next article in this “Mouth of the beast” series.
There I assess the role of Barbados in events that presaged 9/11 – especially Barbados’ contribution to the 2001 United Nations World Conference Against Racism, which from my perspective, was hijacked by precisely such ‘identity politicking’ thieves.
I also explore Blair’s relationship with alleged homosexual paedophile ‘Barbadian’ Sir Cliff Richard and Prescott’s relationship with sleeping socialists like Dr Aaron Kamugishe, featured in the above video delivering a talk at the Birmingham-based University of Warwick.
Kamugishe’s apparent Prescott-like bulimic propensity to consume and regurgitate ideologically high calorie, cognitive-cholesterol-rich racial rhetoric is of deep concern to me.
I certainly cannot agree with the view that black people cannot be racist – anymore than I could accept theologian Williams’ largely legitimate but ultimately context thin, morally anaemic stereotyping of “whiteness” as normative; or lawyer Randazza’s one-sided views on Thiel’s right to conceal his homosexuality.
Such reasoning parodies authentic argument.
It prostitutes principled, context-rich, rational inquiry.
It is not only the fare of pirates and plagiarists, like Melania Trump and Fareed Zakaria, but also stock-in-trade for opportunist “informants” like fantasist and con man Rafid Ahmed Alwan Al-Janabi.
He’s the Iraqi codenamed “Curveball” by his German handlers, possibly because of his ability to spin a yarn convincingly.
As it happened, the primary Iraqi “weapon of mass destruction”, supposedly seen by Alwan, turned out to be his mouth, as he lied through his teeth.
Potentially explosive, such worrying wit-based weather systems recall the fraught, potentially ferocious Blair-Prescott psychosocial synergy that springs from the kind of Margaret Thatcher-Hilary Benn ideological ‘subsuming’, coupling or convergence that I have explored previously.
Unleashed torrentially on the tragically murdered Labour MP Jo Cox by the ‘Northern wind’ driven, brutal bellwether Thomas Mair, metaphysically, such destructive, negative synergy exemplifies cyclonic reality beyond metaphor.
It is born of a convergence of hot and cool airs or ‘spirits’, and energized by a Corbynesque ‘conservation of angular momentum’ that extends from an idealized socialist axis.
Put differently, it flows from an axiomatically anal retentive, shallow fundamentalist, self-contradicting anti-social socialist “reality”.
The blinkered ‘eye’ of this hurricane, exemplified by Corbyn’s coupling or ‘partnership’ with the consciously or unconsciously race-racketeering Labour MP Diane Abbott, consists in a dualistic, ambivalent British manners matrix that can only ever assure a fragile peace.
A certain, “too polite” Norwich-based, lifelong Labour Party supporter working in the education field may know exactly what I mean.
She, and others, possibly including persons who are abandoning the troubled, stormy-sea-of-sentimentality beset Labour ship for the emergent, blunt-knife-tipped, supposedly frank, truth-to-power-speaking Nigel Farage and his Trump-like-hip, real politic preaching UKIP may understand why from my standpoint, Prescott’s anger at Blair, however long deferred was destined to be manifested almost inevitably.
Moreover, I think Prescott’s anger claim may be an example of the confused conscience or “flawed intelligence” that I spoke about shortly after 9/11, when I performed at the 2001 Woodstock Concert of the Cave Hill Campus of the University of the West Indies.
I see it as a primarily politically motivated, cosmetic “flag of convenience” by a man I consider a father figure, to a significant degree.
Like Barbadians the late reverends Holmes Williams, and Bishop Granville Williams and UWI Vice Chancellor professor Sir Hilary Beckles; like Norfolk-based Muslim leaders Abdassamad Clarke and Uthman Morrison, Bishop Alan Hopes and others I look up to, though not uncritically, I hold both Blair and Prescott in high esteem and empathise with them in their faltering efforts to project a courageous, credible paternal lead.

Peter Thiel’s vengeance, BBC’s racist violence and Bernie Sander’s strategic silence (Mouth of the beast – #6)

Peter Thiel, courtesy Wikipedia
Peter Thiel, courtesy Wikipedia

I find the news that American billionaire Peter Thiel bankrolled Hulk Hogan’s lawsuit against digital publisher Gawker deeply troubling.

And not just because it suggests that the homosexual Thiel who was ‘outted’ by Gawker in 2008 has a vindictive streak.

I am more concerned about the Donald Trump-backer Thiel’s and other well heeled individual’s seemingly opportunistic designs on the media.

I detect a determination by Thiel and others to bend popular media discourse to their wills; to make it reflect their agendas – however liberal or conservative, altruistic or self-serving their agendas may be.

It is Thiel’s British Broadcasting Corporation-like, Mike Liggins’ “crank call” approximating opposition to independent voices that concerns me.

It is his professor Sir Hilary Beckles’ recalling, silent killer maneuverings that I find chilling, frankly.

And the argument offered in Thiel’s defense by American ‘right-to-privacy’ advocate Marc Randazza does little to relieve my anxiety.

Indeed, on a first reading, I found the Las Vegas-based First Amendment attorney Randazza’s analysis of the issues so slanted in favour of Thiel that his references to “press freedom” seemed not only suspiciously token but obscene.

I am tempted to denounce his article as a study in dissimulation: a deceptive, anal entrant assault on the democracy in which Randazza claims he believes.

It recalls not only Beckles’ but also Bernie Sanders’, Jeremy Corbyn’s, Clive Lewis’ and other selective socialists’ silence on trade union and other labour movement corruption, which makes them complicit with bankers and venture capitalists like Thiel in the sophisticated frauds and rackets that are exploiting and frustrating society’s most youthful and otherwise vulnerable members’ dreams.

I alerted Randazza to my concerns via a private, rather cryptic (admittedly) Twitter email message on May 27. I wrote: “Dear Mr Randazza, I just finished reading your Peter Thiel-Gawker suit analysis. The term ‘joystick journalism’ comes to mind. Are you familiar with it?”

“‘Morally adrift’ is a related term”, I added, to clarify the trajectory of my thoughts.

Basically, I was trying to alert Randazza to my view that by implying that the high-flying financier Thiel had an unchallengeable right to keep his homosexuality a secret until it pleased him to disclose it, his article, entitled “Is Peter Thiel right about Gawker?” is something of a caricature.

It seems a morally anchorless, or at least anchor-weak, piece of virtual reality.


Randazza, courtesy Wikipedia
Randazza, courtesy Wikipedia


From my perspective, the Florida-based Randazza’s emphasis on a right to privacy seems to give scant regard to the responsibility that Thiel and other prominent figures have to be accountable to the societies in whose values they trade or, as the case may be, on which they tread opportunistically.

I call this opportunism ideological racketeering, and in a recent submission to a Parliamentary Home Affairs Select Committee I outlined some of the challenges it poses for United Kingdom law enforcement authorities, religious institutions, the British Broadcasting Corporation and other formal and informal organs of education.

Ironically, a related point about fundamentalist feminist ideological racketeering is made by Trump-backer Jeffrey Lord, in a February 21, 2013 article entitled S. E Cupp and the freezing of the American mind.

In that full-frontal attack on Ms Cupp and young conservatives, Lord cites the very sound feminist (“radical feminist” by his standards) proposition that “the personal is the political”, albeit in a rather scandalous attempt to rationalize the sexist racketeer Rush Limbaugh’s salacious February 2012 attack on feminist Sandra Fluke, labeling her a “slut” and “prostitute”.

Cupp, Lord argues, had shown no mindfulness of the personal-is-political tenet of feminist discourse when she denounced Limbaugh’s attack on Fluke.

Having not read Cupp’s comments I cannot assert whether that is or is not the case.

Lord may have got that wrong, just as he appears to be wrong about Fluke’s acceptance of the Gawker-like shock jock Limbaugh’s apology – which he claims Cupp ignores.

But I think Lord deserves some credit for standing by Limbaugh because while the personal-is-political feminist principle Limbaugh cited does not justify the ratings-driven radio personality’s crude and cruel labeling of Fluke, it does open, I think, an acceptable line of inquiry or interrogation that those challenging Fluke’s argument might legitimately pursue.

And Gawker’s outing of Thiel, I feel, opens a similarly legitimate line of inquiry.

As with Fluke’s, in Thiel’s case the ‘personal is political’ or ‘PIP’ question is also about relationship, principally that between the tech businessman and the financial investors or other backers he relied on to build the goodwill that is the basis of his entrepreneurial credibility.

Randazza may know more about who those financial and other investors are than I do.

He may know more than I about their values and ethical priorities.

Perhaps that’s why when I sought to clarify my arguably cryptic comments by pointing out that he was not giving due attention to the duty of care Thiel owed them, Randazza responded incredulously “What responsibility”?

I was stumped.

Given the strictures of Twitter communication, I thought of responding “Where do I begin?”

But perhaps the greater challenge would be finding an appropriate point at which to end or limit Thiel’s responsibility.

Which is why I have chosen to respond to Randazza in this article, using the opportunity to follow up on ideas about sound or shaky arguments and solid or Shipden-like, erosion prone foundations that I have raised in part five of this series of articles, and previously.

Moreover, and intriguingly, my reference to “joy stick journalism” not only comes from a literary criticism essay I alluded to in the previous article: I sent a copy of that essay to Fareed Zakaria, who was then with Newsweek magazine and whose article dismissively criticizing protestors at a G8 Summit in Barcelona was the focus of my critique.


Cupp, courtesy Wikipedia
Cupp, courtesy Wikipedia


So, this article, critiquing Randazza, linked to Zakaria through the latter’s CNN ‘GPS’ programme, rounds off my criticism of mainstream news machinations and manipulations, to some degree.

My point is that knowing as little as I do about the identity, values and beliefs of Thiel’s business backers, I would not want to presume that I know their views on homosexuality and its relevance or not to Thiel’s business activities.

It would be presumptuous of me to assume that Thiel’s homosexuality would be of consequence, in business or related terms, to those particular, flesh and blood, real persons – quite apart from any question of how homosexuality is viewed by wider America or persons in the international community with whom Thiel deals.

And I doubt that Randazza is any better placed than I to do anything more than speculate about how those persons may have responded to the revelation of Thiel’s sexuality.

Even if he was doing business in notoriously conservative African or Asian countries, it would be difficult to say what the response of his backers or associates might be.

But in the interest of balance and fairness, I feel that Randazza, like I, should allow the possibility that at least some of those who had backed Thiel’s business ventures felt that he was less than honest in his dealings with them when Gawker ‘outted’ him involuntarily.

To assume, as Randazza does, that none of Thiel’s backers would have expected that kind of accountability from him, perhaps on the basis of some assumption of his right to privacy, seems to take all kinds of variables for granted rashly.

That assumption seems an extension of the “lazy, binary, point of view” that Randazza himself criticizes justifiably.

It smacks of the fossilized, fundamentalist thinking that ideological racketeers exploit deliberately.

It seems a symptom of the ‘frozen mind’ that Lord claims afflicts Cupp and other young conservatives: the kind of ideological polarization that I have long argued afflicts liberal and conservative, capitalist and socialist, Christian and Muslim, male and female and other ostensible opposites equally.

I am as concerned about the freezing of the minds of the young who are flocking to the atheist Bernie Sanders and his Orthodox Jewish ‘High Priest’ Richard Sugarman as I am about fundamentalist feminists who may be backing Hilary Clinton unconditionally.

While Lord is mainly concerned about ‘young conservatives who have a lack of perspective of both conservatism’s intellectual foundation and in this [Limbaugh vs Fluke] case the ferocious politics that swirl constantly around its most prominent champions’, I am concerned about the polarization and poverty of perspective that writers like Randazza feed.


Jeffrey Lord, courtesy Wikipedia
Jeffrey Lord, courtesy Wikipedia


As my on-going, personal experience based critique of the BBC and other news houses makes clear, I am particularly concerned about their domination by special interest groups, including the ideological gender, racial and religious racketeers who have been implicated in a human rights violating criminal conspiracy against me and others, contrary both to their claims of journalistic independence and their rhetoric about free speech.

Lord cites the late Allan Bloom and his 1987 bestseller (The Closing of the American Mind: How Higher Education Has Failed Democracy and Impoverished the Souls of Today’s Students) to give context to his concern about freezing of the conservative mind.

I would argue that today we see media and academic ideological interests converging to produce the kind of “cold fronts” that I have identified in my study of what I call Norfolk’s deep frieze.

As noted in part five of this series of articles, the University of Warwick’s Global Frontiers: Ecologies, Commodities, Labour, and the Arts collaborative research project, led by professor Michael Niblett, is engaging with related issues around academic publishing insightfully.

The Norfolk and Suffolk Foundation (NHS) Trust also is showing a willingness to engage with related issues, through its efforts to embed a “Spiritual Strategy” in its offering to persons suffering mental health challenges – which by my reckoning means all of us.

All of us, whatever our sexual orientation, religion, gender, wealth or poverty are in need of assistance to navigate today’s media minefields.

To be continued…




Peter Kemp’s, Pope Francis’, Bernie Sanders’ and my care crises (Mouth of the Beast – #5)


Opening thoughts

Between February and March 2016, deeply disillusioned retiree Peter Kemp resigned from the boards of governors of two Norfolk-based NHS bodies; the Norfolk and Suffolk Foundation (NHS) Trust and the Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital.

Moreover, Peter a former social worker says that before I first interviewed him on March 30th, he was feeling so socially displaced, disconnected and frustrated that he was contemplating suicide?

And this is not the first time that Kemp, a former social worker with a complex history of personal challenges and triumphs, has contemplated ending his life.

He and wife Teresa say that he felt so disheartened and frustrated by “physical and mental” illness last year that he had made significant preparations for a trip to the Hebrides, where he intended to end his misery.

Why? What’s happening in Norfolk’s NHS bodies?

Why might a former social worker feel that governorships of two NHS organizations in this county have neither offered him any real opportunity to help others nor provided him solace in his gravest time of need?

Indeed, Peter spoke to me of feeling invisible as he walked Norwich’s streets.

Why does Peter born in what remains of the coastal village Shipden, after much of it was reclaimed by the sea many years ago, feel that he and others urgently in need of social integration are basically being ‘frozen out’, written-off or otherwise severed from their communities?

Why does this son of “the best known lost village of Norfolk” feel that two NHS bodies with which he was officially linked are so morally adrift and lost themselves that he is better-off doing a deliberate Shipden, breaking-off his formal, administrative links with them?

Why does Peter feel that governorship of these two Norfolk-based NHS bodies is not worth the effort he and others made to get him elected to such seemingly important governing roles within their administrative hierarchies?

I sought election to the NSFT’s board of governors myself, because of the value I place on a governor’s role. So I can attest to the fact that the role is valued highly.

And Teresa, Peter’s wife and most critical, actual anchor to the solid-ground-mass of Norfolk’s community and wider British society, apparently still has considerable esteem for those NHS internal oversight bodies.

Arguably Peter’s most enduring and fundamentally factual, fleshed-out, face-to-face connection to ‘the real world’, Teresa has suggested that he may have squandered a significant opportunity to reform the NSFT and NNUH from within.

She apparently thinks that her lapsed Roman Catholic husband could have been to the NHS, what Pope Francis is to the Catholic communion: a kind of insider reformer, though arguably on a smaller, less public scale.

But Teresa may also see in the often dermatologically afflicted, relative stigmatic Peter, something of the psychosomatic subtext which, as with atheist Bernie Sanders and his Orthodox Jewish political advisor Richard Sugarman, suggests a capacity as much for self-harm or “negative equity” as for the creative ability to ‘heal’ others and himself.

At any rate, from my perspective, it is doubtful that either Peter or Teresa grasp the depth and complexity of the issues that are derailing the delivery of care by the NHS in Norfolk, as elsewhere in the UK.

Indeed, given the multifaceted, changeable nature of the issues and their prevalence, like sexual and suspect politically compromised and polarized child-grooming, not only across the UK but globally through the degenerative, divisive capacities in the East’s and West’s formal and informal communication and educational systems, it is questionable to what extent any one person, couple or group who or which at least has a considerable understanding of the breadth and depth of the problems, might also be able to rectify things in an exhaustive, final sense.

Knowing what is wrong is not the same as being able to fix it. That is a basic fact of life: a fundamental feature of human fallibility.

And I will be returning to this “knowledge-action gap” issue repeatedly, especially as it relates to the question of what I call measured or calculated actions or operations, in the context of pursuing an informed, mathematical, pragmatic, dare I say scientific faith.

This issue, is related of what Italian academic Franco Moretti calls “operationalzing”, in the context of literary criticism.

As Peter is a lapsed Roman Catholic, I think I can safely make a calculated guess that a literalistic religious experience, that is, a rotish, recitation and related rituals thick, but spiritually thin religious experience, has played a key, negative, faith eroding role not only in his relationship with the NNUH and NSFT but in his life generally.

Certainly, as he has shared details of his story with me over the past six weeks I have found Peter’s life a prism through which the complex, tantalizingly tangled issues that he and Teresa grapple with might be beneficially analyzed, using a regenerative, language-as-land reclaiming, human ecology strategy.

Hence my decision to share Peter’s (and Teresa’s) story here, in this 5th instalment of my “Mouth Of the Beast” series of articles, despite his relative invisibility when compared with Donald Trump, Hilary Clinton and other biblically proportioned ‘big beasts’.

Presumably, it would have been easier to report on Peter’s care crisis independently, without reference to Bernie Sanders’, Pope Francis’, my own or anyone else’s care needs and obligations, irrespective of their public prominence or invisibility.

The poetic, creative fusion or creolization of issues and personalities that I am pursuing here has been fraught with many conceptual, technical and stylistic difficulties.

Not that I am a stranger to compositional, discursive complexity.

Against the grain of mainstream, carnivorous-capitalist-consumption-hinged, diabolically deadline driven journalistic culture, I continue to choose a more caring course, exploring the numinous, substratal symbolism of my subject matter at a reflective pace that is determined by a balancing of material and spiritual concerns.

I continue to be guided by the conviction that seemingly mundane, unrelated issues and events are metaphysically connected by mystically accessed threads of truth to transcendental, cosmological reality.

I continue to assert that the mystical or spiritual and the mathematical or scientific are bound by a bridge called open mindedness that literalistic, fundamentalist science and religion close the path to equally.

Indeed, and perhaps not surprisingly, it seems that the more that I give my heart and mind over to exploring the mustard-seed-sized science or chaos theory type principles and connections underlying or constituting so-called “secular” and “religious” communication and education, and especially the principles governing graphé (a transliteration of the Greek word γραφή, indicating engraved or written things) the more I not only discover, but also, and more critically, experience those principles and connections with ever increasing sensibility.

The word becomes flesh, as the title of my 2001 collection of graphé asserts, truly.

And while this relative ‘joy stick journalism’ transcending path that Peter, I and others now rather implicitly and subconsciously follow exposes us to many printing devils and political publishing perils (including, in my case at least, various kinds of piracy, plagiarism and cynical suppression of my work by the likes of Fareed Zakaria, Amra Tareen, Kamau Brathwaite, Margaret Gill, Sir Hilary Beckles and others, like parliamentary power-brokers Donville Inniss and Clive Lewis, who are operationally within or close to the Barbados, UK and US governments) my work has also been vindicated and reinforced by significant scholarly recognition and related opportunities.

For example, a substantial tranche of my book “The Bible: Beauty and Terror Reconciled” (TBBTR) has been published in the “Encyclopedia of Caribbean Religions” (University of Illinois, 2013).

I have also seen some success working with the Google affiliated American digital publisher Pulse Point-Allvoices, where despite the political machinations of African-American agitator Herbert J Dyer, the plagiaristic behavior of “corporate ethicist” Paul P Jesep and other challenges, I was able to demonstrate my ‘word becomes flesh’ ethical publishing model’s efficacy.

However, while I highly value the affirmations of conventional, established knowledge producers, the kind of entities that dominate the governance of what Moretti has called a “world literary system”, I am also keenly aware of the intrinsic counter-productive and, in instances, destructive capacity of written things: what I call the lethalness of the letter, following the warning of the biblical writer in 2 Corinthians 3:16 that “the letter killeth”.

As in TBBTR and elsewhere, in this series of articles I stress my reservations about graphé/writings repeatedly.

And my reservations extend as much to the works of William Shakespeare and their place in imperialist British expansionism, as they do to the Bible, the Torah, the Koran, the Hindu Vedas and Upanishads, Karl Marx’s “Das Kapital”, Adam Smith’s The Wealth Of Nations and any other ‘sacred texts’.

If there is one thing that I would like to see come out of this year’s quadricentennial celebrations of Shakespeare’s legacy, it would be an appreciation not just of the good but also of the harm that he and all scribes, myself and Peter included, can do potentially.

Having struggled for some time, and so far, unsuccessfully, to put his own life story in writing, I believe that Peter is as well-placed as anyone to speak on the hazards of literacy.

Oh, the stories that Virginia Woolf (England), Bruce St John (Barbados) and other writers might tell if they could communicate beyond the grave about the perils of treading on thoughts in modern and post-modern knowledge mills!

What might Imhotep, Heraclitus and other ancient scribes tell communication and education professionals everywhere about the printer’s devils and publishing perils that have plagued the knowledge industry since time immemorial?

How relevant are Plato’s and others’ warnings about the very act of writing in our current camouflaged content digital age?




Peter’s graphé games and Mick Thurley’s silence

I am rather impressed by how Kemp, probably unconsciously, mitigates the self and other killing capacity of writings through creative text messaging and other eccentric communication behaviors.

At one time he even imposed a ‘moratorium’ on all texts and phone calls he might receive.

As I explain below, one of the more significant discoveries I made about Peter since I started interacting with him on a weekly and sometimes daily basis, is his capacity for verbal and literate play.

And this is after interacting with him at least once a month for about nine years as a fellow member of Norwich Justice and Peace, an East of England tributary of the Roman Catholic Church’s Commission for Justice and Peace river.

More to the point though, for all my creole or synergistic thought motivated, manuscript mixing experience, to which, in an academic context, Literary Criticism lecturer Dr Richard Clarke of the University of the West Indies could attest, the chronicling of Peter’s care narrative has proved a surprisingly, peculiarly fraught undertaking.

But I am inclined to think that this is as much because of my own Shipden-like susceptibility to psychic erosion as his.

This article, more than any other in this series, including the preceding ‘mind-fart’ study, has forced me to engage at a profoundly penetrative level with the limits of my own psychological and literary capacity.

And in this regard the fact that I know as little as I do about Peter, Teresa, their children and grandchildren has been instructive.

At a basic, person-to-person level, this operational knowledge gap points to an element of Shipden-like shallowness in Peter’s and my previous, NJ&P based relationship.

However, coupled with the fact that he, I, and at least one other person that I know of have stopped attending that groups meetings in questionable circumstances, it suggests a deeper, conscious or unconscious conspiratorial crisis in that group, and possibly in the diocese.

Actually, I was obliged to inform the diocese’s Safeguarding officer Michael ‘Mick’ Thurley of my concern over another elderly NJ&P member’s and my own safety and wellbeing.

Because I have long been the target of a Barbados-sown, globally-grown criminal conspiracy, in which my local MP Lewis, Barbadian business minister Inniss, academic businessman Beckles and other prominent secular and religious knowledge industry operators are implicated, the curious, unexplained behavior of some NJ&P members toward me made me concerned that the group had been infiltrated and that elderly member’s safety and wellbeing had been compromised because of her closeness to me.

Unfortunately, for reasons Mr Thurley has so far chosen not to share with me, his investigation into this matter may have been suspended, or sunk like Shipden.

But I have seen enough of such possibly racially motivated ecclesiastical maneuvering and politicking, especially in my dealings with Reverend Holmes Williams of Barbados, not to be put-off by Mr Thurley’s unexplained silence and delay.

Unlike Peter, I have not withdrawn myself from NJ&P completely.

Indeed, my approach to Mr Thurley demonstrates my determination to continue engaging constructively with NJ&P.

But like Peter, with responsibilities of various kinds and only twenty-four hours each day to pursue them, I am obliged to just commit some things to prayer – and occasional public ventilation, as I am doing here.

I am long past reporting every concern that I have about that criminal conspiracy to Norfolk Constabulary, the Police Intellectual Property Crime Unit or some other relevant body.

The Thurley-like silence and other communicative evasions of Mr Lewis, the Speaker of the House of Lords, Baronness D’Souza and other “governing vacancies” has long convinced me of the futility of banking on public officials honoring their tax-payer funded duty of care to me, Peter, that elderly NJ&P member or anyone else.

Unfortunately, a Trump-like, Google-EU and British banking industry-like approach to interpreting written codes seems to dominate much of the UK’s government business these days.

Hopefully, though I have been afflicted since 2008 with atrial fibrillation and other psychosomatic manifestations of intellectual property management related cognitive and affective (emotional) wear and tear, with God’s help I will be as lucid as Peter when I reach his age and see past the façade of Thurley’s silence, Trump’s Islamophobia and similar superficial symptoms that can mask governors’ fears.

Happily, I have the example of Peter, lovingly supported by Teresa, to light my way.

Along with what he assures me is a capacity for total recall that removes the need for notes taken at the few governors’ meetings he attended, I have been struck by the clarity of thought and confidence of expression he has displayed in interviews, for the most part.

Peter’s cryptic use of language in text messages has been the most significant revelation though, introducing me to a playful, self-effacing side of the man that I had not detected during our previous years of acquaintance.

This literate ‘liquidity’, an apparently positive, self-affirming feature of Peter’s communicative competence, is therefore curiously comparable to the negative ‘liquidation’ or disintegration of language for which the erosion at Shipden is a metaphor.

And note the parallel here with the linguistic concept of fossilization, which may be positive or negative, as linguists specializing in second language learning dynamics have noted.

I have experienced and studied the counter-intuitive, positive potential of literacy-transcending, fragmentation or atomization of language, as a practitioner-researcher of glossolalia, called “speaking in tongues” by Pentecostal and other charismatic Christians.

So in some ways, Peter’s eccentric texting seems rather tame to me, if not conventional or normative.

And I am keen to explore how the practice of glossolalia, which was the focus of my Linguistics BA thesis,  may be beneficial to Peter and others with mental health challenges linked to oppressive, rote-repetition-focused and similarly imagination impairing, spirituality sterilizing religious ideas and practices.

As I note in that thesis, entitled “A Voice From Heaven: Could the Study of Glossolalia Benefit Linguistic Theory”, glossolalia is not only known in Islamic and other non-Christian settings but also has a parallel in Jazz scatting, which points to its creative, healing capacities.

I am also keen to explore the possibility that Shakespeare may have been a glossolalist or been influenced by that movement, which seems to have been fairly well embedded, if not established, in the Midlands.




Politically correct speech

As a lapsed Roman Catholic, Peter’s governorship dilemma and wider care crisis intersects and overlaps in significant, instructive and even prophetic ways with both the positive and negative elements of Francis I’s and the US presidency pursuing Sanders-Sugarman stories.

in fact, as I trust have so far successfully communicated, I believe that Peter’s dilemma provides very useful preterist, chaos theory and ripple-effect interpretive data by which Sanders’, Francis’ my own and others’ care crises – the tensions between our caregiver responsibilities and our care-receiver needs – could be interpreted and addressed.

I also see parallels between the 66 year-old Kemp’s care crisis and that of his and my local MP Lewis (mentioned above), for example.

I address semi-sleeping, selectively silent socialist Lewis’ and his party leader Jeremy Corbyn’s carer capacities and care needs at length elsewhere and also give them some attention below.

I am obliged to continue addressing their and other ‘big baby’ socialist and predatory capitalist (typically, but not exclusively ‘Tory’) psychic afflictions because their care crises affect Peter, I and other Norfolk and wider UK residents in significant institutional, operational and therefore consequential ways.

For the minute though, I want readers to consider how Kemp’s crisis can even be metaphysically mapped to and usefully compared with that of the six times younger, 12 year-old suicide victim Isabel Richardson, whose shocking death I will probably also be addressing in this series of articles.

Richardson is another Norfolk resident, and Lewis constituent, coincidentally, who has been grievously failed by this county’s formal and informal carers’ capacity for studied incompetence and/or indifference.

Like Peter, who has been emotionally scarred by a traumatic Catholic schooling and subsequent social shearing, Isabel was not only failed by Hewett School carers, as Norfolk Coroner Jacqueline Lake suggested and the BBC, the Eastern Daily Press (EDP) and other news houses reported, rather simplistically.

My own ongoing investigation, aided by ‘soundings’ with Norfolk County Council, MP Lewis’ office, Norfolk Police, the EDP, freelance journalist Tom Calver (associated with the Telegraph) and other sources, suggests that Isabel was a victim of Norfolk’s capacity for fundamentalist feminist approximating, subtle bullying and cowardice-masked-as-courage.

I have a growing body of evidence suggesting that Isabel was (and her brother Kyle continues to be) a target of Norfolk’s innocence-sapping, child-devouring, ‘Neanderthal Braveprick’ recalling capacity for the cruelty to others that is a kind of self-harm simultaneously.

My sense of the matter is that the learning that should come from Isabel’s tragic death is being prevented by a perverse, preoccupation with “politically correct”, operationally inept speech and documentation.

The digital publisher Facebook, on whose popular platform Isabel was bullied, is implicated in this collective failing.

And so too is the whole beauty-industrial complex that is the military-industrial complex’s disarming but similarly dangerous twin.

Both do their part in confusing beauty and terror to society’s detriment.


Fraught faith management

One thing that is clear from my vantage point is that Kemp’s, Francis’, Sanders’ and my own care crises are in fact crises of faithful, authentic communication, internally and externally.

British Home Secretary Theresa May will know what I mean, if she can recall the ‘continuum of character’ idea that I introduced to her office in 2010 (notwithstanding the destruction of the record of an email I sent her, in line with what her office informed me is government practice).

I think it’s safe to say that the four of us all aspire, as indeed most people do, to communicate, flesh-out or incarnate the dictates and urgings of our internal, conscience-based dialogues accurately.

In our own ways, each of us is trying to visibly walk the talk that guides us invisibly.

We are each trying to authenticate, by practice, the ‘gospels’ we preach.

We would each in his turn no doubt affirm the wise counsel voiced by the character Polonius in Shakespeare’s play Hamlet: “This above all: to thine own self be true, thou canst not then be false to any man.”

Providentially, this aspiration and the kinds of challenges that obstruct its attainment generally were on display at a NSFT ‘Spirituality Strategy Workshop’ that I attended last month on April 19.

The essential communication conundrum was dramatically demonstrated or, as I like to say incarnated, as a number of participants at that workshop, including one of Peter’s fellow governors, said that this was the first that she had heard of that strategy, despite it having been launched in February 2013.

Peter says much the same, incidentally.

Informed of the existence of its Spiritual Strategy by me, via a text message on April 23, Kemp replied that he was surprised to learn that NSFT has one and that he would like to know about it.

And who wouldn’t want to hear about that Strategy or the scandal of how shoddily it is apparently being implemented – presumably imperiling Norfolk residents’ wellbeing and at their tax-paying expense?

What conscientious Norfolk resident, whether an atheist or religious person, would not want to know that such internal communicative constipation is precisely why one of their neighbors has basically written-off two of the county’s NHS boards of governors, in a bid to preserve his sanity?

Well, if the failure of former BBC Norfolk reporter Nikki Fox to do a story on Peter’s dilemma is anything to go by, she or someone else (perhaps someone governing that regional BBC tributary’s editorial decisions) apparently thinks ‘the Peter Kemp care crisis’ is not a newsworthy item.

And from my perspective, that media failing says all that needs to be said about the now submerged Shipden-Village-sized gaping hole in the commitment of the NSFT, BBC Norfolk and other organizations and persons who are failing to deliver on the duty of care they owe Peter and other vulnerable Norfolk residents.

The situation is a variant of the Daniel Pelka tragedy of Coventry unfolding right before Norfolk caregivers’ blinking eyes, calloused hearts and muddled minds it seems.

And the more recent murder of 21 month-old Ayeesha Jane Smith of Staffordshire (Shakespeare’s birthplace) by her mother and her partner, reinforces my earlier point about lessons not being learned about authentic care.

Beyond the NSFT’s and other carers’ communicative dysfunction and fossilization, these virtual Baal-like child sacrifices point to a psychic or rational disconnect between Britain’s Judeo-Christian preaching and practice.

It actually recalls the curiously pious yet cynical presidential aspirant Ben Carson’s brain-fart endorsement of his raving Republican colleague, Trump.

It also recalls Karl Jung’s prophetic warning to secularists of the dangers that rejection of the metaphysical or what he calls “the numinous” entails.

That warning, already mentioned in this series of articles is worth repeating here:

“Modern man does not understand how much his ‘rationalism’ (which has destroyed his capacity to respond to numinous symbols and ideas) has put him at the mercy of the psychic ‘underworld’. He has freed himself from superstition (or so he believes), but in the process he has lost his spiritual values to a positively dangerous degree. His moral and spiritual tradition has been disintegrated, and he is now paying the price for this break-up in world-wide disorientation and dissociation.”

Fundamentally, the shallow distribution and clearly fragmented reception and germination of “Spiritual Strategy” seeds – whether by written or verbal means – points to the existence of a sea-sheared-Shipden-like breach between what NSFT leaders say and what they mean.

It points ultimately to the historically entrenched, arbitrary, artificial and illusory separation of religious and secular language and ideology.

To put it bluntly, NSFT’s failure after three years to have more firmly embedded its “Spiritual Strategy” is most likely the direct result of the relatively low value placed on spirituality by secular scientific authorities operating not only within the county’s NHS bodies, but within Norfolk society generally.

It therefore probably will not surprise readers that the 2011 Census in England and Wales led to Norwich, the county’s capital city, being officially declared the most atheist, godless place in England.

However, I agree with the county’s Anglican bishop, the Right Reverend Graham James that this finding, based on 56,268 people claiming that they have “no religion” is debatable.

The reality, on the ground, I am sure is far more nuanced.

For example, I too am inclined to say I have “no religion”, as I consider myself a spiritual rather than a religious person.

I do embrace and advocate a Christocentric spirituality, anchored in what I have previous called a Literary-Historical Spirituo-Naturalistic understanding of the teachings of Joshua (Jesus) of Nazareth however, as I expect would Peter.

More crucially though, I think that the language and logic of the 2011 Census could well have been operationally biased, not recognizing the extent to which the rationalism against which Jung warned has evolved into a form of religion in England, as elsewhere, for all intents and purposes.

The election in 2015 of Labour’s Lewis, a former BBC Norfolk political reporter as Chair of the All Party Parliamentary Humanist Group is significant in this regard.

I believe Lewis’ election reflects the dominance of these secular authorities in the political arena, in the medical community, at BBC Norfolk, the EDP, at Norfolk County Council, Norfolk Constabulary and other centers of power and shapers of policy regionally and nationally, including, apparently some clerical authorities.

Moreover, I believe that the holding of strategic, mediatory-priestly (middle-men) offices by atheists and secularists is not only well known, but evangelically promoted by prominent personalities, like Norfolk’s Stephen Fry, national atheism icons Richard Dawkins and A C Grayling and atheistic and/or agnostic novelists, journalists and other writers like VS Naipaul, Sandi Toksvig and the Guardian’s Cath Elliott.


Big baby Bernie

Intriguingly, the NSFT constricted communication drama, in which Peter’s fellow governor revealed that she had not been informed (or failed to retain the information, possibly) of the organization’s more than three-year-old Spirituality Strategy has American atheist Sanders’ reported bungled effort to electorally bask in the glow of Pope Francis’ populist spiritual mojo written all over it!

The ‘Bern’s’ alleged stalking (virtually) of the man who currently holds the “Office of St Peter” in the Roman Curia can certainly tell us all something about his and other atheists’ self-belief deficient, glory-grabbing, media manipulating capacities.

Much as I would like to view his behavior as a genuine attempt to engage with Christians in good, empathy-grounded faith, Sanders’ previous pronounced disregard for religion, like trade unionist Lewis impiety, cautions against this.

In fact, I think English academic professor Margaret Archer’s denunciation of beast-like Bernie’s questionable, ‘high speed’ pursuit of baby-like, relative innocence icon Pope Francis as an act involving a “monumental discourtesy” may well be a monumental understatement, bordering on inaccuracy.

From my psycho-seismic events mapping, preterist political phenomena interpreting vantage point, Sanders’ officious, PR pandering to New York’s Roman Catholic and other conscientious, progressive Christians through an alleged staged participation in a meeting of the Vatican-linked Pontifical Academy for the Social Sciences, headed by Archer, may be interpreted through what chapter 12 of the apocalyptic, biblical Book of Revelation tells us about would-be baby-devouring pedophile predator beasts for good reason.

And the fact that many of those Sanders was metaphorically curtseying to were not only no longer babies but also well beyond voting age, should not be an impediment to psycho-seismic or preterist interpretation here any more than my comparison of Kemp’s with Richardson’s and Pelka’s ages prevents an appreciation of their relative psychological constipation and related internal, conscientious communication constricting injury.


White Vatican Man Francis

The ancient adage, once a man, twice a child, can certainly be applied to both ‘Norfolk Peter’ and ‘Vatican Peter’ 79, on reasonable, life-cycle, human ecology acknowledging grounds.

And note that White Vatican Man Francis actually stressed the child-like vulnerability of elderly people when he delivered a Mass at the Basilica of the Shrine of Our Lady of Aperecida during his visit to Brazil in 2013.

On that occasion, addressing Brazil’s Roman Catholic bishops privately, the former Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio said “More than a formal address, I would like to share some reflections with you.

“The first came to mind again when I visited the Shrine of Aparecida. There, at the foot of the statue of the Immaculate Conception, I prayed for you, your Churches, your priests, men and women religious, seminarians, laity and their families and, in a particular way, the young people and the elderly: these last are the hope of a nation; the young, because they bring strength, idealism and hope for the future; the elderly because they represent the memory, the wisdom of the people.”

Setting aside, for the moment, Francis’ oblique reference to the Black Madonna that is “the statue of the Immaculate Conception” at that Shrine, and how that arguably innocent, “racially anonymizing” or socially sanitizing slight, perhaps motivated by an assumption that the unusual colour of the statue is widely known, might relate to my earlier reference to Francis as ‘White Vatican Man’, at the time, seemingly pointlessly.

At this point I will only say that if the word “Aparecida” tells us anything, it is that appearances matter, and that they may matter profoundly, especially in the context of Brazil’s historical race narrative.

My main concern for the moment though is the Rift Valley-like, reductionist, simplistic separation of secular and religious thinking which dictates that the two should never meet.

I am concerned with the parceling and marketing of medical knowledge in simplistically scripted silos to serve the capitalist needs of entities like Serco and other companies contracted by the NSFT, the NNUH and other NHS bodies whose main allegiance sometimes seems not to patients but to the pharmaceutical industry.

My focus is the communication constipation, masquerading as cost-cutting corporate consolidation that is related to what I have previously identified as linguistic obesity, and the obesity of the English language particularly.

This is reflected in not only the NSFT’s but also the Norfolk public’s apparent confusion around the word “spirit” and, as a consequence, around the notion of “spirituality”.

At the NSFT Spirituality Conference I sought to underscore the fundamental importance of addressing this millennia old, perennial challenge if that Trust or any other British NHS or related health care body is to embed a ‘Spiritual Strategy’ in the at least ostensibly secular, atheism dominated Western world of pharmacology.

I sought to draw attention to the schismatic, fossilized communication norms that not only fragment and impede written and verbal communication in Norfolk and Suffolk but across England and, indeed, in many other parts of the global community.


Care crises and opportunites

Fractious, fundamentalism prone, care corrupting communication norms are the focal point of my more than thirty-year long, ongoing critique of secular and religious ideologies.

In my book TBBTR, I explore the millennia old, cyclical character of these norms, a project not unlike the University of Warwick’s Global Frontiers: Ecologies, Commodities, Labour, and the Arts collaborative research project.

Led by professor Michael Niblett, this project explores “the ways in which literary and cultural texts register the socio-ecological transformations through which the capitalist world-system has developed.”

Taking as its starting point the contention that world literature is to be understood as the literature of the capitalist world-ecology, GFECLA may understandably be viewed as a self-limiting, selective socialist affair.

But its methodologies may nonetheless offer a framework of analysis to which Peter and many other Norfolk residents, especially traditionally Labour-voting Norfolk residents can relate beneficially.

Hence, Kemp might well construe his departure from the NSFT and efforts to blow the whistle on it as acts of a socialist revolutionary.

Similarly, he could well argue that the “Governor’s Guide” by which he was expected to abide amounts to a kind of “Bible” that unjustly privileges NHS’ clergy-types over its laity.

Kemp’s particular frustration with ordinance 3:2 of the biblical “Your Statutory Duties: A reference guide for NHS foundation trust governors”, which puts what he feels are unreasonable restrictions on NSFT governors’ ability to engage with the organization’s staff and its service users operationally, can therefore be interpreted as an expression of both his Christian and revolutionary, or at least reforming, zeal.

That regulation reads: “Governors may also become involved in many areas not covered by the legislation. However, they should remember that they do not play an operational role within the trust. Although NHS foundation trusts may choose to involve governors in hospital visits or volunteering, governors neither have a right to inspect NHS foundation trust property or services nor a duty to meet patients and conduct quality reviews.”

It should be noted that while this regulation does not forbid operational engagement by governors explicitly, it does make it clear that such engagement is not anticipated and is likely to be frowned upon.

Hence Peter’s assessment that the kind of meaningful, radical reform that he wants to facilitate would not be encouraged by NSFT.

Whatever may have been said to him by NSFT authorities, the wording of the NHS code convinced Kemp that his aspirations for his local care providers were destined for frustration and futility.

“The letter killeth” indeed!

In this instance, it killed Peter’s fighting spirit – or almost did, until perhaps, his interaction with the media (first the BBC, then me) gave him some hope that the positive potential of his care crisis, its cathartic, curative, opportunity, could be realized.

Of course, if as I suggest the atheism-leaning BBC is in fact more disposed operationally or pragmatically to exacerbate the negative elements of Peter’s, my own and others’ care crises than it is disposed to accentuate and actualize the positives in them, then the reporter Fox’s failure to follow through with a ‘Kemp care crisis’ story and the causal or other relationship of that failure to Peter’s subsequent contemplation of suicide take on a concerning aura of calculation and predictability – perhaps even inevitability.

To be continued..







Ben Carson’s brain-fart, Kim Kardashian’s butt and comic Sandi Toksvig’s toxicity (Mouth of the beast – part 4)

Pooping on the Pope
Pooping on the Pope from Wikipedia’s article on ‘Flatulence’



There is one ‘biblical Book of Revelation-like’ event that I clearly recall intending to include in the list I shared in the second article in this series but didn’t.

That is the Glasgow bin lorry tragedy of December 22, 2014.

Actually that mechanical ‘intelligence’ featuring tragedy is part of a complex web of events in Scotland that I have been tracking, against the backdrop of Scotland’s and Barbados’ pro-independence movements.

So its omission from that list of psycho-socially seismic events is of huge significance to the overall Mouth of the Beast narrative that I am composing.

The fact that I forgot to mention the ‘Scottish’ dimension of this narrative, despite the late Stephen Alleyne’s links to that country and my own and former US Attorney General Eric Holder’s roots in Barbados’ ‘Scotland District’, on the eastern, elevated side of the island, says volumes about the fallibility of human memory, which is the focus of this article.

Here I liken human forgetting to farting, something approaching a necessary evil.

Oh, and before I forget, three things: the Donald’s last name, Trump, is also a slang synonym for ‘fart’ here in England; he has links to Scotland, through his controversial £750 million golf course investment and thirdly, the phonetic and other links between ‘farting’ and ‘wind farms’, which Trump probably used as political footballs to distract attention from other aspects of his investment, are a very significant oracle in this context.

These material and symbolic links open liminal linguistic portals not only to Geoffrey Chaucer’s The Miller’s Tale, where a female’s fart feature’s prominently, but also to the Hindu bovine biogas and related preoccupations, which link in turn to the study of wind in Chaos theory.

Add my recurring exploration of reputed ‘Brahmin’ novelist (or should that be ‘novice’?) VS Naipaul and other ‘alcoholic’ Aryan, power-drunk, principle-impoverished supremacists, like the fascistic schismatic Subhas Chandra Bose and carnivorous, dog-eat-dog capitalist Surinder Kandola into the mix, and one gets a sense of the violent vapours I hope to redeem.

And this is without any reference whatsoever to Lloyds Banks’ Scottish and wider UK trade union links, especially those of my former business relationship manager Daniel Brindley or his Asian colleague who “assisted” me.

I do however mention the fart-like skulduggery of my former English literature teacher Esther Phillips below though.

And I do believe that her links to BBC Scotland are noteworthy.


Media burps and mind farts

Do you ever feel like your butt and your brain have switched places?

Do you ever feel like the term ‘brain fart’ is more than just a metaphor and that the customary contents of your brain’s left and right hemispheres have somehow migrated to your derriere, impairing your optimal self-aware functioning?

Well, I was having that kind of day on Friday, March 18, as I found myself running frantically around Norwich, worrying needlessly about a situation the God I claim to believe in is more than competent to fix.

Isn’t it extraordinary, that for all the earth-shaking wonders of God that theists like me may witness – like the ‘twin-earthquakes’ in England and Barbados that I mentioned in the first article in this series – we are still prone to panic and even become manic, worrying that the manna of the creator’s daily provision for us may cease?

Isn’t it positively terrifying that all our beast-like knowledge and eloquence can in the blinking of an eye be reduced to flatulence?

Chapter 3, verses 1 to 8 of the apostle Paul’s  letter to the Philippians makes it clear that he had a very  acute sense of this transitory feature of human logic, and especially its religious and other ideological incarnations.

Having listed his various academic and religious distinctions, in verse 8 Paul announces “…I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ.”

And according to official sources the word “skubala” translated “dung” by the King James translators would have been more accurately rendered “sh-t”.

More on that later.

I find humanity’s persistent failure of memory, and especially my own and other theists’ tendency to perennially dwell on our own and other human’s insufficiency, a deeply engrossing mystery.

I see it as a key component of the larger mystery that is the fart-like, fleeting, fragile property of human consciousness and intelligence itself.

I see it as an essential component of the terror of human intelligence, counterbalancing our capacity for the most fragrantly beautiful dreaming and achievement.

Ben Carson on 'The View'
Ben Carson on ‘The View’ as depicted in a Daily Beast article.

And few things have brought this frightful brain fart phenomena to the fore  so dramatically as the virtual apostasy of 2016 American presidential hopeful Ben Carson: his endorsement of the race, religion and gender racketeering, deviously demonizing demagogue Donald Trump.

Has there ever been a more spectacular surrender to cynicism by a public figure professing faith in the love-preaching Joshua of Nazareth and his self-sacrificing gospel than Carson’s affixing of his signature to sociopathic, destructive ‘self-love’ epitomizing Trump’s bank-of-hatred blank cheques?

And if there was previously any doubt that Carson had essentially been morally bankrupted by his presidential bid (or, alternately, that the current election cycle has exposed a ‘liquidity of faith’ crisis that he has long lived with), his attempt to rationalise his endorsement of Trump when he appeared on American talk show The View on March 24 has dispelled it.

Pressed by the show’s moderator Whoopi Goldberg to address Trump’s racist comments about Mexicans and his noxious, Neanderthal views on women, Carson uttered what Daily Beast writer Matt Wilstein describes as “possibly the most honest and revealing thing he has said over the course of this entire election cycle.”

Carson, a prominent Seventh Day Adventist influencer said “Let me tell you something, when you’re very nice, when you’re very respectful, you talk about the real issues and not get into all these issues, where does it get you? It gets you where it got me: nowhere.”

But isn’t the urbane congeniality and ‘niceness’ of Barack Obama an important part of the complex of personal characteristics and socio-political circumstances that got him elected president of them thar United States – twice?!

Maybe if Carson had spent less time trying to undermine America’s first black president and more time trying to understand him, he would have cottoned on to this rather elephant’s-dung sized detail of Obama’s electoral success.

Maybe if he, like the divisive Trump, were not too preoccupied with blowing rhetorical raspberries or ventilating violent, vaporous-fart-like ideas about Obama’s links to Islam and other paranoid political invective, Carson would not have found himself in the intellectually insolvent and politically perilous position he is now in.

I am not without sympathy for the prominent African American neurosurgeon though.



President Barack Obama, Wikipedia
President Barack Obama, Wikipedia



In fact, I would happily work with Carson on the linguistic B4 Babel, the “alchemical” Walk on Water and other projects I am currently busying myself with, if he could be persuaded to acknowledge the error of endorsing the Hitler-like Trump and discontinue his British Broadcasting Corporation-like provision of cover for that media manipulator’s Jimmy Savile-like rape of their country.

Why would I not work with the Christian Carson for the benefit of society, on clearly agreed terms, when I am prepared, as previously stated here, to work with Muslim leader Louis Farrakhan and others with whom I differ ideologically?

In fact I actually reached out to Carson via email last year, seeking his support for my work with one of my Holistic Home Care and Hospitality clients in the UK.

And actually, Carson’s patently confused rationalizations and those of other political, academic and religious leaders in the US, UK, Canada, Barbados, India and elsewhere that I have been studying for some time, have convinced me of the urgent need for my organization’s B4 Babel and Walk On Water projects, and related efforts to advance a sound, historically grounded, individually empowering and social bonds building brand of spirituality.

That’s largely because from my perspective, the religiously conservative, politically misguided Carson’s concession to Trump’s prejudice playing, populist race-baiting propaganda is not just a sign of burp-like defects or ruptures in his own moral make-up but also a deeply disturbing indictment of African American Christianity.

It smacks of the mammon-focused, materialistic rationalizations of atheists like Richard Dawkins, AC Grayling and other secular humanists – including England MP Clive Lewis, who is implicated in a Barbados-sown ideologically motivated criminal conspiracy against me.


Clive Lewis in a 2015 photo
Clive Lewis in a 2015 photo


And like the former BBC reporter Lewis’ flagrant violation of journalistic principles of impartiality, Carson’s cow-towing to Trump is charged with the principle parroting, values voiding, contradictory “spiritual” energy of the nihilistic “Brahmin” author VS Naipaul and other caste coding commentators on the global community.

The violent, anal ‘vocalizations’ of African supremacists like my compatriot Sir Hilary Beckles and the murderous Norwegian Islamaphobe I call ‘Unders (short-for underachieving) Braveprick’ also come to mind readily.

So too do British trade unionists linked to the Glasgow bin lorry tragedy, and particularly the seemingly conscienceless, luddite lorry driver Harry Clarke, the key catalyst of that tragedy.

The man I dubbed a #BinLorryBinLadin, as I coupled him with British Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn (the “unapologetic trade unionist” Lewis’ party colleague), not only killed six people and injured fifteen others when he blacked-out behind the wheel of the bin lorry he was driving on December 22, 2014, but has since demonstrated a scandalously callous instinct for self-preservation, an indifference to norms of decency and gross insensitivity to the feelings and needs of the families and friends of his victims.

Coupled with revelations of previous blackouts he had suffered and his concealment of those mind burps from proper scrutiny, a morally putrid profile of Clarke emerges: an extremely foul, fart-like stench fixes to the unapologetic anus-approximating hole in his face.

And I would argue that the current corporate media-led preoccupation with artificial intelligence, or as I like to say ‘arsificial’ intelligence, in some ways represents a similar kind of  fart-like expression.

Indeed, given the media’s history of robotically puffing various ideas and personalities (from Randolph Hearst’s puffing of Billy Graham and being “born again” to the puffing of celebrities like Kim Kardashian, gay marriage and other contemporary orthodox vanities) Rupert Murdoch, David Thomson, Oprah Winfrey, Rev Sally Muggeridge and other media barons and baronesses, editorial influencers and ‘canonists’, might be characterized as portals of flatulent intelligence and burping bias justifiably.

I can certainly see how in my former evangelical fundamentalist fervour, Kardashian’s internet flashing of nude selfies would have seemed flagrantly fart-like to me, even if I acknowledged her compelling, formidable feminine beauty.


Quality Assurance Unit Programme Officers of the University of the West Indies
Quality Assurance Unit Programme Officers of the University of the West Indies. The women I know a little about.


And as suggested by the reference to her in the title of this article, I owe a considerable debt to Ms Kardashian whose posting of a nude selfie on International Women’s Day prompted me to reflect on how such showing off on that day in particular may have an inherent validity, as an expression of women’s erotic prowess and the centrality of that power in human procreation and its indispensable place in human ecology.

But my conservative instincts (yes, I’m a small ‘c’ conservative who writes about ‘Clinterests’ and ‘cliterati’) tempt me to recoil from the American reality television star’s immodesty.

On balance, the most judicious thing I can say about Kardashian’s serial exhibitionist behaviour is that in being both fecund-flowery and fart-like obscene, it voices the best and worst of human frailty, the beauty and terror that I cited previously.

And I would add that comparing Kardashian’s behaviour with the Trump-like attention seeking of her husband Kanye West, I find it hard to decide whose exhibitionism is more fart-loud extreme and obscene.

I have some sympathy for the journalist who dismisses Kardashian’s liberality as “just provocation and bluster, repeated images that seem to offer us some sort of truth or insight but are really just self serving.”

But being an “ass man” myself, as I wrote some years ago in an article about my on-going women’s ass sizes study, I disagree fundament-ally with the proposition that “Kim Kardashian’s ass is nothing but an empty promise.”

How could I endorse such a view when I am fully persuaded of the pulling power of Jennifer Lopez’s divine derriere – what I, alluding to Chaos theory, call the heterosexual ‘butt-to-fly’ effect of human ecology?

Perhaps the ancient, comically dismissive attitude to farting attested in the image I have featured above provides some resolution of my quandary.

Perhaps the endearing mind farting of comics like Sandi Toksvig and politicians like London Mayor Boris Johnson might bring us all some relief.

As I indicated in a recent tweet, I actually know of a buttocks named “Boris”, dubbed that name affectionately by myself and the owner of the buttocks in question.

She is a Norfolk, England-based admirer of the prominent, charismatic Tory (see #ButtNamedBoris) and one of my HHCH clients.

We “Christened” her buttocks “Boris” one day while jovially discussing my and her ‘blonde moments’: Joey Essex-like lapses in attention or transitory limits on intelligence that happen to even the most alert and intelligent of us occasionally.

But being mindful of London Mayor Johnson’s bias toward the ancient Greeks and Romans at the expense of more ancient and ongoing Afro-Asiatic contributions to human civilization and civility, I feel obliged to point out the butt-headed, fart-like futility that persistently stalks the most beautiful and best any civilization, colour, caste or class might achieve.

And likewise being mindful of the fart-like excesses and burp-approximating bigoted campaigns and emphases of the feminist and gay movements, to which the seasoned political animal Toksvig is linked, I feel obliged to point out that not all of her advocacy is perfume perfect.

Indeed, from my vantage point, some of her output positively reeks!

I recently tweeted a brief deconstructive analysis of Toksvig’s rather uncharitable criticism of the Duchess of Cambridge’s womanly appeal in 2013.

But it is Toksvig’s shocking readiness to absolve the BBC of responsibility for shielding Jimmy Savile’s pernicious paedophile and other violent and immoral sexual activities that offends my nose for the noble, fairness and accuracy most sharply.


Sandi Toksvig, compliments Wikipedia
Sandi Toksvig, compliments Wikipedia


Commenting on the Savile affair shortly after news of it had broken like a stink bomb globally, Toksvig said “I’m really sorry that the BBC got maligned in this way because they simply were not responsible, it was society.”

Well, I don’t know if the widely loved and admired, Oxford-educated comedienne might be able to justify that statement to herself on the basis of some definition of ‘humour’ she has studied.

But from where I stand such a selective failure of memory or mindfulness of the prominent morality-shaping role that the BBC plays, along with other media houses, the UK Parliament, the Church, academia and other ‘civilizing’ or socializing entities simply does not bear scrutiny.

It is as biased as any rationalization that Carson burped in his appearance on The View this week.

It smacks of the sordid side-stepping that some race, gender, religious and other human rights advocates are adept at when confronted by a failure to exercise their rights responsibly.

It reeks of the hypocritical, lopsided leftist reasoning that was apparently behind Toksvig’s denunciation of Kate Middleton’s prominence, saying “She achieved her position through marriage, she didn’t achieve her position through skill, talent.”

If marriage requires neither skill nor talent, what is it about that institution that would have Toksvig and other intelligent, progressive thinking gay rights activists wrench it from the grip and guardianship of the conservative religious traditionalists that have monopolized its definition for centuries?

Moreover, what is it about child-rearing that inclines Toksvig, Sir Elton John and other gay people to argue that the legal, semi-adoption parenting arrangements that they are obliged to employ at base level (where our ideological speculations meet butt-bound, biological reality) are essentially the same as what heterosexual parents achieve through their biological difference and complementarity?

And the more crucial question for me is what we may be losing, overlooking, subsuming, or otherwise forgetting about the biological and related fundamentals of human identity, in Carson-endorsing-Trump, faith-shipwrecking fashion, if we uncritically embrace Toksvig’s and others’ romantic, academically anaemic, armchair linguist understandings of the word “family”.

I think it is clear that despite her best intentions Toksvig, like all of us, is ever in danger of projecting her limitedly lit views beyond the proper domain of fantasy.

What Kardashian offers by flashing her buttocks, it might be said, Toksvig offers by aspirant ‘flashes of brilliance’ that mark her as less a writer and more a figure of divine comedy.

However, unlike author A N Wilson, who castigated Toksvig over her opportunistic criticism of Duchess Kate, I do not think Toksvig a bore or unfunny.

I value both the funny and serious sides of her wit and am sure that I would do so even more if she (and the BBC) could demonstrate more ideological impartiality and less atheistic leftist intransigence and inflexibility.

And some evidence of that in a ruling I am anticipating from a certain media monitoring body imminently would be greatly welcomed, auguring well not just for me but for all who recognize the importance of a free press to UK democracy.

Having been a target of both “antisocial socialist” and caprcious capitalist intransigence myself, I know only too well how any ideological overindulgence can lead to faithless, mechanical, involuntary fart-like expression.

Wilson, mentioned above, has opined that “The fact that logic cannot satisfy us awakens an almost insatiable hunger for the irrational.”

Mind burps and farts, like Hilary Clinton’s extraordinary 2008 presidential campaign claim about coming under fire by snipers while on a diplomatic visit to Bosnia, may be construed as the inevitable consequences of Carson, Kardashian or Toksvig-like excessive, rushed ideological eating.

They may be construed as the brain’s way of minimally offensively eliminating the arrogant, violent and otherwise toxic thoughts that have motivated patently racist individuals like Beckles, Naipaul and Braveprick.

Based on my own experience of such toxic thinking, as an evangelical fundamentalist Pentecostal Christian, I know only one remedy for such ideological indigestion: humility.

I expect that the etiquette sensitive, manners minding Toksvig will agree with me that the words “pardon me” may be the most profound in any language.

As I say in TBBTR, however erudite or enlightened we are, those words, which take on peculiar significance for Christians every Easter season, must never be too far from our lips.



Jeff Goldblum
Jeff Goldblum


I close shortly with the true story of a Facebook ‘conversation’ I had recently which I believe demonstrates how in the face of extraordinary cruelty and hatred, humility can facilitate empathy, and in so doing prevent us from projecting our views onto others, essentially saving us from ourselves.

But first these insightful words from the character Ian Malcolm (played by Jeff Goldblum) in the movie Jurassic Park, which may be interpreted as a warning of the dangers of eating what the sickly Triceratops featured in that film had dropped.

“The problem with the scientific power you’ve used is that it didn’t require any discipline to attain it.  You read what others had done and you took the next step . You didn’t earn the knowledge yourselves, so you don’t take the responsibility for it. You stood on the shoulders of others of geniuses to accomplish something as fast as you could, and before you knew what you had, you patented it, packaged it, slapped it on a plastic lunch box, and now you want to sell it.”

Having suffered a kind of intellectual rape myself, at the hands of both antisocial socialists and capricious capitalists in Barbados and England, these words resonated with me at a profound level when I first heard them.

They delineate the flip-side of Toksvig and others ‘ psychological transferring, which amounts to a kind of cognitive impersonation.

We might speculate that it is impossible for hate-driven people to either see or empathise with their perceived enemy because they in some ways have internalised and become that person, especially if that person’s behaviour is considered successful.

This would explain the behaviour of Barbadian ‘Mother Poet’  Margaret Gill and other Barbadian socialism preaching individuals toward me, on one hand, and the equally hostile feelings I seem to inspire among business people like Surinder Kandola of Domino’s Pizza (UK) on the other.


My comment


I am indebted to a stranger named Sarah King who recently got me  ‘blue sky’ thinking about a punishment befitting the butcher of Utøya, Braveprick, who murdered 80 of his fellow Norwegian citizens on July 22, 2011.

Commenting on a Channel 4 News clip of that Neanderthal Norwegian’s recent court room Nazi salute and self-contented smile as he claimed the very human rights he denied his victims, King wrote “tether him to the bottom of a f___ing toilet and let people sh_t on him like the dirt he is. scumbag”

Immediately recognizing the fallacy of letting the lunatic murderer think he has infected anyone else with the hatred that is his hollow soul’s solace, I responded to King with my own penal proposal. I wrote:

“Why would you want to subject anyone’s arse to the torture of being in this neanderthal throw-back’s presence for more than a second, Sarah King?

“It’s bad enough having to endure news reports on him and Donald Trump in the same 24 hour period!

“Moreover, I’m sure we can find more productive, creative uses for our faeces.

“Save your sh_t. For him, a sigh is expression enough.












Of Clinterests and Cliterati: an ‘Action Jackson’ script, Sir Elton John’s grip and Mohini Harris ‘socialism’ (Mouth of the beast – part 3)


This page appears to have been hacked. The content has been withdrawn.

Religious scholars urge Israeli Knesset not to ratify repressive religious law

Below I have reproduced an open letter sent to the members of the Israeli parliament, the Knesset, by members of CESNUR (English: Center for Studies on New Religions, Italian: Centro Studi sulle Nuove Religioni), imploring them not to pass a seemingly repressive law.

The law is intended to restrict the operations of groups defined as “cults”.

However, according to CESNUR, it is based on “faulty notions of ‘cult’ and ‘brainwashing,'” which were “discredited long ago among scholars”.

The CESNUR letter, signed by CESNUR founder-director Massimo Introvigne, an Italian sociologist and attorney and religious scholars from Europe, the Americas and Australia, says the proposed law “would introduce the possibility of declaring the members of new religious movements mentally incompetent, thus opening the way to the practice of deprogramming, which most courts around the world have declared illegal and criminal.”

CESNUR was established in 1988 by a group of religious scholars from universities in Europe and the Americas, working in the field of new religious movements. It defines itself as being independent of any religious group, church, denomination or association. It has evolved into a network of scholars and organizations who study the field.



Photograph of Knesset copied from CESNUR website.

Dear Sirs:

We are scholars who have devoted a substantial part of our career to the study of new religious movements, sometimes referred to as “cults” in the media. Indeed, one of the most studied topics in our field is the so called “cult wars” of the late 20th century in the United States and Europe, when a societal reaction developed against the success in the West of new religious movements, either imported from Asia or domestic ones. Parents and the media did not understand why youths might be willing to sacrifice their careers in order to spend their lives in an exotic religious organization. A handful of psychologists imported from Cold War American propaganda against Communism the notion of “brainwashing,” arguing that these youths did not join the groups voluntarily but were manipulated by sinister “gurus” using mysterious mind control techniques. These therapists and their supporters labeled the groups allegedly using “brainwashing” as “cults.” Lawsuits were instituted against “cults” for the assumed use of “brainwashing” and anti-cult statutes were proposed in several U.S. states.

Sociologists and other social scientists reacted against the “brainwashing” theories, claiming that they were not part of accepted science and were used as a simple tool to deny religious liberty to unpopular groups labeled as “cults.” The argument, they claimed, was circular: we know that certain groups are “cults” because they use “brainwashing,” and we know that they use “brainwashing” because, rather than persuading young people to embrace “reasonable” spiritual teachings, they spread bizarre forms of belief, i.e. they are “cults.” Anti-cult activists and therapists countered that public opinion and governments should not believe academic social scientists, who were often “cult apologists” or “hired guns” for the “cults,” but instead give credence to the “victims” accounts. The latter were the disgruntled ex-members who had left the “cults,” either spontaneously or after the forcible intervention – called “deprogramming” – of self-styled “counselors,” who kidnapped the “cultists,” kept them confined, and submitted them to various forms of psychological and often physical violence.

In the end a massive number of studies proved that “cults” accused of using the so called “brainwashing” techniques obtained a very low percentage of conversions, proving that these techniques, if they existed at all, were not very successful. Scholars also explained why “apostates,” i.e. ex-members who left a group and had a score to settle, were not the most reliable witnesses about what happened in their former organizations. They added that only a few ex-members became militant “apostates,” i.e. active opponents of the groups they had left. Most ex-members quietly pursued other interests and when they were interviewed, remembered their past experience with no particular ill feelings. However, since only apostates contacted the media, their point of view came to be wrongly regarded as representative of the average ex-members, while in fact it reflected the views of a minority only. It should be added that the word “apostate” is used by sociologists as a technical term and does not imply any derogatory judgement.

In 1990 in the case U.S. v. Fishman, a federal court in California concluded that “brainwashing” was not a scientific concept and that testimony about “cults” based on the brainwashing theory was not admissible in American courts of law. Fishman was the beginning of the end for the American anti-cult movement’s social relevance, and proposals for anti-cult or anti-brainwashing statutes were quietly dropped by their proponents. Deprogramming was considered illegal in most court cases, and some deprogrammers went to jail. Nevertheless, “brainwashing” theories and anti-cultism remained popular in other countries, although similar academic criticism prevented anti-cult laws from being passed in most countries of the world. One exception was the French About-Picard law of 2001, but once it was passed, it was rarely applied.

Viewed from abroad, what is going on in Israel appears as a curious remake of the “cult wars” that we witnessed decades ago in the United States and Europe. As it happened during the “cult wars” a small number of apostates, who were not typical of the majority of members who left the new religious movements harboring no particular grievance against them, were promoted by the moral entrepreneurs of the anti-cult movement. They were mistaken for typical ex-members and received a disproportionate attention by certain media.

Esteemed members of the Knesset:

You have now in front of you a law proposal based on the faulty notions of “cult” and “brainwashing,” discredited long ago among scholars, which would introduce the possibility of declaring the members of new religious movements mentally incompetent, thus opening the way to the practice of deprogramming, which most courts around the world have declared illegal and criminal.

Those who support the law rely on the experiences of a few disgruntled ex-members. In some cases, less than ten ex-members are regarded as the only reliable sources about groups including thousands of followers. This approach is not part of social science, nor is it part of common sense. Militant anti-cultists have a very limited and partial experience of the groups they criticize based on the anecdotical stories of a few former members, unlike professional scholars who use broader quantitative and qualitative methods and whose works, before being published, are thoroughly reviewed by their peers.

In the few countries where they have been passed, laws based on theories such as “brainwashing” have been used to discriminate against minority groups whose ideas are regarded as unpopular or marginal. Under the guise of punishing deeds rather than creeds, in fact, it is precisely creeds that are judged and punished. We certainly do not deny that some new religious movements commit crimes or harm their followers. They should be investigated and prosecuted according to the general laws. Special laws that make “being a cult” a crime, or that punish the imaginary wrongdoing of “brainwashing” are tools aimed at denying basic religious freedoms to groups that have committed no real crimes.

We respectfully urge you not to pass the proposed law,

Yours faithfully

Massimo Introvigne
Professor of Sociology of Religions
Pontifical Salesian University, Torino, Italy
Managing Director, CESNUR (Center for Studies on New Religions), Torino, Italy

Milda Alisauskiene
Associate Professor, Department of Sociology
Vytautas Magnus University, Kaunas, Lithuania

Phillip Arnold
The Reunion Institute, Houston, Texas

Torang Asadi
Duke University, Durham, North Carolina

David V Barrett
Author, The New Believers, London

David G. Bromley
Professor, Religious Studies and Sociology
Director, World Religions and Spirituality Project
Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia

George D. Chryssides
Honorary Research Fellow in Religious Studies, York St John University, UK
Formerly Head of Religious Studies, University of Wolverhampton, UK

Carole M. Cusack
Professor of Religious Studies
The University of Sydney, NSW, Australia

Régis Dericquebourg
Groupe de Sociologie des Religions et de la laïcité
Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS), Paris, France

Bernard Doherty
School of Theology
Charles Sturt University, Canberra, Australia

David Frankfurter
Professor of Religion
Boston University

Liselotte Frisk
Professor in Religious Studies
Dalarna University, Sweden

Ann Gleig
Assistant Professor of Religious Studies
Editor, Religious Studies Review
University of Central Florida, Orlando

John R. Hall
Research Professor
University of California – Davis

Jean-Pierre Laurant
Groupe Société, Religions, Laïcité
École Pratique des Hautes Études, Paris, France

Scott Lowe
Professor Emeritus, Philosophy and Religious Studies
University of Wisconsin – Eau Claire

Philip Lucas
Professor of Religious Studies
Stetson University, DeLand, Florida

J. Gordon Melton
Distinguished Professor of American Religious History
Baylor University, Waco, Texas

Timothy Miller
Professor of Religious Studies
University of Kansas

Rebecca Moore
Reviews Editor
Nova Religio

Alex Norman
Division of Social Sciences
University of California – Davis

Susan Jean Palmer
Professor of Religious Studies
Dawson College, Montréal, Québec

James T. Richardson
Foundation Professor of Sociology and Judicial Studies
Director, Judicial Studies Program
University of Nevada, Reno

Bernadette Rigal-Cellard
Professor of North American Literature and Civilization
Université Michel de Montaigne-Bordeaux 3, France

Jean E. Rosenfeld
Retired scholar
Formerly with University of California – Riverside

Richard C. Salter
Associate Professor of Religious Studies
Hobart and William Smith Colleges, Geneva, New York

Rodney Stark
Distinguished Professor of the Social Sciences
Baylor University, Waco, Texas

James D. Tabor
Department of Religious Studies
University of North Carolina at Charlotte

Catherine Wessinger
Rev. H. James Yamauchi, S.J., Professor of the History of Religions
Loyola University New Orleans

Donald A. Westbrook
Professor (Hoogleraar)
Faculty for the Comparative Study of Religion and Humanism (FVG), Antwerp, Belgium
Adjunct Assistant Professor of Church History
Fuller Theological Seminary, Pasadena

Stuart A. Wright
Professor and Chair, Department of Sociology, Social Work & Criminal Justice
Lamar University, Beaumont, Texas

PierLuigi Zoccatelli
Deputy Director
CESNUR, Torino, Italy



Hilary’s Clinterests, Owen Arthurs’ houracle & Mia Mottley’s mythology (Mouth of the Beast – part 2)


Hilary Clinton, Mia Motley, Owen Arthur - composite image
Hilary Clinton, Mia Motley, Owen Arthur – composite image



Given the obscurity of the Book of Revelation, the complexity of United States-Barbados-British relations, the minefield that intersects at gender, race and religious politics and other themes that I am pursuing simultaneously in this series of articles I think it is vital that I offer the following background and statement of Clinterests.

My unshakable conviction that Barbados’ Honorary Consul to India, Dr Philomena Mohini Harris, University of the West Indies Vice Chancellor professor Sir Hilary Beckles, former prime minister Owen Arthur, current Opposition, Barbados Labour Party leader Mia Mottley and other crucially still alive Barbadians, are at the centre of life and death situations that require urgent, meticulously managed attention, also mandates that I communicate as forthrightly and forcefully as possible.

I am also mindful of what I consider former PM Arthur’s finest hour, possibly, when in 2005 he announced he would not be accepting a $33,000+ pay increase to which a public service pay review had deemed him entitled.

My awareness of how I may benefit personally from what I share here sparks a similar ambivalence.

But I break that tension and rise above that “awkward moment”, to use Arthur’s words, because I am motivated by a profound politics engaging and transcending duty of care to alert Barbadian, American, British, Indian, Nigerian and other citizens to the self-destructive, Talibank thinking that, like billionaire beast Donald Trump, confuses bullying cowardice with courage and equates glory-grabbing with the greatness that can only come from doing good.

This, incidentally, is also Hilary Clinton’s main challenge – as her male machismo mimicking, media courting, fictitious Bosnia bullets ducking ‘awkward moment’ of the 2008 presidential contest exposed.

Herein lies the tragedy of the Trump spectacle: his obvious oblivion to the fact that his campaign is a study in Al Queda approximating ‘Al Koh’l-ism’ (Read about the roots of alcohol in Arabian vanity here).

True greatness will not always be appreciated or celebrated, even when it is understood.

And greatness shouldn’t always be celebrated, because at our greatest we are still fallible.

This is why I have not given up on Clinton, a Christ-bride, church-like figure: a virtual “woman clothed with the sun”, whose fallibility is apt to be exposed in her most public moments.

It is why I maintain a fundamental goodwill toward Barbados Labour Party leader Mia Mottley, though I remain critical of her ‘down low’ demagoguery and am not likely to ever support her prime ministerial ambitions.

My views on Clinton, Arthur, Mottley, Mohini and others reflects my acceptance of the complementarity between the divine and the human that fundamentalist evangelical atheists, with the best will in the world, will never be able to grasp.

And what hope have any of us of competently engaging with the divine ‘sense of humour’ that would bring together a tale of ‘three Hilarys’ (Clinton of the US, Beckles of Barbados and Benn of England) if we cannot navigate the alternating light and darkness behind all reality?

What hope have any of us of recognizing and realizing the vital cosmic relief that we need to survive the bestial, brutish routine of our daily communicating if we have no sense of the universe’s comic timing?

Wake up!

On Thursday, 29 November, 2007 at 13:00 hours local Caribbean time an earthquake of magnitude 7.4 shook Barbadians’ excessive self-reliance.

I was driving my ‘half-sister’ Yvette’s car along Howell’s Cross Road at the time and had just come adjacent to the Barbados Community College when I felt the effects of the road shifting under it.

I brought the car to a halt and then watched as utility poles lining that road swayed.

But another seven or eight years would pass before I realized the significance of where I was on that eve of Barbados’ 21st Independence Day celebrations.

I certainly had no inkling of the shadowy, shockingly superficial yet deeply destabilizing, Iago-like role played in my business affairs by poet-educator Esther Phillips, a former BCC lecturer.

It would be longer still before I sensed the numinous or symbolic significance of my relationship with the owner of the car I was driving: the sister who was ‘adopted’ by my father, as Nero had been by Claudius, and who has habitually been informing our other siblings and I that while she may have received the least formal education, she is the most intelligent “of all of mummy’s children”.

However, less than two months after that Barbados earthquake, on Wednesday, 27 February, 2008, at 00:56, I experienced the Lincolnshire earthquake while sitting in my home in Norfolk, a neighbouring English county.

Having been a student of the oracular and the obscure for several years by the time I experienced those ‘twin’ earthquakes, I was deeply affected by the experience.

So by the time Barbados was shaken by a magnitude 6.5 earthquake on Tuesday, 18 February, 2014, I was well placed to anticipate what would follow in England: the magnitude 4:1 earthquake that struck in the Bristol Channel two days later, on Thursday, February 20.

Since then I have been chronicling increasing, uncharacteristic seismic activity in and around Barbados with varying degrees of anxiety, optimism and fascination.

I have also been ‘mapping the coordinates’ of psycho-socially ground-shaking events within ‘Revelatory triangles’, typically linking Barbados, the UK and North America (including Canada) but also Barbados, the UK and India-Pakistan, the cite of Dr Mohini’s roots.

These biblical Book of Revelation-like events include:

  • the tragic killing of Jamaican Khalil Campbell by Barbadian Rodney Beckles, son of current University of the West Indies Vice Chancellor, Sir Hilary Beckles, on 4 January, 2007
  • the subsequent staging of the Cricket World Cup in the Caribbean between 13 March and 28 April that same year
  • the shocking and controversial death during that World Cup of the Pakistani team’s coach, South African Bob Woolmer, in Jamaica on 18 March
  • The death some months later, on 15 October of key Barbadian cricket administrator and CWC 2007 organizer Stephen Alleyne
  • the election of beast-like orator Barack Obama as Americas first black president in 2008,
  • the Campus Trendz inferno that ended the lives of five young women and one female toddler on 4 September 2010,
  • the untimely death on 23 October 2010 of Barbados Prime Minister David Thompson, a close business and political associate of professor Beckles’.
  • The ‘Malcolm in the middle’ medical-juridical media convergence event of 2 April, 2013, in which two doctors, one medical (like Dr Mohini), the other academic-juridical, but both named Malcolm Grant, were prominently featured on the same day, in two superficially unrelated news reports originating in Britain and Barbados.
  • The deaths of the babies or small children of three leaders: Barbadian Rastafarian elder Iral Talma (in 2001 or 2002), the afore mentioned PM Arthur (in May 2007) and his British counterpart David Cameron (2009).


My study of the timing and related characteristics of these and other events has convinced me of the validity of the view of the world in which I and other oracles ‘live and move and have our being’, in line with the biblical teaching of Acts 17:28.

Pearl Bayliss-Woods of Elim Pentecostal church in Norfolk was healed of multiple sclerosis in 1998 and can attest to the reality of divine intervention.

As can my friend “K” (previously identified as ‘Steven’, if I recall correctly), a penitent homosexual healed of full-blown AIDS while on his deathbed in Barbados.

I believe that Pearl and K would affirm the perilous state of the human condition, and especially the threats to our children, born and unborn, that is encapsulated in the message of Revelation.

Standing with Karl Jung, albeit with qualifications, as I consider his alleged beast-like sexual over-familiarity with at least one female child reprehensible, I affirm and echo his concern that:

“Modern man does not understand how much his ‘rationalism’ (which has destroyed his capacity to respond to numinous symbols and ideas) has put him at the mercy of the psychic ‘underworld’. He has freed himself from ‘superstition’ (or so he believes), but in the process he has lost his spiritual values to a positively dangerous degree. His moral and spiritual tradition has disintegrated, and he is now paying the price for this break-up in worldwide disorientation and dissociation.”

Like Pearl of divine providence, and K, an oracle for those who have ears to hear, Jung’s life and work, like my own, attests to the divine-human concursus that transcends race, religion, gender, language and similar temporal-spatial classifications.

It attests to the access we can all enjoy to the mustard seed science that moves the earth.





When former Barbados Prime Minister Owen Arthur speaks, I’m inclined to listen.

After all, it took exceptional survival skills for that former big beast of Caribbean and international politics to survive the minefield of Barbados’ fundamentally incestuous, cruelly colour-coded and otherwise complicated political landscape and firmament.

And as Barbados’ longest serving PM to-date, the former Barbados Labour Party leader Arthur didn’t just survive our island’s rough and tumble, Russia-entangled, American-stranglehold-mangled, declining-British-imperial-ties-testing political furnace: he excelled in it.

With a rhetorical subtlety and inclusive, soft power appeal that aligns him more closely with Clinton than Trump, arguably, Arthur rose above Barbados’ legacy of gender, racial and religious disunity and divisiveness as he preached a gospel of socio-political inclusion and cohesiveness.

As biographer James Manheim notes, Arthur was quoted in Current Leaders of Nations as saying “No country can ever truly develop unless it finds the means of engrossing everyone in the task of nation building, whatever their class, creed, colour or political persuasion.”

Like the apostolic church builder, the ‘Man from St Peter’ stood like a Colossus, bestriding the geopsychic landscape of Barbados’ dependent, independent and interdependent history.

Visibly and invisibly building on foundations laid for him by his prime ministerial predecessors Errol Barrow, Tom Adams, Bernard St John and, especially Erskine Sandiford, in whose political demise he played a key role, ironically, ‘King Arthur’ consolidated the multi-jewelled crown of their collective achievements: Barbados’, internationally admired and emulated “social partnership”.

As the literacy-limited, charisma-curbed educator Sandiford floundered under the weight of ideological and personal conflicts that emerged after he controversially assumed the leadership of the Democratic Labour Party, then Opposition leader Arthur seized the initiative, virtually hijacking the Sandiford crystallized social compact, the first ever tried and tested labour and capital reconciling national development preserving and perpetuating pact in the world, reputedly.

And for 14 years that shrewd beast Arthur, Barbados’ longest serving PM to date flourished.

Until his crown was lifted by another political big beast: a tough-talking-Trump-like, political stage monopolizing “woman clothed with the sun” (Revelation 12:1); his BLP party colleague Mia Mottley.

Aided and abetted by the truth subverting hubris of professor Sir Hilary Beckles, David Comissiong and other reverse racists (dubbed Negrocrats by Arthur), the connivance of Clinterest motivated male and female fundamentalist feminists, a number of religion manipulating opportunists and other dragon-driven allies in the Barbadian, Caribbean and international communities, Mottley undermined Arthur, amplifying his shortcomings and understating the good he had achieved.

Something I am sure many a good husband will understand: even giving our best may not be enough.

This is not to say that Arthur was blameless in his own eventual defeat.

As I have been careful to point out in the first article in this series, we are all fallible, being fallen Adam and Eve’s seed.

And this idea of ‘the fall’ is clearly as prominent a theme in the Apocalypse (Revelation) John received on the isle of Patmos as it is in the Genesis account of humanity’s creation and evolution.

So too is the principle of male-female interdependence that I have until now been dancing around.

But those familiar with my Woman-I-Zen project, in which the speech impaired Norfolk mystic and ‘oracle’ Janice Gurney is prominent will have some idea of the centrality of this theme in my life and work. As I argue in my 2005 essay Fundamentalist Feminism, a healthy recognition of male-female complementarity and interdependence is the indispensable prerequisite of all sound, sustainable social partnership: the indispensable basis of coherent, cohesive social interaction.

I also revisited this theme indirectly in a brief Twitter exchange about gay parenting and adoption issues with BBC broadcaster Kenan Malik, a non-identical thought twin of Sanders’ adviser Richard Sugarman, ostensibly.

That was on 21 July 2015.

I had not yet heard of Sanders, so far as I am aware.

And until 18 February, 2016, at approximately 20:00, I had not known of his child adopting background, as I had not yet read his Wikipedia page.


To be continued…


Social Partnership,_Baron_Turner_of_Ecchinswell

Donald Trump, Nero and ‘the Beast’ of revelation (Mouth of the beast – part 1)


“The conventional wisdom holds that Donald Trump is playing into the hands of ISIS. His call for ‘a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States’ — a temporary measure, he says, ‘until we can figure out what the hell is going on’ — has served only to divide America, offend and inflame Muslims worldwide, and quite possibly drive deeper into alienation the small minority of disaffected Muslims who are teetering on radicalism’s edge.”

This is how American journalist and former Mitt Romney adviser Gabriel Schoenfeld describes the impact of the obscene, incendiary rhetoric of Republican Party presidential front-runner Donald Trump.

I go further: I think the self-lionizing Trump’s opportunistic rhetoric twins him with the archetypal, apocalyptic “Beast” described in the Bible, especially in the Book of Revelation, chapter 13.

And reading the first part of verse 5 of chapter 13, which as translated by The Message version of the Bible reads “The Beast had a loud mouth, boastful and blasphemous,” I think the ‘lion mouthed’ Trump fits the biblical Beast’s description particularly accurately.

Donald Trump - Wikipedia Commons

Coincidentally, or, if my atheistic adversaries will permit me, providentially, The Message: The Bible In Contemporary Language (to use its full title) was published by another more subtly brash American, Eugene H Peterson.

And while not as patently publicity crazed or self-promoting as “the Donald”, in Peterson, a founding pastor of Christ Our King Presbyterian Church in Bel Air, Maryland, one can detect a germ of the beastly arrogance and conceit that can afflict and ruin us all.

Unsurprisingly, that proud human corruptibility or fallibility is particularly borne out in Peterson’s ambition to ‘popularize’ the Bible’s message, which seems to have been motivated fundamentally by his failure to fully appreciate the lethalness of “written things”: the relative futility of literacy.

“The letter killeth”, we are warned in 2 Corinthians 3:6.

In his failure to grasp the fossilizing, fragmenting effect that written words have on human intelligence, there is a trace of the ecclesiastical vanity that disposes all Christians, and especially pastors and other church office holders to Beast-like blasphemy.

Like the anti-Christian Roman emperor Nero, of the first century AD, we become deluded by our own visibility and volubility.

The deceptive, black and white “bigness” of ideas reduced to writing feeds our predisposition to moral obesity.

As Trump’s, Louis Farrakhan’s and others’ pre-emptive violence applauding and justifying rhetoric demonstrates, it predisposes us to the fatty philosophizing or thick thinking that encourages a resort to brute force.

Like cholesterol, ‘clogging’ and corrupting the internal (conscience) and external (societal) communication pathways that ensure the consistency of thought, word and deed, that I like to call the continuum of character, a preoccupation with written things can frustrate our best intentions.

Poison mushrooming “Food of the gods” indeed!

Atomic heir of Adamic fear, truly.
Note that Suetonius Paulinus, one of Nero’s generals implicated both Nero and his mother Agrippina in the murder of the emperor Claudius, his adopted father.

Agrippina is believed to have fed Claudius poison mushrooms.

Suetonius claimed that Nero cruelly ridiculed the dead Claudius by labeling mushrooms the ‘food of the gods’ in his use of that Greek saying.


A low, mean wall

I expect that my comparison of the obnoxious, proudly materialistic billionaire Trump and the unquestionably devout, spiritual-humility-advocating Peterson will offend that patently pious, undoubtedly well meaning man and his many admirers profoundly.

That is not my intention.

But I must assert that while I too am an admirer of Peterson, his pastoral achievements do not blind me to his fallible humanity any more than The Donald’s material wealth blinds me to his spiritual poverty.

Tapisserie de l'Apocalypse in Angers, France). A medieval tapestry, this detail of which shows John, the Dragon, and the Beast of the Sea.
Tapisserie de l’Apocalypse in Angers, France). A medieval tapestry, this detail of which shows John, the Dragon, and the Beast of the Sea.

I am no more enamored of Peterson’s gifts, I hope, than I am of my own still blossoming prophetic potential and abilities.

How could I be proud of any talent I possess when I know how easily I fail?

It would be lunacy to insist on others’ admiration or adoration stubbornly when I know how easily my own beast can seize control of or override and subvert my good sense and sensitivity – not least when a she-beast is in my presence!

And yet, in spite of my fallibility, it turns out that my twinning of Trump and Peterson and the comparison of that pair here with Nero Caesar (the Zero Caesar?) is even more apropos than I imagined when I set about it on Monday, February 8, 2016, buttressed as I was by my recent discussion with Barbadian historian Karl Watson and others discussing the wall of 98% literacy that confines Barbadians’ psycho-social liberty.

Last year it had occurred to me that the real estate magnate Trump’s wall-building proposal stood to benefit him financially, more than anyone else.

But it was only today (February 9) as I researched Nero, who according to his contemporary Apollonius of Tyana was called “that beast” by some critics and who preterist interpreters identify as the “first beast” mentioned in the Book of Revelation that I learned of Nero’s Trump-like “low and mean wall”.

It was only as I learned of that wall which Nero had constructed as a rather moronic Neronic  tribute to the deceased Claudius that I gained a fuller appreciation of the prophetic trajectory that my thinking about Trump is on.

Note that in the universalist context that I am constructing here, Claudius is not just an archetype or symbol of America’s Founding Fathers.

The betrayal Claudius suffered (or justice meted out to him, depending on your perspective ) at Agrippina and Nero’s hands could just as easily be applied to Errol Barrow, Barbados’ ‘Father of Independence’, Winston Churchill or the peace advocate Hilary Benn.

My prior linking of Trump and Hilary Clinton with the race-racketeering ideological excesses of Barbados’ Adolf Hitler-approximating current Prime Minister, Freundel Stuart and his Joseph Goebbels reverse-racist-ideology propaganda peddling proxy, Sir Hilary Beckles, therefore take on a deeper spiritual and practical significance than even I had imagined.

While I had intuitively linked the phenomenon of biogenetic coding with that of written codes years ago (as a certain American aide to the Ethiopian Royal Family living in the US may recall) only today is it becoming clear to me just how the racial colour coding that blights Indian society, for example, may be related not only metaphorically but also metabolically to our ‘consumption’ of written codes.

More on that later, when I cast Hilary Clinton in the role or mystic mould of “the Beast” and the role of “a woman clothed with the sun” (Revelation 12:1), simultaneously .

I will also be addressing Bernie Sanders’ beastly propensities, especially the meaty ‘materialist dialectical’ analysis that is the basis of his appeal to many young people at the University of Illinois and other American, British, Canadian, Caribbean, Chinese, Indian and other universities.

Less enthusiastically (with deep regret, actually), but as a matter of necessity, I will be ‘rosecuting’ the case of Dr Philomena Mohini Harris, Barbados’ Honorary Consul to India.

Note: You can hear Peterson explaining his rationale for creating The Message Bible here:


‘Grotesque inequality’ as MP Clive Lewis makes legal threat (#Barbados50 – part 4)

Dear Chief Constable Bailey,


Norfolk MP Clive Lewis’ office has responded to my recent open letter to you by subtly threatening legal action.

On Friday, January 15, I received an email from Mr Lewis’ assistant “Jamie”, who I believe to be “Jamie Smith”, an activist that maintains the Norwich South MP’s website.

The email takes issue with my informing you and the Norfolk and wider UK public that Mr Lewis has been implicated in a Barbados-sown, globally-grown race, religion and gender racketeering criminal conspiracy.

It reads,

Dear Mr Campbell Thank you for your email regarding claims against Mr Lewis and the blog post documenting the meeting held between yourself, myself and my colleague Adam. I have contacted the legal team at Labour Party HQ regarding this and suggest you remove it. Please do not contact our office about this issue in future.

Kind regards


Office of Clive Lewis MP


CC Bailey, up to the time of writing this article I had not responded to “Jamie” (or Mr Smith) but I do not intend to “remove” the one that seems to have I have made Mr Lewis incensed.

I will not be intimidated by a former BBC Norfolk reporter-turned-politician.

Frankly, I am a bit surprised by this tactic as it suggests that Mr Lewis is not even going to try to project the illusion that he, a political reporter, cares about press freedom.

Moreover, it suggests that Mr Lewis shares his former BBC Norfolk colleague Mike Liggins’ rather patently prejudiced, low opinion of me: an opinion he holds to the BBC’s and the Norfolk and wider UK public’s detriment.

I will do nothing to encourage their misguided, morally suspect opinion of me, my methods or my motives.

I will not be party to that conspiracy.

I will not encourage or indulge those conspirators or others in the delusion that I can be persuaded to abandon my crusade for justice for my client and myself by ill-advised, litigious threats.

Ironically, as I wrote this article on Sunday, January 17, I happened to tune in to The Andrew Marr Show on BBC One (television) where Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn was denouncing Britain’s “grotesque levels of inequality” at every opportunity his host presented.

I could not help but marvel at the fact that Mr Lewis’ threat to have his party’s considerable legal and other resources deployed against me sets up just the kind of unequal, privilege exploiting, big bully basher scenario that both he and Mr Corbyn claim to be challenging!


Clive Lewis in a 2015 photo
Clive Lewis in a 2015 photo


Finally, but only because I thought I should save this most intriguing item of evidence for last, not because I am unaware of its significance: I note that the “Office of Clive Lewis MP” email does not even allude to the dilemma of my client.

I think it speaks volumes that Mr Lewis’ office makes no attempt to even create the impression that this Labour Party politician’s concern for his public image is matched by any concern for how Norfolk County Council and your organization, Norfolk Police, is treating the vulnerable, 24-hour-care-needing adult that is my client.

I think this extraordinary email is a study in public image pinned and propelled political over-reaction.

I cannot see how any of the many people being affected by Norfolk County Council failings (be those failings the consequence of criminal fraudulent or “innocent” incompetence) might find any hope or comfort in the self-obsession signalled by Mr Lewis’ official response to my article.

Empathizing with the relatively newly minted parliamentarian Mr Lewis, the Barbados-sown, globally-grown criminal conspiracy that he is being implicated in by a considerable, growing body of evidence (as is the evidence implicating the BBC, the Eastern Daily Press, the University of Illinois, the East Anglia Diocese of the Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Daily Press, Lloyds Bank and other individuals and organizations) is, in a word, breath-taking.

CC Bailey, this more than 30 years-running conspiracy (or series of conspiracies) that I have been begging you and other law enforcement, news media, religious and other individuals and organizations to help me fight has apparently floored or enfeebled the legal battle-hardened Laura Clower, Senior Counsel at the University of Illinois.

Since contacting me on January 4th about this matter, Ms Clower seems to have gone psycho-socially “missing in action”.

But I am trusting that she will speedily be restored to her fighting fit, ethically equipped self, perhaps with her UofI colleagues’ (like Head and Gutgsell Professor, Education Policy, Organization and Leadership, James D. Anderson and Acting Chancellor Barbara Wilson) and Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan and Governor Bruce Rauner’s help.

Professor Anderson, whose many credits include authorship of Forgotten Genius: The Percy Julian Story, can clearly bring some useful evidence detecting and narrative composing skills to the UofI’s investigation and contextualization of the quite complex global, criminal conspiratorial web that the Barbados government, the Anglican Church’s Barbados diocese and other parties have spun.

But my point is that given the magnitude and complexity of the Barbados MP Donville Inniss facilitated criminal conspiracy, I can understand how Mr Lewis might assume that it is inevitably linked to the much smaller Norfolk County Council criminal conspiracy against myself and my client.

He might assume that a “wheel within a wheel” relationship exists between to the two things.

However, I have not made that assumption.

More crucially though, as sympathetic as I am with Mr Lewis’ and others’ conspiracies blurring or similar dilemmas or problems (including yours CC Bailey), I cannot change the course upon which I have embarked.

I cannot abandon my client’s and my interests or limit our perfectly reasonable, human rights, tax-paying and otherwise supported expectations and ambitions.

What I will do is share with you and the good people of Norfolk a series of emails between Mr Lewis’ office and myself that should help put my belief that he is implicated in the bigger conspiracy in perspective.

The longest of these emails includes a record of my October 2, 2015 meeting with Jamie and Mr Adam Giles, the other member of “Team Clive” mentioned in the email I received on January 15.

Mr Lewis was supposed to attend that constituency surgery meeting but just before it began I was informed that he could not do so because he had been delayed in London.

Please note that I was told this several minutes after I had arrived at MP Lewis’ surgery, housed in the Graham Dacre-owned Open premises located on Bank Plain in Norwich.

The ownership of the building is significant, as Mr Dacre, a local millionaire, has strong ties to Barbados’ religious establishment.

But I shall have to elaborate on what that could mean in another article.

My record of the meeting was composed days after it occurred and I submitted it to Mr Lewis’ office where it was verified by Mr Giles.

Indeed, as one email makes clear, he even suggested I added an item of evidence of Barbados government bullying that I had mentioned but failed to include in my record of our October 2 conversation.

Here are the emails:


From: “Jay Campbell” Sent: 9 October 2015 13:45

To: Office of Clive Lewis MP

Subject: Re: Case Ref: ZA 0197 – Record of Friday, October 2, 2015 meeting (Case Ref: ZA0497)

Hi Adam Thanks for getting back to me. I will add the items that you mentioned to my record. I will also add my suggestion that Mr Lewis may be able to assist me through his links to the media, especially his links to BBC Norfolk. I am currently receiving professional counselling to help me deal with the stress of my situation.

If I think it prudent to have my counsellor (or my GP) contact Mr Lewis I will facilitate that. While I’m on this topic: I did see my counsellor on Tuesday and discussed my meeting with yourself and Jamie with him.

I also informed him that I will not be providing the list Jamie requested at this point. I believe that the information I have provided so far is enough to at least warrant some attempt by Mr Lewis to establish the truth (or not) of my claims – especially my claim about Barbadian MP Donville Inniss’ abuse of my business name.

Also, inform Mr Lewis that it is my studied opinion that if he is really concerned for my mental and/or emotional wellbeing, his energies may be more effectively used by using his contacts with the National Union of Journalists and other entities and individuals to help me break the psycho-socially oppressive, stranglehold of silence that BBC Norfolk, the wider BBC and other UK, Caribbean, US, Canadian and other media houses and their political co-assassins have been imposing on me!


J Campbell

Founder-PrincipalIntelek International |  | | |  |  |

Junior |   | |  |


On Thursday, 8 October 2015, 11:24, Office of Clive Lewis MP  wrote:

Dear Mr Campbell

Thank you for this e-mail composing a brief record of our meeting last Friday.

Could you just please add what you said in the meeting regarding the cancellation of a performance in Barbados in front of a Brazilian diplomat, and the BBC not reporting on a scandal you alleged to have discovered in relation to Dominoes in the UK.

I gather that the character assassination campaign that you believe the Barbadian Government are engaging in against you is causing you a great deal of stress.

Would you be prepared for us to contact your GP to highlight our concern for your welfare? If so, what is their name and contact details? Kind regards Adam Giles ________________________________________

From: “Jay Campbell” Sent: 7 October 2015 05:48

To: Office of Clive Lewis MP

Subject: Case Ref: ZA 0197 – Record of Friday, October 2, 2015 meeting

Dear Mr Lewis

Below I have compiled a brief record of my meeting with Jamie and Adam of your Support Team last Friday.

Please let me know if there are any corrections or additions that you wish to make.

Kind regards


Record of Friday, October 2, 2015 meeting

I was greeted by Jamie and informed that Mr Lewis was held-up in London and would not be attending the meeting.

I was asked to explain the matter I wanted Mr Lewis to address. I offered a brief summary, recounting the situation I had described in an email to Mr Lewis’ office on September 29, 2015.

Here is that information again: “I’m the object of what appears to be a Barbados-sown, globally-grown, long-running campaign of character assassination, economic sabotage and political subterfuge.”

I also noted that both the ruling Democratic Labour Party and the opposition Barbados Labour Party are members of the Socialist International in London, as is (sic) the British Labour Party.

I also said that so far as I could tell members of the Labour Party, the Conservative Party and the Liberal Democrats were complicit in the campaign against me.

Prompted by a comment by Adam about “colonial relations”, I sought to make it clear that I do not subscribe to the common notion that the British-Barbados colonial relationship was a “one-way” arrangement with benefits accruing to the British and losses being borne by Barbadians.

I was either asked for or simply volunteered information about Barbadian MP Donville Inniss’ attack on my business, Intelek International, as an example of the kind of violations I was being subjected to by the Barbados government.

I shared how months after I created the domain name, Mr Inniss created the domain name but has never created an website.

I noted that he has instead linked the domain name – and in turn, my business – to the pornography website, in which he has or has had a proprietorial interest.

The domain name was originally registered to his catering company, Fiesta Catering International.

Jamie asked for another example of the attacks to which I have been subjected and I told him and Adam about how I appear to have been targeted by MI5 or some other security body as a possible Al Queda affiliate, because of my association with Barbadian Pan Africanists who had participated in the ill-fated 2001 UN anti-racism Conference that preceded the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Jamie said the person, a total stranger, who linked me to Al Queda might have been a lunatic.

Adam said it might just have been a racially motivated slight.

I explained that UN Conference context, which I had not previously stated.

I had only mentioned that this stranger had approached me in the Millennium Library with bizarre questions, and I felt he might have been misinformed by the Barbados government.

Jamie then said that Mr Lewis would not be able to help me because the matter would be too controversial.

I replied that controversy is par for the course in politics.

Jamie then said Mr Lewis could not get involved because the matter could lead to a diplomatic incident.

I replied that this too seemed a routine risk of politics. – just another kind of controversy, essentially.

At about this time Jamie said the meeting must end because they were expecting another person.

Adam left the room to collect the person who had the next appointment.

I asked if we could continue until that person, who was late, arrived.

Jamie said no. I believe it was around this time, as I was preparing to leave, that I mentioned that my former local MP Simon Wright had offered to help but achieved little ultimately.

I also noted that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office had merely suggested I hire a solicitor. Jamie said why did I raise the matter with Mr Wright as late as I had.

I said I had raised it with him when I found out about Mr Inniss’ attack. Jamie asked for a list of other attacks.

I agreed to provide the list. I said I had hoped that Mr Lewis could work with me constructively and creatively and that his failure or inability to do so is likely to have consequences for the Labour Party.

I thanked Jamie and Adam for their time, bid (sic) them a good day and left the meeting.

|  | | |  |  | Junior |




Norfolk Police and Clive Lewis MP fatalism-and-fraud friendly? (#Barbados50 – part 3)

“The volume of fraud impacting on the United Kingdom is growing in complexity and diversity. Those who commit fraud exploit and profit from misplaced trust and act to the detriment of the public through the serious harm they cause.” (UK College of Policing)


Dear Chief Constable Bailey

I write this open letter to share with you and the good people of Norfolk, my profound concern about the seemingly abysmal fraud detecting and deterring incompetence of some persons employed by Norfolk Police.

I preface my comments with the above quotation, taken from the College Of Policing website, to underscore the point that while I focus on a specific example of police incompetence based on my and one of my business clients’ personal experience, the consequences of this case for the Norfolk and wider UK public are much further reaching.

Indeed I know of a number of care providing business and voluntary (especially family) interests who have complained of similar difficulties.

Today I was visited by one of your officers who I informed of apparent Norfolk County Council complicity in what appears to be a race, religion and/or gender motivated criminal conspiracy that is endangering my psychological and economic wellbeing and that of one of my directly contracted Holistic Home Care and Hospitality clients.

I provided the officer with evidence of NCC’s apparently conspiratorial and fraudulent abuse of its position (as per the Fraud Act 2006) including,

1) NCC’s obstructive and possibly illegal use of Freedom of Information and associated legislation to withhold information from my client and I, and

2) the apparently coercive, manipulative influence it has exerted over my client and myself, aided and abetted at critical junctures by the questionable, possibly fraudulent conduct of some of my clients’ relatives, some of her other carers, the charity Equal Lives, and in one extraordinary instance, a female Norfolk Police employee.


Astoundingly, despite the provision of this evidence, your officer has said that as far as he is concerned there is no evidence of fraud in the situation I described to him.

He said he will refer the matter to his superiors but as far as he’s concerned I have no evidence of fraud, or even of the racial, gender or religious/ideological abuse I alleged.

Based on his overall confidently dismissive tone, I do not get the impression that he has fully taken on board everything that I told him so I am doubtful that his superiors will see past his subjectivity.

I am consequently now fearing even more than previously for my client’s and my psychological and economic wellbeing.

Moreover, I fear that this opportunity to robustly address the reputedly cynical, opportunistic and/or incompetent behaviour of some NCC employees will be missed.

From my perspective, this puts NCC’s more conscientious, hardworking, honest and authentically public-spirited employees at risk – which will in turn have the domino effect of eroding the already demoralized NCC’s capacity to provide quality care to Norfolk residents.

It will also encourage an attitude of cynicism and a sense of impunity among others outside Norfolk, including my client’s relatives, who do not reside in this county.

Please do not let this happen.

My client and I are at your mercy, CC Bailey.

I have sent copies of this open letter to politicians of the major parties, various news houses and other individuals and organizations who possibly could help.

But I am mindful that Mike Liggins of BBC Norfolk has dismissed me as a “crank” in the past.

And while the BBC Trust has given me cause to expect a reversal of the prejudice I have suffered at that state broadcaster’s hands, I am not taking anything for granted.

Also, late last year the Eastern Daily Press, which is running a campaign focusing on mental health informed me that it thinks that my story of the psycho-social challenges I experience simply by being part of Norfolk’s Black and Minority Ethnic community are “too personal” for its audience.

Moreover, as you will see below, my local MP Clive Lewis apparently thinks that I have the intelligence level of the kind of goat he once joked that he and Ed Miliband are not likely to be caught sexually assaulting.

So I really think that you may need to be my client’s and my “salvation” in this situation.

It is customary for some people to blame Conservative Party cuts for the police’s and other public servants’ failure to do their jobs with due care and attention.

Here is a case where the wholehearted and persistent efforts of a client who needs 24-hour care and her private contractor business partner to work collaboratively with NCC in a manner that would save it money have been dismissively spurned and contemptuously rejected.

What I find particularly astounding is that amid all their whinging about government cuts, NCC personnel are not seizing the opportunity to develop and duplicate the client-centred-funding care model I have introduced to them!

Or is NCC’s “seizure” of my Holistic Home Care and Hospitality model a subversive secret?

Before working with this client (I work with others), I approached NCC and sought their advice about a number of matters, including how much I might charge for my services.

I made it clear that I was as keen to be open, transparent and accountable in all my dealings with NCC as I am in my dealings with my client.

When it became apparent that the client was being put in an unnecessarily stressful and apparently exploitable situation by another carer, I turned again to the Council for help.

When my suspicions about that carer’s motives and competence were vindicated, after she apparently walked out on our client, I helped the Council redeem the precarious situation – and at considerable cost to my own health, at one time doing a few 24 hour shifts, because the client needs 24-hour care.

My reward for these exertions and sacrifices has been obstruction after obstruction by NCC Adult Social Services employees and other persons implicated here.

Even as these persons complained about the Council’s lack of funds to cover the cost of her care, they undermined and sabotaged my crowd-funding and other efforts to raise funds on the client’s behalf – efforts that I invited them to partner in.

It would appear that the Council, my client’s relatives, Equal Lives and other parties were more intent on crushing mine and my client’s faith in ourselves, in God and/or in humanity than anything else.

Actually, I have wondered if Norfolk’s reputed atheism, is to some degree responsible for the way NCC has dealt with my client and I.

And in a similar vein, I have noticed a schizophrenic, selective socialist aversion to private enterprise among some NCC staffers and some Norfolk NHS personnel.

I note the historic dominance of the Labour Party in Norfolk, and that political party’s Mitt Romney-recalling, political flip-flopping, Talibank thinking attitude to matters of faith and politics.

I particularly note the already cited, extraordinarily obscene and irreverent comment of my MP, Lewis, during the general election last year.

Sadly, I was subjected to a more subtle and subversive “obscenity” by a member of Mr Lewis’ staff when I visited his constituency office later last year.

He said Mr Lewis could not support my effort to have the Barbados government and its criminally conspiring international allies held to account for their violation of my human rights, especially those rights that pertain to my intellectual property, because it might cause a diplomatic incident.

Perhaps that Team Lewis staff member had heard of my deliberations with the London-based Police Intellectual Property Crime Unit (PIPCU), the morally muddled (or at any rate slow-moving) Mick Thurley of the Roman Catholic Church or some other religious cleric, business person, public servant or other “minister” from whom I have so far only received excuses for inaction in this matter and decided to try to outdo their intelligence insulting claims.

At any rate the ethical confusion that seems to have overtaken the illegal drug-taking, long-time Labour member and ordained Methodist minister Paul Flowers, of Cooperative Bank scandal notoriety, seems to have infested that Lewis colleague’s intellect as well.

And when I reflect on what in retrospect looks like Mr Lewis’ opportunistic posing with religious clerics during the electoral canvassing period last year I am inclined to think the same of Mr Lewis.

It just goes to show that the claim to believe in God can be as hollow and fraudulent as many atheists’ claims to have a monopoly on sound moral reasoning.

CC Bailey, my ongoing research on the “suicide psyche” (with which you may or may not be aware) suggests that atheism, informed by an exaggerated, seemingly evangelical fundamentalist “stoicism” and secularism may well be a factor in the prevalence of suicide in Norfolk and elsewhere in the UK.

It seems to me that fatalism and fraud have become embedded in the minds of a significant segment of Norfolk residents.

If I might paraphrase the Christian apologist Malcolm Muggeridge, might it be the case that because some Norfolk police essentially believe in nothing (that is, in neither God nor other human beings) they will fall for anything?

Widening the context, might Norfolk residents’ atheistic temperaments explain why Norfolk police seems fatalism-and-fraud friendly.

I close with the following two paragraphs from the College of Policing document with which I opened.

They urge consistency in fraud investigation irrespective of ideological or any other persuasion:

“Fraud has been globalised and the reach of the fraudster has increased through the use of new technologies, enabling traditional crime to be committed in new ways through the use of computers, computer networks or other forms of information communications technology.

This advice is intended to support forces to provide a consistent response to investigating fraud.”

One might be forgiven for thinking that the only “diplomatic incident” Mr Lewis really fears is his own and/or other Norfolk and wider UK Labour Party members’ arrest and public disgrace.

(Also read my follow-up letter to CC Bailey at this link: Grotesque Inequality as Clive Lewis MP threatens legal action


Investigating fraud