Australians’ burning ambition (Technologies of Trust #6)

As Australia burns, what might we learn, individually and collectively?

I think there is a lesson about poetic justice here: a lesson about cosmologically fair outcomes, as I indicated in a January 3rd tweet thread.

Responding to a reflection about Australia’s unprecedented, deadly bush fires by Mona Siddiqui, Professor of Islamic and Interreligious Studies at the University of Edinburgh, on the BBC Radio 4 program Thought for the Day, I published the arguably incendiary idea that those lightning generating fires might be a form of divine retribution for Australia’s political gaslighting immigration policies.

And I must point out here that since I started writing this article on January 16th, under the title “Melbourne burning”, my understanding of the word gaslighting has deepened and evolved considerably.

I started out with a superficial, rather misleading sense of that word, thinking that it denoted a blatant, obvious mode of political incitement and instigation — the kind of verbal behavior that has made United States president Donald Trump infamous.

I now have a deeper and still deepening, time and space filling grasp of its more accurate use as a synonym for subtle “brain washing” and other covert forms of psychological warfare: the kind of mental undermining that I have been addressing in a number of initiatives, including previous installments in this Technologies of Trust series of events and articles.

I am now more inclined to associate “gaslighting” with the indirect, chthonic gender, racial and religious micro aggression employed consciously or unconsciously by University of the West Indies Vice Chancellor Sir Hilary Beckles, media baron Rupert Murdoch, British economist Ruth Lea and others who have been waging psychological warfare on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Prince Harry and his wife Meghan.

And readers should note that consistent with my generally cautious New Covenant nous (“nous” is pronounced like “mouse”) informed, conscientious approach to questions of divine judgement, I published this potentially divisive, possibly deeply hurtful suggestion of a link between those fires that have claimed at least 29 lives and the New Zealand mosques attack in the form of a question.

And that is because I had no desire to contribute to the self-destructive, political gaslighting or flame throwing that I was challenging in the tweet thread I posted at 9:20 the morning of January 3rd.

Like conciliatory approaches I have been making since 2017 to my apparently atheistic, lewd, bestiality-humor-backfiring branded local MP Clive Lewis, in an effort to peacefully resolve past differences, my tweet thread was an invitation to prof Siddiqui and others of all faiths and none to have a dialogue with me.

Like the “Spirited Sport” football match I organized between Norfolk-based Roman Catholic Christians and Muslims in 2007, it was intended to initiate an open-ended dialogue: a constructive conversation about the metaphysical reality in which we all live and move and have our being, as offspring of Divine Essence (Acts 17:28).

I remain firmly convinced that Judaism, Christianity and Islam have more in common than differences, both positively and negatively, as “religions of the book”.

Having thus transcended the terrors of that text trapped and trapping, familial faith-based love triangle, by untangling the reality of the unwritten New Covenant from its written representations, I would have to be out of my mind to let my mind be ensnared again, as it was between 1982 and 1987, by any other “bookish theoric”, reality reducing secular or religious divisions.

So however strongly I was and remain convinced that those deadly wild fires entail a cosmological or karmic response to the murderous, Aryan supremacist excesses of the self-described Australian “ethno-nationalist” (Nazi) mass murderer, as the second tweet in that January 3rd thread suggests, I am mindful that my compatriot Rev Dr Sonia Hinds, English cleric Rev Laura Fawcett and other theists might have another take on the matter.

Even as I noted the bush fires focused New South Wales roots of that heart-hardened, brain dead, morally muddled, self proclaimed Christian “knight”, I was mindful that physicists professor Brian Cox, Jim Al-Khalili and other science preaching souls might not accept that detail as evidence of a cosmic correlation between the fires and tragic mass murders perpetrated by that miscreant Australian: they might reject the poetic justice rounding or reconciliation of Australia’s immigration policy accounts that I offer in my Siddiqui-triggered-thread.

(And in noting that Australian misanthrope’s murderously muddled, tragically twisted incarnation of the notion of chivalry, I am urging persons reading this article to view president Trump’s efforts to reach out to Roman Catholic knights similarly.

More on that, and particularly on how Trump’s Catholic agenda may be being facilitated by his “rabble rousing” Roman Catholic adviser Kellyanne Conway in the next TOT article.)

I am mindful, even now, that “gay gospel” preaching Sir Elton John and his primacy of heterosexual reproduction challenging complementary Christian counterpoint, president Trump, who challenges the primacy of natural reproduction on other fronts, might not find my arguments compelling.

And I respect their right to disagree with me, even as I hope they would respect my right to disagree with them.

Unlike political gaslighting Australian prime minister Scott Morrison, who came under fire in February 2011 for spouting anti-Islamic, pyrrotechnic Pentecostal rhetoric, I try to apply the New Covenant (NC) principle of transcending religious and other ideological “denominations” or labels in all of my public interventions.

On Twitter, as in other settings, I often publish the views I hold most firmly as questions because I know only too well the paradoxical impotence and power of written words in private and public contexts — as I explain at length in my book The Bible: Beauty and Terror Reconciled.

Like Marshall McLuhan I deeply appreciate the fact that the messenger is the message.

And like Vilém Flusser I am very wary of the “textolatry” that apparently polluted the mind of the Australian who killed unarmed men, women and children at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand.

I abhor the abuse of literacy by gender, race and religious racketeers, like the English nationalist who brutally butchered Lewis’ Labor Party colleague Jo Cox MP : males and females, misogynists and misandrists who seek to etch their names on history by creating and exploiting a “hostile environment”.

I know that written words can ignite and give deadly “life” to mind darkening, gaslighting lies, whether those lies are perpetrated consciously or unconsciously.

petition I have created calling on Pope Francis to make a definitive statement on the crucial difference between the unwritten NC and the written New Testament (NT) reflects my deep appreciation of how much the confusion of the unwritten, conscience based NC with its written, linguistically limited and deep, empathetic learning limiting NT representation has blighted the evolution of Christianity for the past 1900 years, approximately.

I know how easily ALL words, but especially written words, can be twisted and manipulated to serve the short-sighted, unethical aims of conscious or unconscious gender, race and religious racketeers, plagiarists and other vampirish identity privateers and thieves.


Still, I might have used the word “gaslighting” in my January 3rd tweet thread if it was more than just a buzzword I had heard, by then.

I might have used it if it were as deeply seeded and securely seated in my heart and head as it now is.

As I recall, I first became aware of the word “gaslighting” when I heard it used in one or more news items about the toxic climate being generated by Britain’s inflammatory Brexit politics.

I therefore associated it with the fiery rhetoric and anxious atmosphere that was being generated by the hybrid, artificially inseminated or “plagiarized”, screaming baby of David Cameron, Theresa May, Boris Johnson, Jeremy Corbyn, Cherie Blair, Diane Abbott and other conscious and unconscious Cerberus (“hound of Hades”) channeling surrogates on either side of England’s core Leave/Remain EU referendum narrative.

I was not aware of the word’s rich roots in the truth twisting psychological abuse depicted in the 1938 play Gas Light by Patrick Hamilton.

I was not aware of how much the conduct of Jack Manningham, the fictional villainous husband in that play, has in common with Morrison’s and other Australian politicians’ word-based, legalistic psychological manipulations.

Indeed, Morrison only came to my attention last year when Australian media houses reported on his surprise victory in that country’s general election.

I had no idea that in 2013 when Morrison was appointed Minister for Immigration and Border Protection in then prime minister Tony Abbott’s Government he was responsible for implementing Operation Sovereign Borders — an Australian incarnation of excessively ideological, infernal ideas about our human capacity, individually or collectively, to subjugate nature to our gender, racial and religious appetites and ambitions.

I recall being naively pleased, or at least innocently intrigued, to learn that like me, Morrison can be described as a Pentecostal Christian.

It was only as research for this article led me to study him more deeply that I got a sense of how much Morrison, (like Trump, Johnson or, albeit, less likely, Barack Obama or Oprah Winfrey) could be viewed as a political incarnation of the gas light dimming, treacherous, treasure seeking marital manipulator and murderer Manningham.

Only after I learned that it was the morally muddled, Islamaphobic Christian Morrison who piloted Australia’s arrogant, anti-Christ evoking “sovereign” borders initiative did I begin to sense the extent to which his consciously or unconsciously “petty pope” or pirate “king of kings” conduct shares a bloodtype-like moral kinship with the character Manningham’s malicious manipulation of the gas lighting in the home that he shared with his wife, Bella, in foggy London.

And by January 19th I was able to discern an ethically genetic correspondence between Morrison’s political capital motivated attacks on Islam and Manningham’s dimming of the gas light, then insisting that its flame was constant, to confuse his wife and make her question the reliability of her memory and sense of perception.

It was that Sunday afternoon, if I remember correctly, that I noticed that the playwright Hamilton’s creation of the fictitious “gas light” scenario provides an excellent framework in which to discuss the mind bending, human intelligence scandalizing notion of a harmonious relationship between divine sovereignty and human responsibility for our actions — especially as this relates to our interactions with the “natural environment”.

It dawned on me that like the unconscious, subterranean hypocrisy of some deeply pious people, who have been duped, as I was, by Christendom’s almost 2000 years deep confusion of the unwritten NC and the written NT, Manningham’s lying, psychologically abusive behavior was to some degree “involuntary”.

And so too was the “insane” Morrison’s.

It occurred to me that as Hamilton’s play is constructed, the dimming of the gas light in the house that Jack and Bella Manningham share is out of his control, being — at least in the first instance — the undesired, or at least unforeseen, unplanned consequence of his nefarious gas light dimming activity in the home of an elderly female neighbor that he had killed.

By Monday, January 20th, 2020, I could see with 20/20 clarity, that like Christianity and Islam, the two homes are fundamentally connected.

And home was the central theme of Siddiqui’s thoughts, coincidentally.

And on Tuesday, January 21st, at approximately 03:21, it dawned on me, that I had been led — by God, the cosmos, the Fates; call it what you will — to see that Hamilton’s play, was first and foremost about the ecology of light and darkness in the operation of male-female interdependence.

Thanks to the light being shed by Hamilton’s approximately 82 year-old play, the significance of the fiery-tongued-Pentecostals-allied Morrison’s education in “economic geography”, his background in tourism marketing, first in New Zealand, then in Australia, and other evidentiary details supporting the prophetic analysis I am presenting here is becoming increasingly clear to me.

And in due course I will be employing that play and its literary Caribbean cognate “Wide Sargaso Sea”, a novel by Jane Rhys, to analyse other “fires” raging in the British Commonwealth.

I will only note here that similarities between the stubborn, “stoical” contempt that Conway, attorney general William Barr and other legally trained Trump officials have shown for the Hatch Act of 1939 (which states that federal government employees must not advocate their political beliefs while representing a public office) and the perverse notion of chivalry that led an Australian to perpetrate mass murderer at two mosques in New Zealand are not accidental.

That Trump praising, monstrously misguided Australian Islamaphobe’s pernicious, pyrotechnic notion of chivalry is powered by the same desensitization to the teachings of Joshua (Jesus) of Nazareth that led the first century heretic Marcion to gaslight other Christians through pilpul manipulations of written records of Joshua’s teachings.

Intriguingly, Marcion was branded a heretic by the African “Church Father” Tertullian and other leaders of first and second century Christendom who nonetheless adopted and consolidated elements of his written communication based pilpul strategy when they confused the unwritten NC phenomenon that Joshua apparently saw himself as inaugurating with the 27 documents we know as the NT.

A forerunner of the ideologically liberal, entrepreneurially pragmatic Australian-American publisher Murdoch in many respects, it was the “schismatic” Tertullian who first labelled those 27 documents (the Gospel of Matthew through to the cryptic “Book of Revelation”) the “New Testament”, as I report in my book The Bible: Beauty And Terror Reconciled.

And the monstrous, psychological warfare being waged by Murdoch and other monopolistic mass media publishers against the Duke of Sussex, Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan Markle, and against their infant son Archie, indirectly, in the name of some ill-defined, obscure notion of stoicism also springs from a place of moral confusion about the the medium of divine movement and rule in earthly affairs, clearly.

I draw readers’ attention to psychologist Bryant Welch’s claim in his 2008 book State of Confusion: Political Manipulation and the Assault on the American Mind, about the prevalence of gaslighting in American politics, beginning in the age of modern communication.

Welch wrote,

To say gaslighting was started by the Bushes, Lee Atwater, Karl Rove, Fox News, or any other extant group is not simply wrong, it also misses an important point. Gaslighting comes directly from blending modern communications, marketing, and advertising techniques with long-standing methods of propaganda. They were simply waiting to be discovered by those with sufficient ambition and psychological makeup to use them.

I am arguing for a rather more radical, historically far reaching “back cataloguing” (or “backburning”?) of what Welch might mean by “long-standing methods of propaganda”.

I am calling attention to the at least 1900 years worth of NC displacement by the NT.

I am urging readers to reflect on the build-up of biblical “branches and dead trees on the ground” that I believe has been fueling fires of one kind or another, with or without the conscious or unconscious complicity of technology disrupting, temperamental “tongues of fire” flame throwers like Trump, Murdoch (who was made a Knight Commander of the Order of Saint Gregory the Great by Pope John Paul II in January 1998, 3 months before the announcement of his separation from his second wife, Anna, a Roman Catholic, incidentally), his presidential predecessor Obama, current Australia PM Morrison or any other Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, atheist or any other hot wind wielder of earthly authority.

I am saying that the Australian bush fires should probably be examined scientifically as a metaphysical manifestation of Murdoch’s, Morrison’s, the mosque attacker’s and other Australians’ New Covenant knowledge deficient, moral anchor abandoning or abandoned burning ambitions.

Barr’s ‘banana republic’ and Israel’s wrecked rocket (Technologies of Trust #4a)

“Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who turn darkness to light and light to darkness, who replace bitter with sweet and sweet with bitter.” (Isaiah 5:20)

On April 11 I published a two-tweet thread in response to MSNBC oracle Rachel Maddow’s use of the words “absurd” and “freelancing” as she described the very questionable, seemingly unjust and unethical, president-Donald-Trump-impunity-serving behaviour of United States Attorney General William P Barr in the latter part of the above video.

In a summary beginning at 20:19, intriguingly because we’re in the “year of our Lord” 2019, Maddow uses the adjective “absurd” and the verb “freelancing” to describe what she says is the latest stratagem in the Trump administration’s “epic effort to submarine” special counsel Robert Meuller III’s report of his investigation into possible Trump administration collusion with Russia in the 2016 US presidential election and obstruction of justice since then.

Maddow says “Barr’s handling of this started off weird: it is now absurd! And, he is obviously freelancing; he is obviously making this up as he goes along.”

Tweeting directly to Maddow, I first suggested that instead of “absurd” the word “obscene” would better describe Barr’s apparent justice obstructing, ethical-legal accountability barring behaviour, which Maddow had already likened to that of Richard Nixon defenders, during the Watergate scandal.

I tweeted “Heartfelt thanks for this @maddow… But your characterization of Barr’s behaviour seems off. I wouldn’t call what you’ve described absurd: I’d call it OBSCENE.”

And declaring my own status as a “freelancer”, my second tweet takes issue with Maddow’s use of the word “freelancing” to describe what I consider Barr’s full-time, president-Trump-personal-employee-like actions.

It reads “I’m similarly concerned about your use of the word ‘freelancing’. I’m a freelancer. Barr seems to be on @POTUS’ personal payroll. #BarrBananaRepublic”

I tweeted these opinions (heresies?) because from my perspective, Maddow, whose apparently unscripted, at least partly improvisational, jazzy commentary was punctuated with incredulous sniggering and similar liminal laughing expressions, was failing to communicate the gravity and urgency of Barrr’s and the wider Trump administration’s threat to America’s democratic development.

In my opinion, she had failed to model the indignation that I believe citizens of what is reputedly the world’s leading democracy, should be feeling in response to Barr’s and other Trump supporters’ very questionable attempts to deny American taxpayers and voters direct access to Mueller’s report.

As the hashtag with my second tweet suggests, I believe that despite his best intentions, the 45th president of the US, aided and abbetted by his devout Roman Catholic attorney general Barr, his devout Roman Catholic vice president Mike Pence, his Catholic schooled counsellor Kellyanne Conway, the self-confessed Christian cynic Dr Ben Carson and others possibly harbouring antisemetic, homophobic, islamaphobic and similar prejudices, risks reducing the world’s all-time greatest secular democracy to a banana republic.

Despite referencing the Nixon administration’s tactics, Maddow’s commentary failed to convince me that she is fully alert to the urgency of the crisis confronting America’s democracy safeguarding justice system and its free press.

It may also be that because Maddow demonstrated a knowledge and understanding of what had transpired under Nixon, she may have unintentionally channelled a tone of glibness or complacency.

Could I have been put off by an unintended, perhaps subliminal suggestion in Maddow’s presentation, especially perhaps, in her body language, that we had seen it all before?

I cannot say for sure.

What I do know is that the more I have reflected on Barr’s behaviour and Maddow’s commentary, the more I have come to believe that she, and by extension MSNBC, were mischaracterizing a hugely consequential historical moment (And I will be addressing the peculiar historical-political worldview of Maddow’s boss Phil Griffin at my earliest opportunity).

I believe that like the ill-fated Israeli Beresheet spacecraft lunar mission, Maddow’s ambitious commentary had crashed and burned, on this occasion.

And the pain propelling me to share my perspective stems from my sense that Maddow and other media influencers are to some extent colluding with Barr, consciously or unconsciously, by misrepresenting the seriousness of the Trump White House threat, in much the same way that the unwritten New Covenant, a key democracy dispersing principle of Joshua (Jesus) of Nazareth’s teaching and legacy, has been distorted and submarined by successive generations of his followers since at least the AD 30s.

As I make clear in my book The Bible: Beauty And Terror Reconciled (TBBTR), the conscience based, personal responsibility focused sunsum (part of an ancient African metaphysical tradition that is similar to the Qi [pronounced “Chi”, as in “Tai Chi”] of Chinese culture) or driving force of Joshua’s life-story has been mischaracterized since approximately AD 30, the year of the first “Good Friday”.

My April 11 Twitter appeal to the “strict Catholic family raised”, gay rights activist Maddow could be viewed as an imprecise-precise passing of a burden of truth I have been bearing for at least 36 years now.

It could be considered both a cry for help and a clarion call that dates back to my 1992 poem The ‘Illiteracy’ of Christ; a poem I penned in 1992 and featured on page 21 of my first poetry collection, Standing, published by Roots Academy, (the predecessor to my current Intelek International proprietary label) in Barbados in 1994.

My poem “The ‘Illiteracy’ Of Christ”. There is also a song version of this poem, which I hope to produce for lovers of meaningful music one day.

Last month I tried to get some help bearing the weight of this burden by initiating an online conversation with Ryan Bonfiglio, an Atlanta, Georgia based American theologian.

But there seems to be a Barresque barrier obstructing Bonfiglio’s engagement with me.

Perhaps my missilic missive effort to engage with him has suffered some internal messaging malfunction and crashed and burned, like the Israeli rocket Beresheet.

I do not know.

I do know that there is an irony here though, because Bonfiglio leads the public access and engagement efforts of the Candler School of Theology, at Emory University.

And while I have no reason to cast aspersions on his, Candler Dean Jan Love’s, her personal assistant Jenka Fyfe’s or any other Emory employee’s character personally, I do wonder if some seemingly unjust and unethical, politicized gender, racial, religious or related racketeering impunity-serving individual or entity has intervened.

Sadly, more than 30 years of dealing with this kind of sabotage of my and others’ New Covenant “relationship rocket” building interference obliges me to consider this possibility.

But this kind of New Covenant communication copying and corrupting has been happening since the first century AD, as I feel certain academic theologian Bart D Ehrman, author of Misquoting Jesus, will agree.

Having said that, if as I suspect, Ehrman, has not grasped the fact that the greatest, most catastrophic misrepresentation of Joshua’s life and work consists in the confusion of the UNWRITTEN New Covenant with the WRITTEN New Testament, he might not be as pained about the damage Christianity, its Judaism antecedent and its Islamic and other book-based successors have been doing to themselves and other segments of humanity as I am.

To be continued…

Corbyn-Abbott pacts, Mair-Cox facts and Keith Vaz’s act – Mouth of the beast #8

TBBTR dedication page – a tribute to my family

“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, tank-tough-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 defered was destined to be manifested almost inevitably.”

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


Little lies and big blangs

What if every time we told a lie, we shortened our lives a bit?

Or, put positively, what if the secret to maintaining youthful health and vigour for as long as possible is the courageous, radical honesty with oneself and others that keeps one’s conscience clear?

I believe that the secret to my own relatively youthful appearance is precisely such primarily self-facing, complementarily other-embracing, courageous honesty and a healthy conscience.

I believe the pursuit of such honesty and consequent clear conscience, or as Barbadian historian Trevor Marshall might call it, “pursuit of the quintessence of spirituality”, has distinct, scientifically measurable, mathematically verifiable psychosomatic health benefits.

Marshall is one of two prominent Barbadians who wrote a Foreword to my book The Bible: Beauty and Terror Reconciled, my most simultaneously sweeping or panoramic and deeply probing prose study of the human psyche to-date.

The other foreword writer, Reverend Andrew Hatch, a high-ranking Anglican priest and broadcast media personality is now deceased.

I am indebted to those and other men, as I am to Esther Phillips, Viola Davis, Margaret Gill, Eudene Barriteau and other Barbadian women, for lessons in life that exceed the capacity of any secular or religious creed or teaching.

But their lives, their truth and ‘lies’, darkness and light are not “the history that touches and teaches me most”, as I write in the poetic tribute on TBBTR’s dedication page.

That role was and is still held by my father Geoffrey, my mother Lucille, my twin brother Wayne and sisters Cheryl, Yvette, Suzan and Ava: the members of the nuclear family into which I was born and which shaped my innermost infant and early childhood identity.

And the genetic and environmental deposits that I received through interaction with these first closest, earliest character forming relatives, continued to bear interest throughout my adolescent years, even after I was “born again”, as the saying goes, in usually keenly stressed, Bible-based evangelical Christian terminology.

The vigorous, jet stream adjustments and justifications of their love and understanding, or misunderstanding, as the case sometimes is in all familial eco systems, not only shaped my basic understanding of ‘right and wrong’ but carved the crucially character-shaping biological contours of my sexual self understanding simultaneously.

Those early, distinctly domestic interactions shaped my deeply ingrained, affective orientation toward heterosexual relations, marriage and fatherhood, co-productive journeys I looked forward to as a young adult with an enthusiasm that is in some ways baffling to me today.

That home-based history imparted a self image and understanding, or operational conscience, that continues to regulate my amorous appetites and wider social ambitions, moulding my moral compass and enabling me to navigate not only Barbados’ but Britain’s and the world’s fraught, perenially frothing ethical waterways with Sidney Poitier-like composure, and dignity.

It has catalysed a “personal truth to social power” principle of self-other communication that I believe is essentially what the biblical author of 1Timothy 1:19 is pointing to when he advises his intended audience, preseumed in the first instance to be a youthful apostolic apprentice named Timothy to “Cling to your faith in Christ, and keep your conscience clear,” as the New Living Translation puts it, providentially.

The providence I am referring to here has to do with the NLT translators’ choosing of the verb ‘cling.’

As I read this word for the umpteenth time today (Friday, November 4, 2016), it gently rang with revelatory relevance and resonance as it had been echoed in the surname of African American author, activist and educator James Clingman.

Clingman had come to my attention for the first time only minutes before, at approximately 7:00 am, as I read his latest article, published on his own Blackonomics blog ( and the website co-productively.

That article, entitled “What you need to know about the NAACP’s war on charter schools” confirms the perennial crisis of conscience in the global labour movement that has currently come to the fore most spectacularly in the ongoing atomization or disintegration of the British Labour Party.



This workers’ ‘lights and rights’ crisis is a tributary of the core, family-focused gender dynamic that I have been tracking in these articles using tropical storm imagery.

It sprouts from the seed of male-female identity and role confusion that has been humanity’s lot from time immemorial.

In the previous article I focused on the stormy relationship between Tony Blair and John Prescott.

Here it is the arguably steamy, ferociously fecund, passionately political pact between one-time lovers Jeremy Corbyn and Diane Abbott that concerns me primarily.

I explore that race, gender and ideology transcending pact, which I have dubbed Corbott (like Brangelina, for Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie) as a trans-generational trade unionism contrived, capitalism co-opting, democracy disembowelling gambit that may well come to be viewed as a catalyst of the Thomas Mair-Jo Cox or Maox murder-suicide tragedy.


Corbott - the machinations of Jeremy Corbyn and Diane Abbott
Corbott – the machinations of Jeremy Corbyn and Diane Abbott


And I use the term ‘suicide’ here poetically, pointing to the environmentally sensitive, husbandman Mair’s self-destructive, Mitt Romney-like Talibank thinking: the fatal flip-flopping of those who take what they read about ‘communism’, ‘capitalism’, ‘feminism’, ‘atheism’, ‘Christianity’, ‘Islam’, ‘Hinduism’, ‘Buddhism’ and other secular and religious thought systems or ideologies too literally.

And news reports about the murderer Mair have made it clear that he read voraciously.

But are British educators, legislators, publishers and others who trade in intellectual property ever likely to take this hazard of reading seriously?

Nothing I have seeen so far in the UK, including during the ongoing British Broadcasting Corporation’s ‘Love To Read’ campaign or a recently concluded study of reading as a form of rest (R.I.P?) suggests that the lethalness of the letter is being internalized and bearing fruit anywhere as urgently as it needs to be.

Yet it is clear to me that the capacity of reading to foster simplistic, divisive analysis is costing Western society phenomenally.

For example, the same conscience eroding, opportunistic, selective superficial uniformity enforcing literalism conceals the catastrophic co-dependence of Hilary Clinton and Donald Trump, or Clump, as I call these long-time, ambition conjoined twin-like personalities.

I do believe that Clinton and Trump are united, or unionised, at a profound, perversely productive level as surely as some of my Unite the Union colleagues and the Tories they denounce, by their respective childhood tragedies.

Has either Clinton or Trump really come to terms with their parents’ follies?

Has Hillary fully forgiven her father?

Has ‘the Donald’ been radically reconciled to his mummy’s reality?

Trump’s apparent contempt for women and Clinton’s much commented on impassivity suggest otherwise.

Americans voting today may therefore legitimately ask what Bettina Aptheker recalling, long-suppressed, unresolved familial conflicts might explain the eventual winner of the US presidential election’s domestic and foreign policies.

As I indicated to those who attended the inaugural Walk On Water talk, at the United Reformed Church on Princes Street in Norwich, here in Norfolk, on October 30, I view hurricane Clump as a contemporary consumation and manifestation of the age old battle of the sexes.

In a ‘deliberately’ tangential, thought trek through Martin Luther King Jr’s paternal inheritances, sexual interests and political legacies, I told tango teacher Laura Campeo and other creative Intelek associates of Clump’s incarnation of anxieties and antagonisms around male-female copulation and co-production that date back at least to Valentinus’ (c. 100 – c. 160 AD) and other first century Christian gnostics’ cosmic theories.


Walk On Water flyer
Walk On Water flyer


These are the same tensions that the trade unionism breathing Lord Prescott admits in his 2009 biography Docks To Downing Street.

And one of my main tasks here is to show how marriage and parenting fare as poorly under atheistic fundamentalist labour influences as they do under the context ignoring, conscience corroding influence of fundamentalist Christianity, Hinduism, Islam and other religious and secular thought systems.

Clingman’s article is crucial in this respect.

The highly esteemed educator writes “The call for a moratorium on charter schools by the NAACP is a case of ‘Throwing the baby out with the bath water.'”

Implying a degree of subversive strategizing Clingman continues “While most Black folks are concentrating on Hillary and Donald, the largest and oldest ‘Colored’ organization approved an internal resolution calling for a halt to the ‘expansion of charter schools’ until those schools meet criteria set forth by the NAACP.”

“The NAACP lacks the power to enforce its resolution, but their call for this draconian measure does come with the familiar stench of other positions they have takenand not takenbecause of political and, of course, economic reasons, the latter of which seems to be the driving force behind this latest move,” he continues.


Clump - the machinations of Hilliary Clinton and Donald Trump
Clump – the machinations of Hilliary Clinton and Donald Trump

And in a reference that brought to mind the blanging (blagging and banging) National Union of Teachers and that “certain, ‘too polite’ Norwich-based, lifelong Labor Party supporter working in the education field” mentioned in the quotation at the start of this article, Clingman quotes Dr. Steve Perry, a prominent American educator who has operated charter schools for years and who had this to say: ‘The NAACP national headquarters has received a significant amount of money from the teachers’ union. The only organizations to call for a moratorium on charter schools in particular, because they are non-union, are the teachers’ unions.’

That was conclusive proof for me that I had been led to Clingman’s article by divine providence.

The potential interpretaion of the Christian Clingman’s surname as a variant of the word “husband”, a man who clings or cleaves to his wife, as the Bible instructs, is just a collateral blessing, from that standpoint.


Life and death on the frontlines of gender struggle

Through an email notification I received on November 3, I am aware that Time Magazine has taken up the gender gyrations theme, in an article entitled ‘How the 2016 election became a battle of the sexes’.

Having read my Fundamentalist Feminism article, England-based men’s advocate Dave Pickering might understand why from my labels-penetrating linguist’s perspective, all conflicts can be viewed as off-shoots of the big bang, and subsequent clinging and clanging that is rooted in what I call fight-like-fraught, male-female complementarity or interdependence.

University of East Anglia students Juliet Donaghy and Francesca Gilbert, ‘feminist’ and ‘womanist’ activists respectively, might also appreciate why I and other heterosexual males continue to reel from the electric shock of Western media Jihadi Joans’ conscious or unconscious, Keith Vaz-like, dark, down-low homosexual hostility.

Clive Lewis, my local MP and other directly or indirectly aggressive, conscious or unconscious allies of professor Sir Hilary Beckles, his ‘understudies’ David Comissiong and Dr Aaron Kamuguishe, Barbados Labour Party leader Mia Mottley, poets Gill and Phillips (mentioned above) and other Barbadian academic, trade union and political elites might understand why I continue to protest and appeal, unapologetically, for a global gender war armistice.

I certainly hope that these and other current opposers but potential allies in my long-running campaign to expose global capital’s and labour’s flags of convenience are more open to collaborative, inclusive interpretations of contemporary gender conflicts than the ‘missing-in-action’ Martin Tod, CEO of the UK-based Men’s Health Forum and the possibly too-battle-hardened soldier Sean Jones, of the Princess of Wales’ Royal Regiment seem to be.

After supposedly reading my FF article, Tod, a Liberal Democrat councilor for Hampshire apparently has difficulty seeing how his and my understanding of feminism are compatible.

Tod says that’s why he won’t sign a petition I have created calling on the British Parliament to have possible correlations between fundamentalist feminism and increasing rates of suicide among men investigated scientifically.

He has refused to make a pact with me and others committed to explore that possibly fatal, Corbott exploiting, Maox murderously marrying, negative male-female synergy.


Twitter conversation with Jihadi Jones
My Twitter conversation with Jihadi Jones



And Jones, who like ex-soldier and current MP Johnny Mercer is a possible unintentional defender or ‘rationalizer’ of rogue soldier threats to UK civilians’ safety, seems to think that my emphasis on spiritual discipline is incompatible with the doctrine of mental toughness that the Armored Tigers with which he is associated teach.

Like Abbott and Militant or Momentum operatives, surging to support Corbyn with potentially admirable but also alarming militaristic “Labour discipline”, the apparent Tory soldier Jones inserted himself into a Twitter conversation I had initiated with Mercer, after I had discovered a Tweet by the Plymouth Moor View MP denouncing the Iraq Historical Allegations Team (IHAT) as a witch hunt.


Concerned that Mercer might not be aware of the full implications of his denunciation I tweeted “Hi @JohnnyMercerMP. Are u not worried #RogueSoldiers may see yr views as licence to abuse UK civilians? #Impunity.”

Mercer, who apparently subscribes to a deeply problematic doctrine of military “exceptionalism” and has been featured on BBC Radio Four arguing that human rights law should not be applied on the battlefield responded “No. absolutely not.”

That is the only response I have had from him so far.

But as my question to Mercer was re-tweeted and he retreated, infantryman Jones took up the charge, tweeting “@Poeticjazztice @JohnnyMercerMP @TelegraphNews I think the question to u should be why do you think that we would abuse anyone? #getoutmore.”


I responded “Why? Because you’re fallible human beings and with the best intentions, mistakes happen.”

Jones apparently accepted this explanation but also sought, consciously or unconsciously, to minimise the scale and intensity of the consequences arising from armed forces personnel fallibility, saying that he “can only think of a few individuals who have been convicted of wrong doings”.

And apparently committed to the problematic, American military and politics recalling idea of “exceptionalism” that Mercer and others (including former British Army commander in Afghanistan Colonel Richard Kemp) embrace, Jones eventually started making what I believe is an unhealthy ideologically inflexible, literalistic, Corbottic coroded-conscience distinction between British civilians’ and soldiers’ fallibility and suffering.

For example, after I went to some length to explain that life is a battle for all of us, Jihadi Jones tweeted, “i see what your saying but I know people that fight life battles daily the average joe doesn’t have much to complain about”.

He would eventually go on to imply contempt for the suffering of Kate Goldsmith who lost her daughter Aimee and three other relatives who were killed in the notorious Tomas Krozer, mobile-phone-minding-lorry-driver tragedy that was receiving prominent news coverage at the time of our twitter exchange.

When Jones continued to show signs of sociopathic Corbottic, ideologically fixated desensitization and evasion, after I shared a video of Ms Goldsmith speaking after her daughter’s killer Krozer was sentenced, I suspended communication with him indefinitely.

Yet I have considerable sympathy for rogue soldiers defending Jihadi Jones.

From my perspective, he should not be made to bear sole responsibility for getting caught in the cross-fire of the deeply entrenched, historically bequeathed indiscipline and excessive self-indulgence of British religious and secular ideologues, brain-hardened, conscience calloused careerists who like Corbot (and Mercer, possibly?) play divisive gender, race and religious racketeering games in pursuit of short-sighted personal and political victories.

Indeed, if we take former soldier, Conservative politician Ian Duncan Smith’s shockingly candid comments about the use of secretive, subversive psych op tactics (at 16:06 on the linked recording) by himself and other pro-Brexit campaigners in the EU Referendum debate seriously, we might conclude that infantryman Jone’s defence of Mercer’s reckless, rogue-soldier-sense-of-impunity risking denunciation of IHAT as a witchhunt is evidence of psychological warfare fatigue.

That is, we might conclude that Jones’ deeply insensitive and disrespectful dismissal of the battles that the bereaved parents Doug Houghton and Goldsmith face on the frontlines of unrelenting human conflict and tragedy is evidence that he is a victim of subversive psych op brainwashing and deceit.

We might conclude that Jones and indeed all UK residents, civilian, military and paramilitary, have become so desensitized to matters of life and death, through the psych ops of manipulative, monopolized media-political campaigns primarily, that like Corbott and Clump, we have lost our capacity to humanely engage with and process the murder of the Parliamentary “infant” Cox and other events in the unrelenting saga of human misery.

To be continued….




Little thought of Barbados PM Freundel Stuarts’ ‘Big ideas’ – #Barbados50 – part 1

“He spoke from his heart…We were just discussing what a great speech it was.”

This is how the speech delivered by Barbados Prime Minister Freundel Stuart during the launch of celebrations to mark the country’s 50th anniversary of independence was described by Sandra Hinds, a member of his secretarial team.

I called the prime minister’s office on Thursday evening to request a copy of the speech as I prepared to respond to claims he made about the impartiality of Barbados’ judicial system and the soundness and sustainability of its democracy.

Needless to say, based on my own and others’ observation of the impunity that some Barbadians like Donville Inniss enjoy, I am not sure about the authenticity of Mr Stuart’s statements.

Donville Inniss of the "BBC"
Donville Inniss of the “BBC”

I imagine that many Barbadians who have seen how partial or paralytic our court system can be in its dealings with, for example, the CLICO monetary ‘abuses’ of Stuart’s predecessor the late PM David Thompson, would want to challenge those and other claims made by Stuart and echoed by most who spoke during that launch ceremony.

Sadly, Stuart and many other Barbadians seem to have difficulty facing their own and others failings.

They tend to excel in superficial, simplistic analysis of those failings or ‘sins’ and the long and short-term impacts they have had and can yet have on Barbados’ development.

Hence, the rather disappointing suggestion by PM Stuart that some people are demanding perfection of Barbadians while being poor models of perfection themselves.

Could he have framed that argument in more clichéd, thought-tiny language?

Prime Minister Stuart delivers his speech.
Screenshot of Prime Minister Stuart delivering  his speech.

Could he not have come up with a more original and rigorous way of expressing that idea: a more robust scale or framework by which to assess and measure the expectations and standards by which Barbadians analyze our country’s progress since the relative independence achieved in 1966?

What is ‘great’, to quote Ms Hinds, about that defence by Stuart of Barbadians failings?

It doesn’t suggest a very deep reach into his heart by the PM.

It doesn’t suggest, for example, that Mr Stuart is familiar with the idea that “perfection” is more of a process than a point of personal or national development.

Might not Barbados’ High Commissioner to the UK, Reverend Guy Hewitt, or some other prominent Barbadian cleric have informed the PM that in the well known passage of scripture “Be ye perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect” (Matthew 5:48) the Greek terms behind the English translation invoke pursuit of a goal, rather than its attainment?

Might not regional Anglican potentate Dr John Holder, himself a Barbadian, have previously informed PM Stuart of this more historically informed and accurate mode of biblical interpretation?

Or should we conclude that while Mr Stuart is a Queens Counsel (or QC, like Cherie Blair and therefore presumably a legal practitioner of some standing) he has never been exposed to that level of religious or spiritual teaching?

More worryingly still, might it be the case that having been exposed to such teaching PM Stuart has not retained the basics?

Might the soil of his heart have proven so shallow, hard or barren as to have squandered or rejected such small beginning, mustard seed sized educational investments?

Our Prime Minister is clearly familiar with the idea of receiving, retaining and rejecting biblical education approximating banking lessons.

Unless I am mistaken, he advised Barbadians to employ a three-fold framework of receiving, retaining and rejecting aspects of our national heritage as we contemplate our island state’s future prospects.

This clearly more studied, possibly pre-rehearsed proposal is something of an improvement over the simplistic “imperfect people asking us to be perfect” comment that preceded it.

But Stuart’s apparently glib, greasy and slippery grasp of what it means to pursue perfection does not inspire confidence in his ability to lead Barbadians in a truly rigorous, robust process of measuring moral development or progress.

On the contrary, what it suggests is a degree of moral myopia and bankruptcy.

It indicates ethical erosion and anchorless historical drifting.

It evokes the dripping or spitting of essentially empty words from the mouth of one who, in ethical terms, is only superficially educated.

From my perspective, it puts PM Stuart’s speech, and the political mouthing of Opposition leader Mia Mottley and many of their DLP and BLP associates (including persons like University of the West Indies Vice Chancellor professor Sir Hilary Beckles, prominent poet Margaret Gill, politician David Comissiong, educator Esther Phillips, journalist David Ellis, Rev Sonia Hinds and others with whom I have had significant interactions, in a rather lamentable regional and international context.

Essentially, it lumps their words with Hilary Clinton’s extraordinary 2008 fantasist account of landing in Bosnia under sniper fire in 1995.

That military incident appears to have happened only in Ms Clinton’s head.

And few would vouch that as she uttered or berthed that item of artificial intelligence she spoke from her heart of hearts, her deepest, most holistically self-understood self in that instant.

Stuart’s and other Barbadians apparent failure to understand that being perfect is at least as much about a course of travel as arrival at any destination lumps their and narrowly nationalistic, critical analysis dismissing defense of Barbados’ shortcomings with the mainstream media-puffed, much over-rated speech delivered last year by British Labour Party power-broker Hilary Benn in the English Parliament in defense of David Cameron’s proposal to intervene in Syria to bomb ISIS.

He may have been generously applauded by Tory, Labour, Liberal Democrat, UKIP and other Parliamentarians, but I can’t conceive of his father, anti-war icon Tony Benn being particularly proud of him in that moment.

At a substratal linguistic, and especially pragmatic and semantic level, Stuart’s speech recalls the African supremacist pro-reparations (for trans-Atlantic slavery) money mongering arguments of the UWI Vice Chancellor Beckles, delivered at the United Nations New York headquarters, Chicago University and other unfortunate openings in recent times.

And the term ‘abomination of desolation’ comes to mind here, as the killing of Jamaican Khalil Campbell by Beckles’ son Rodney in 2007 is whispered in my conscience.

Sadly, such deeply deplorable, even sacrilegious abuses of public spaces by profane speech acts seem to have become all the rage since 9/11.

Among these metaphorical, ISIS approximating ‘public beheadings’ and other short-sighted, opportunistic obscenities, the crowning of Trinidad born and initially bred, Oxbridge and wider British elitism prejudice fed writer VS Naipaul with the Nobel Prize for literature in 2002 stands out poignantly.

Has human intelligence, measured in terms of morality, spirituality, scientific inquiry or any other rubric ever been more profanely prostituted than when it was associated with the dark, devious machinations that were conceived in Mr Naipaul’s head?

I do not wish to be unkind to the aged Mr Naipaul, Prime Minister Stuart or anyone else with whom I have taken issue in this essay on the measurement of human progress or perfection.

I’m simply saying that if Barbadians are to stand any chance of ever achieving the kind of global leadership that Mr Stuart and others may rightly desire for us, they and we will have to give up the cognitive and affective industry avoiding laziness that inclines us to complacently and glibly ‘measure ourselves by ourselves’, to paraphrase the apostle Paul (2 Corinthians 10:12).

Such simplistic, Adolf Hitler and Forbes Burnham recalling notions of independence and integrity lump Barbadians with the demagogue Donald Trump, the Talibank thinkers Mitt Romney and Luis Farrakhan, and a range of other Jamaican, Trinidadian, Guyanese, British, American, Canadian, Indian, Nigerian, Malaysian and other morally bankrupt political opportunists.