Sad State of Islamic Affairs

So World War III has begun it seems!  Although nice to see old enemies rallying together for the ‘common good’ it appears that this unusual set of bedfellows, now known as the ‘Allies’, are indeed a rather bastardised bunch of misfits.   The United States seems to me to have opened another can of worms that we’re all going to struggle to control in time to come.  In fact, that statement in itself may be extremely optimistic.  Have we not learned from the history of backing the wrong teams?  Well of course not. 

It wasn’t too long ago that the US endorsed and colluded with the corrupt and dictatorial  Shah Pahlavi of Iran (also our friend in Apartheid SA), in their financing and arming of Kurdish rebels in the Second Kurdish–Iraqi War  in the early ‘70’s.  That was until the Iranian people had had enough and opted for a radical about turn to orthodox fundamentalism through the Islamic Revolution and unceremoniously tossed the Shah and his family out of Iran.  We had already set up Marino Chiavelli’s mansion, Summer Place, in Sandton, for the Shah and his family to reside until he succumbed to cancer in the US whilst still in exile.  Within a few years, Iran had turned back decades of reform.  

Then the US and the French in particular, supported French Prime Minister Jacques Chirac’s close friend, Saddam Hussein, in his ambitions to topple the Iranian Islamic government. With the support of the Arab states, the United States and Europe, along with significant financial aid from the Persian Gulf states, Saddam Hussein became "the defender of the Arab world" against a revolutionary Iran.  It is often conveniently forgotten too that Saddam initiated Iraq's nuclear enrichment project in the 1980s, with French assistance.  That was until the Israeli’s got jittery and decided to destroy the enrichment facility as early as 1981 with a few air to ground missiles.  

The Israelis didn’t buy the ‘allied strategy’ from the start.  Despite this, the US, UK, France and other allies viewed Iraq as "an agent of the civilized world".  The fact that Iraq had tossed international law out of the window and increased violations of international borders; this too was simply ignored by the West.  Instead, Iraq received economic and military support from its ‘then’ allies, who conveniently overlooked Saddam's use of chemical warfare against the Kurds and the Iranians whilst he frustrated Iran's efforts to develop nuclear weapons.  These chemicals incidentally, having been developed from materials and technology supplied primarily by West German companies (just when you thought they’d been destroyed and dismantled after WWII), as well as the Reagan administration.  At the same time, the US also supplied Iraq with satellite imagery showing Iranian deployments, and encouraged Hussein to bomb civilian targets in Tehran and other Iranian cities.  In order to open full diplomatic relations with Iraq, the US removed the country from their little black book list of State Sponsors of Terrorism.  Ironically, they were allegedly developing their own nuclear stash, which turned out to be an embarrassing, bogus ‘mistake’ in the more recent ‘war on weapons of mass destruction’. 

Next there was Osama Bin Laden, who was quietly supported by the US in his war against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan.  It was believed that he and his al-Qaeda managed to "bring down the mighty superpower" of the Soviet Union in the late ‘80’s just prior to Perestroika.  I know differently.  And so it goes.

So now, in the apparent tunnel vision strategy to wipe out the Islamic State ‘ISIS or ISIL’ or however the CIA decides to spell it this week, we now have the US rallying old Middle Eastern enemies like a flock of tame sheep.  According to President Barack Obama and the Pentagon, only five countries; Bahrain, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, have joined the United States in this week's air-strikes in Syria.  Not surprisingly, that’s not the whole story, as US enemy, Syrian President Bashar Assad, is now a useful mate in-arms (or blind eye).  Although the US can't admit to working with him, because he's the dictator the US supported Syrian rebels are trying to overthrow, the US managed to hit at least 50 targets in three parts of his country, whilst Assad’s substantial and very capable air defenses stayed parked in their bunkers, with not even a radar being deployed against the noisy foreign incursion.  That’s perhaps a little too remarkable wouldn't you say?

Meantime the US also denies coordinating with Assad's ally, Iran. “Iran and the US!” I hear you scream.  Not only that, but all the Gulf states and Sunni tribes are now friends, despite John Kerry’s woeful attempts to say otherwise.  Surely only CNN believe him when he moves his lips.

Despite my relatively short stint in SA Naval Intelligence and regular interactions with NATO Intelligence in the mid ‘80’s, (mainly the CIA, MI3, MI5, MI6 and Israeli Intelligence), I find this strategic approach rather short sighted to say the least.  Surely the Americans and the European allies can see through the desire of some to be armed and supported in the short-term, in order to wreak havoc in the region in the longer-term?  The allies have been guilty of short-term strategic intent far too many times in the past, leaving mayhem and destruction in their wake (I can testify to that from ‘not so wonderful’ personal experience).  More often than not, ‘worse a devil you don’t know than the devil you do’, if one can bastardise the phrase.  

One cannot but abhor what is known as the Islamic State and their ridiculous fundamentalist agenda, in fact I don’t believe it is Islamic at all, and definitely needs to be brought under control very quickly.  Yet I cannot but foresee a melting pot of disaster in the Middle East in the years to come, not to mention the bombing of soft targets within each allied country becoming the norm.  This is no ordinary war and the repercussions are dire.  As I've said so often before, religious fundamentalists (Christian, Jewish, Muslim or other), are impossible to reason with, and yet not easy to identify from within.  It is just too easy for Islamic State militants and just ordinary, disenfranchised Muslim fundamentalists in the West, to pop up all over the world with the desire to seek revenge for whatever ails them.

What is needed here is a removal of the cause, and not the symptoms.

Is the Oscar Case Really an Abusive Wake-up Call?

Over the past few days I have been inundated with emails, Facebook messages, electronic news and good old fashioned newspaper articles lambasting the judgement by Judge Masipa in the Oscar Pistorius case.  What has intrigued me is that most of these have tended to focus on the apparent abuse of Reeva and the plight of abused women in general. Even the ANC Women's League ranted outside the court and took issue with the learned judge after the judgement was announced. She was after all a woman, and women should stick together, sisters! 

Don't get me wrong here, I absolutely abhor abuse of any sort, particularly that of women and children. However, is this case really the right case to attach such sentiment to, or merely an opportunistic window used to get exposure no matter the association, proof or lack thereof?

I have said before on a few occasions however, that I find it rather cheap journalism to have to turn this into a sexist or racist case.  Moreover, there are many ill-informed South Africans who are rubbishing their country and the legal system due to pure ignorance of the law. 

I most certainly don't agree with their sentiment, because it surely applies equally to women who murder their husbands and their children as much as it applies to men who murder other men, white or black. The point of law is not to be presumptuous or swayed by people with personal gripes or media hype, but to consider all the evidence and facts of the case very carefully. In this case there was never going to be clear cut evidence, as the only other witness is dead. Advocate Gerrie Nel did his best to throw insinuations and possible scenarios at the court, but that’s all it was.  There was no factual evidence to back it up.  There is a chance that Oscar’s explanation is true, although very unlikely, there is still a chance. Hence, where there is 'reasonable doubt' there cannot be a guilty verdict and that goes for presumptuous opinions about their allegedly abusive relationship too.

To give you an example. Years ago, whilst playing mixed doubles tennis with my cousin’s wife as my partner against my then girlfriend and cousin, I hit the ball, which hit the top of the net and shot up into my rather competitive girlfriend’s eye.  She was playing up at the net at time.  Needless to say, she ended up with a beaut black eye for the rest of the holiday.  What was interesting, and rather disturbing however, was the fact that when asked (and very few people did ask her directly, incidentally), she told them that I had given her a smack, thinking it rather amusing.  Needless to say, I am still convinced that those who didn’t get her Aussie sense of humour, may still believe that to be the case to this day.  After all, people love a scandalous story, especially when it’s least expected.  At least I hope it was least expected!

We must remember that many people were hung from the gallows in the past and later found to be innocent, hence the updating of the law to protect those innocent until proven guilty. Reasonable doubt is the saving grace.

There is no doubt that many people would have loved to have seen Oscar found guilty of first degree murder, merely because he came across as a bit of a bastard, not only to Reeva, but to others around him at times.  That does seem to be a little extreme it must be said. But it certainly doesn't make of him a murderer, nor a woman abuser necessarily. Sadly as with most things in life, perception becomes the onlooker's reality and therefore any conviction to the contrary is likely to spark discontent amongst the masses. People love to see justice done, even if it is unjust.

As much as it is always a possibility, I'm not sure about the 'clear' conclusion regarding 'violence against women' in this case however. Take the case of the woman in Jo'burg who arranged to have her husband killed by supposed house robbers when he went to check why the lights had tripped. Or the woman who arranged to have her judge husband murdered in Sea Point recently, etc. Is that something that indicates violence against men? I think not. It's murder, that's for sure.  Similarly I'm not certain that one can conclusively presume abuse against Reeva. Murder possibly, manslaughter, without doubt, as he admitted to that. Oscar may have some serious issues, that's for sure, but judging by the witness reports it appears he has issues from both a men's and women's perspective. 

I understand the plight of abuse against women who are not able to be independent, self-supporting, or have themselves had an abusive upbringing.  But surely Reeva must have been equally stupid to have stayed with Oscar, if what they say is true. After all, she was pretty, smart, financially self-sufficient and apparently very well liked. Why many women do this to themselves and blame men alone I have never been able to understand.  Surely women must learn to take some responsibility themselves for staying with abusive men, whether the abuse is induced physically or emotionally. I am sorry if I don't sound very sympathetic, as I regard myself, perhaps mistakenly, as a fairly considerate and open minded bloke who loves women dearly. However, I find behaviour such as this extremely hard to understand from both sides.  Perhaps society needs to rethink their approach to matters of abuse.  After all it is the mothers and fathers of sons and daughters who are clearly jointly responsible for getting the message through without any ambiguity.  Where that system fails we need it to be part of school curriculum, as sex education is already, and prevent this scourge from passing through to yet another generation.

Hot Yoga is no Yoking Matter

Having been a sceptic of most things 'woo-woo' as I term them, until proven otherwise, I have always pigeon-holed yoga into the same sad genre as veganism, tattoos and blond braids. One could perhaps add to the list; the likes of bitter herbal flu drops from health shops, having one's own chickens on one's small holding in Noordhoek to control snails but not for eating, and the very same tiny white pills homoeopaths prescribe for popping under one's tongue to remedy every ill.  Only just last week our vet gave me the very same little white pills for our West Highland Terrier’s eczema!  So you see what I mean? However on the yoga front, and only yoga from the list above (I must insist), I have been forced to eat some humble pie of late. I'm not sure where 'humble pie' fits into the Banting diet if at all, but I have to admit I haven’t really been following that for some time. I just enjoy pasta far too much to be menu swapping partners with Prof. Tim Noakes, as nice and convincing a bloke as he is.

There’s no doubt that yoga lacks the ability to substitute the aerobic exercise I'm used to, but I have come to realize the fact that there is something rather satisfyingly exhilarating and logically soothing about this weird slow motion practice of many prayer inspired poses. Thanks to the nagging encouragement of one of my fittest swimming mates, the kind who swim to and from Robben Island in 6°C water, and her tirelessly supportive husband, I have just completed my first week of 'Hot Yoga'.  Despite only having been exposed to the apparent entry level bikram yoga, whereas I understand that yo bikram, ashtanga and vinyasa flow yoga await my curiosity, I have started to realise that toning and stretching without the jarring from impact will not only raise one's heart rate significantly, but make one feel extraordinarily good about oneself.  I have been well advised that I remain on the basic level class until I can satisfactorily wrap my arms and legs into reef knots, legs and arms outstretched fore and aft, whilst remaining calm and perfectly upright on a pointed rock beside the ocean’s lapping waves.  I now accept that advice most gladly.

Ok, so there is the added motivation that being one of the only males in the room does have its advantages. Being new to it all, one is often forced to examine one's posture by inspecting the superbly firm, curvy buttocks bent over or legs spread-eagled in front of one, or to the left or right. As perverted or invasive as that may sound to some, there really is no time to dilly-dally as serious concentration is required at 40℃ and balance and correct posture are key, but the vision isn't something to be scoffed at that's for sure. 

The 'woo-woo' lingo in hushed chalky tones I do however find somewhat superfluous, as I have no idea what on earth the instructor is referring to most of the time anyway. Why plain English isn't an option I have no idea?  Hence the need for regular, well meaning ‘butt glances', for me at least, in order to be guided into correctly striking my next pose.  To support my point, on completion of my first hour-long session, the instructress recommended we lie back on our mats “to absorb the energy – woo-woo” or some such; heels together, arms by our sides, palms up and eyes closed. As she left the room, she quietly said what I thought was 'you-mus-stay', which everyone else repeated for some bizarre reason. So I stayed, deciding not to look around for any reaffirmation, so as to appear a little less distracted. Only when the cleaning lady, armed with a bucket and mop, entered into the room some 20 minutes later did I wake up, and seeing no-one else about came to the conclusion that I may have misunderstood the jargon, just a little. Yet after a quiet, embarrassed chuckle to myself as I sheepishly collected my mat and towels, I tried slipping out of the room without being noticed, only to be met with calm, loving greetings by the smiling staff sitting in the reception lounge.  Despite feeling a touch embarrassed, I left feeling rather good about it all and even glowing somewhat.

Having now signed up for longer-term membership, I’ve now become rather confident about it all, and with a break in meetings, popped through to today’s 13h00 yoga class, mistakenly thinking it was Wednesday, as opposed to Thursday.  Clearly the ‘woo-woo’ is affecting my judgment. As a result I ended up in entirely the wrong class only realising it once it had begun.  The Super-Advanced ‘Ashtanga’ Class as it happens, where one is expected to tie oneself up into ever demolishing circles and make extraordinary movements (and noises) until one finally pops one’s head up one’s own fundamental orifice, levitating above the mat whilst quietly whimpering ‘Oooh, but it’s dark up here!’..  A mistake I'm not likely to repeat in a hurry, although I was rather proud at having been able to do most of the poses, bar the above, which in itself isn't that distressing.  Despite her valiant efforts, I did manage to make my rather serious instructress giggle quietly to herself on a few occasions as she tried hard not to kill herself laughing.  But I shall be back, with vigour, only to the correct class next time.

So, I'm a new convert to Hot Yoga, that’s true, however if you catch me starting to think about lentils, brussel sprouts, tofu and mineral water for lunch afterwards, please put me down.