Force Majeure - Act or Will of God

This story has surfaced this week in Christian doctrine. People must reflect that Christianity as all religions - and there are many - are faith upon belief in something which may or may not be a truism.

We have all heard of the term "Force Majeure" - act or will of God and we use it when there is a catastrophe that cannot be explained logically or by reason.

My view of people who are gay/lesbian is that they are loved by their mothers always and also by their fathers. It is a societal construct that causes them to be seen as in some way afflicted.

However, on the issue of afflication - so are all disabled people - are they also Force Majeure. If there is a common denominator here, then gay/lesbian should come within the boundaries of "disabled people" who are not subjected to societal constructs to the same degree of what I would call "nonsense".

Be this religious or political it is not acceptable that a Church of Christianity would abuse human rights and "Freedom of Expression" especially and place a ban on their own congregation.

In fact I can see where this could go ... to the courts via litigation and as the Queen is head of the Church of Scotland, a call would be made on her "Divine Rights" ...

The Scotsman 26/05/09 Article by Craig Brown

Perhaps it is just as simple as some people are to chose not to reproduce (why does that make them less of a Christian in "belief" or "faith") - the act or will of God "hypothetically" can cause people not to procreate as it can to procreate - the Theologians can have the debate ... I doubt that the act or will of God was to create an "injustice" which in this case falls on both sides of the debate - the Church congregation and the Gay Minister by gagging freedom of speech. What is important is that if gay/lesbian is seen as a disability then they can be socially inclusive in societal construct and act in accordance with whatsoever nature intended - it does not mean they are not inherently good people if they choose to be so.

Statistically, please note : 1 in 4 experience mental health disability in Scotland, and 2 in 5 of all categories of disabled people do not have knowledge of how to use the internet or even a computer in the UK (Office of Disability Issues - recent report out) as well as issues of open stigma and discrimination - if you would not exclude disabled people from Christian worship - why would you exclude Gay / Lesbian. The point being made here is that DISABILITY is not always OBVIOUS - but bias and prejudice, stigma and discrimination IS! It is time the world moved on with this topic and focused on the real and really important issues in the real world and the religious world of "belief" and "faith".

Gender Equality - the real solution

I have been reading a free magazine http://ec.europa.eu/research/research-eu - Special Issue April 2009 - Women and Science - "The march towards equality".

Read it carefully : the conclusion I reached is ... "if, women seek "potential" gender equality of 40% by positive discrimation/positive action - then 10% actually get there on merit! That means 40% of men experienced "actual" positive discrimination/positive action and 10% of men were meritious - the issue has to relate to equality 50:50".

The article I found most interesting in the magazine was "Developing Diversity - It is a Friday afternoon in a rather special laboratory. One where female researchers are not playing supporting roles". The conclusion - "Engaged on their individual quests, these men and women researchers nevertheless work as team members. "I [Jean-Francois Moreau] believe that a group of men does not necessarily have the same behaviour as a group that includes women. Scientific gender mix is a positive thing. Generally speaking, women seem to me to be more concerned about the common interest. They are also quicker to discover this common interest, whereas the men often persist with their own reasoning". What could possibly be being discussed round the coffee table area that is not being discussed down the pub: positive discrimination [doorstop common interest topic] - perhaps we can see who the lab rats are - controlled experiment! I wonder who realised and who did not!

The solution of positive discrimination and positive action as European FP7 policy appears to me to be not a correct approach to equality. Perhaps FP8 if and when it may occur could have a policy "positive 'no' discrimination" or even "flip a coin" - which would assist meritorious appointment to post and especially positions of power. In any event, the statistics measured against FP7 would be interesting ... Correct me if I am wrong, but I reckon there is unlikely to be a FP7 policy "flip a coin"/positive "no" discrimination!

Furthermore, the solution appears apparent to me - if you 'perceive' you are experiencing a glass ceiling, ask did you put it there yourself, and therefore ask yourself if it is self-imposed what do I need to do to rectify it. INEQUALITY IS something you do to yourself via your own subjectivity!

However, if you are experiencing the "corporate psychopath" and/or corruption and/or organised crime then removal of the obstruction appears to me to be the most sensible route - assuming that you can report misconduct or corruption or organised crime to your "professional bodies" so as to discreetly deal with it - you should not need to professionally whistleblow otherwise. You can also issue Writ and [litigate]/[arbitrate] and ask for the application of the rule of law via the judiciary! Unfortunately, having used this route it generally historically and at the current time is toothless in relation to the Law Society/Bar Council and Judiciary - but then lawyers, barristers, judges are supposed to be "educated and trained" to know better in any event. UNEQUAL is something others do to you via their and others subjectivity - you now know the material difference concerning "Equality".

There is currently prima facia genuine gender equality opportunities available in the police at the moment : never mind "positive discrimination" if you think you have reached a glass ceiling in your police career - carpe diem - clue : politicians : beyond reproach (not) : misconduct in public office (a real offence) and other lesser offences: what are you waiting for ... don't all rush!

Moreover, removing politicians who are not beyond reproach and criminalising means "genuine" authentic "meritorious" opportunities raising the 10% and encroaching on the 40% no need to positively discriminate/positive action. You know it makes sense.

The local Herald & Post last week deserves a mention - 18 police officers were sent round to look at the criminal property damage circumstantially occasioned to "Fred the Shred's" house - a brick apparently smashed a window ... . How many police officers are currently sent round to the Royal Bank of Scotland to investigate the "ponsi scheme" that saw the bank lose £26billion - the highest bank heist in history in the UK. [Micro/Macro criminality - circumstances = consequences or just plain [cause and effect] what's the material difference concerning crime and crimality? Lord Donaldson's two nuclear weapons - the Anton Pillar Order and the Maraeva Injunction do not appear to have been launched ... and nobody apparently knows the whereabouts of 'Fred the Shred' : his boat did not sink attempting to reach an off-shore trust [with that pension] by any chance! My goodness, the gender equality opportunities available for promotion in the Police these days ... you know the reason why you need to go for promotion - you're not going to get it in your pay increase or your pension ... other than via Brown envelopes commonly known as organised crime, legal mafia and corruption - don't even try to claim expenses! misconduct in public office - you never know where these SAS bods can get to these days!

Credibility ... and Integrity

Gordon Brown, Prime Minister is correct - it is not the time for a General Election. However, it IS the time for Constitutional Elections in the areas where there has been substantive abuse of the expenses system. The reason - CREDIBILITY. Credibility is something that cannot be found lacking amongst "professionals" WITHOUT A REASON, because they are deemed "educated" and "trained". That is why "beyond reproach" exists with the holding of public office. That is why the CONSEQUENCES should be severe and criminal. The issue is democracy.

INTEGRITY on the otherhand should mean that Mr Martin, Speaker of the House of Commons - IS NOT STANDING DOWN ALONE!

My MP has notified me that his expenses are in order. He has also notified me that there are "interim measures" being agreed by the main party leaders. In the longer term, the Committee on Standards in Public Life has been asked to conduct an inquiry and make recommendations - which will be expected in the Autumn or sooner. The Committee is inviting submissions - a copy of the consultation paper can be found on the Committee's website www.public-standards.org.uk and written submissions can be sent by email to inquiry@standards.x.gsi.gov.uk or by post to the Review of MP's Expenses, The Committee on Standards in Public Life, 35 Great Smith Street, London SW1P 3BQ.

A General Election now would "punish" those who have good/high credibility and integrity - that in my opinion is not acceptable as it would be UNFAIR to penalise in any way those who have been decent, hard-working, honest and not abused their expense claims even where the opportunity and the temptation was there to do so.

However, I am concerned that a political show on TV last night suggested the inquiry will look at the last 4 years: I do not consider this is acceptable - the inquiry should investigate from 1997 - the point of origin of New Labour. Moreover, it should also map the expenses both abusing and non-abusing to "voting" in the House of Commons. In this regard, Gordon Brown MP should not be standing alone - he inherited a lot of problems from ex-PM Tony Blair's leadership regardless that he has had every opportunity to deal via Cabinet throughout duration.

The reason: there has to be a reason why the judiciary and legal profession is substantively COMPROMISED when it is supposed to be about the "application of the rule of law" (in my experience a legal mafia and organised crime exists which has not yet been dealt with Mr Brown, PM - with also, unbelievely, a prison population reaching 80,000!). Also why the banking and financial sector has taken a direct hit including pensions; why the Defence and Security Dept entered into the "UNJUST" and OBVIOUS deficiency in Intelligence Services - Hans Blix should have been provided time to complete his report and recommendations"; and now the Politicians appear to be scuttling the ship that is already significantly scuppered!

I was pleased to see that the Ghurkas have now had a satisfactory outcome - well done Ms Joanna Lumley.

I was also pleased to be watching the Chelsea Flower Show on TV last night and see Ken Livingston state "plant an Oak Tree [and Birch] and it will attract 250 species. A bit more aesethetic in society would make some areas of the UK a safer and nicer desireable place to be. Well done Mr Livingston. And the Chelsea Show Gardeners Discussions raised a topic close to my own heart - roundabouts - aesethetic would be nice - driving along the road gride - mirage, oasis (take a look at the roundabouts in Inverness!), non-violent criminals project anybody - crime does not pay - prisoner/ex-prisoners employability skills and training opportunity/gap filler on resume, etc.

Which also set me thinking ... air pollution. Many rooftop office blocks in Central London / cities could usefully be covered by potted "leylandii" for their life to 3 or 4 foot - "leylandii" trees are the air purifiers: excess water usage in the buildings could quite easily be recirculated/recycled to the rooftop to irregate. 3 or 4 year old plants then sold on and planted out - commercially roof top space could be rented out to the Forestry Commission! covering management costs of the building! Also, why do allotments need to be on the ground - why not on the roof - even tomatoes! You saw it here first - climate change idea!

IF NOT "Beyond Reproach" in public office THEN "misconduct in public office"

I have been following the "expenses" problem at Westminster over the last few weeks. I have written to my MP asking for him to deal via the House of Commons and the Prime Minster, Gordon Brown. I have asked for two lists - those who have abused and those who have not.

I was concerned this evening to see the news - Government appear to have placed any modicum of credibility we may have had in the Speaker for what appears to be the hefty cost price of £100,000. The outcome is to be "reforms" of the expenses system as opposed to making folks accountable and responsible where they NEED to be accountable and responsible. Credibility appears to have the value of a plug, dog food, gardening, plasma tvs, moat clearing, horse manure, "House Flipping", house repairs and expensive/lavish kitchens, even office garages come rather expensive to the state, etc etc etc. Everyone appears to think they can just pay it back with no consequences. The Speaker even had colleagues who suggested he was a "scapegoat".

First things first, if not "beyond reproach" in public office, then there has to be constituency elections = democracy.

If the failure of the beyond reproach is actually "misconduct in public office" = crime (mens rea)A + (actus reus)B + (Offence)C or "inchoate" A+1 or more + C = conspiracy or B +C = attempt. Misconduct in public office as far as I am aware is a penalty of life sentence (ie 16 years) - and there was an attempt on Damian Green MP (Conservative) not so long ago in political life to bring this OFFENCE down to a matter of discipline without criminal consequences - perhaps we now know one of the reasons why!

Now I am aware the Liberal Democrats appear almost "lily white" concerning their expenses - there is just the issue of "knowledge" - did they know that abuses of the expenses system were occurring and possibly by whom - and if they did - what "did" they do about it! The New Labour and Conservatives camps appear well and truly caught.

So, what are the police waiting for, it is not as if there is not enough EVIDENCE to put before the CPS. My MP should be able to produce the "Abusers List" shortly as he has been asked to provide it to me.

Yes, reform is a good thing -but after the entire system is first of all cleared up - why would you "reform" something without first adhering to the rules of public office and clearing out that which is already rotten, thereby ensuring that any ensuing reforms are "improvements" and good.

I was pleased to read the article relating to John Wick, an ex-SAS man (it probably is not his real name) and thinking it made sense for an SAS man to be seen to be doing the RIGHT THING at 60 years old. I saw merit and mirth in the challenge: rather than being in fear of waterboarding and/or prosecution, I thought "be not afraid"/"light" where there is darkness, the most a court could do is what they usually do with "likeable rogues" state the fact objectively in a judgment - if needs must use the words "in the interests of justice" via "independence of the judiciary to use "equitable discretion", ie judicial subjectivity over objectivity of the application of the rule of law! The mirth the government attempting to pursue an SAS bod who is effectively saying "make my day punk". It might be wise for the Government not to try.

On the issue of reforms, what about :

Hotels - one each for the main parties : sheets get laundered and bed numbers are known, no house repairs and expensive kitchens, no "flipping", no need for horse manure, moat clearing, helipads, no MP's double claiming where partnered, no gardening for 600 + politicians homes. You would have an in-house restaurant, a concierge and a really really good security system, parking, internet, office facilities and rooms come with Plasma TV and plugs and lighbulbs and you can ensure the whole exercise is "not for profit" and monitor and evaluate who is checking in and who is checking out concerning workload and ensure that all expenses are recorded in the hotel record and the cost forecasted and budgetted for on a reasonable premis to the taxpayer. You could even have a dog kennelled. All second homes would be historical. Grace and Favour appartments you could lease or sell them on, no longer necessary.

The reason - you are elected to serve the people, not yourselves.

Lastly, please remember that those engaged in the Welfare Reforms agenda from the core jobless categories: lone parents, homeless, disabled, mentally disabled, ex-prisoners, alcohol and substance abusers, NEET - not in education, employment or training (young people), AGED 50+, and any others which I cannot recall on this list for the moment - may be "volunteering" in the Third Sector to fill gaps in their CV's, pick up skills or assist recovery and receive no "non-financial benefit", nor increase in their benefits other than the yearly increase whether engaging because they meet the engagement criteria for welfare reforms or who have voluntarily engaged in the welfare reforms. Working for no benefit other than altruism or work reforms as a volunteer grates with MPs abusing the system. The suggestion that politicians caught up in this political mess they created are similar or same to benefit abusers is offensive, not least because a benefit abuser would be prosecuted.

Moreover, it appears that a lot of effort goes into investigating and prosecuting lower-economic societal echelons, who may cause criminal damages on a micro scale, but similar/same qualities appear "attractive" at the upper-economic societal echelons and are not being prosecuted to jail-time or at all. "Fred the Shred" caused £26 billion of damage to the RBS (or in his other guise "pin-strip hoodie"). There is a material difference: upper-economic societal echelons are allegedly "educated" (to degree level ? ponsi scheme - no one did that module!) and also "trained" (professional qualification) - so there really is no excuse. Concerning abusing MPs on the list that may be sent to me - some will be lawyers, accountants, doctors, academics, bankers with resultant degree certification and practising certificate - the professional bodies need to take their right to practise off them as a material issue concerning evidence where they are not "beyond reproach" or can be prosecuted for "misconduct in public office" - their professions may like to issue writ or certainly be a member of the panel of scrutiny and evaluation.

Beyond reproach MUST mean BEYOND REPROACH. Democracy MUST mean Democracy. I am hoping that the widespread abuse of the expenses system has not been a form of bribery - the reason I am suggesting the issue of bribery IS BECAUSE THERE IS AND HAS NOT BEEN EFFECTIVE OPPOSITION POLITICS! I am also aware of what is being covered up in society - Alternative Dispute Resolution (Mediation). There is probably a Directive on Mediation due for harmonisation in the UK and Europe - Arlene McCarthy MEP's undemocratic processing of the Consultation Paper re the Directive on Mediation which interviewed 2 out of 27 published responses and refused to interview me on request where I was proposing the "Competition Model" over the "coercive regime model" implemented via the Woolf Reforms in England & Wales via the Access to Justice Act 1999: CPR Rule 26 and then interviewed 5 experts SHE calls expert (but I don't) managed to get passed by the European Parliament and is being harmonised in Scotland and Europe - it could also be scrapped and Arlene McCarthy MEP and her team investigated for "misconduct in public office" by reason of an undemocratic consultation process which results in the undermining of the rule of law, enables compromise of rights and the possibility of having no rights at all. Society is not safe and just - as is abundently clear - is designed, engineered, concerted and deliberate not inadvertent.

The Queen had the power to deal with the Speaker and appears not to have done so, or effectively, or at all. The Prime Minister appears to see the need to deal via the House of Commons. The House of Commons appear to lack power to make people "accountable and responsible", restore democracy or arrange prosecution or even constituency elections - but they will having abused the system agree to reform it! NOT DEMOCRACY THEN. Where is our power and transparency, let alone trust and confidence.

I was listening to Bob Marley & the Wailers this evening - I thought "Exodus" for those on the abusers list and Punky Reggae Party for those who have not abused might be appropriate in the House of Commons at the moment. John Wick - Well done. Mr Speaker we do not have any credibility at all and the price to loose any we did have appears to be £100,000.

Wise

I have seen some "wise" articles in the papers recently:

(Click Here) 30/04/09 : T in the Park drugs peddler escapes jail : article by Gordon Currie

Sheriff Robert McCreadie has fined a man £600 plus ordered 240 hours of community service contra imprisonment. The benefit of value and added value of Sheriff McCreadie to his community is wise indeed - covering the cost of the court action and securing some employability over the burden to the taxpayer of imprisoning someone for non-violent offence is a common public good. It would be interesting to hear from Edward Livingston (and others) what the impact of his sentence has been and the immeasurable outcome personally and on the community.

Sheriff McCready is wise - he has turned a societal burden into a societal benefit. Well done.

(Click Here) 08/05/09 Queen's Trinity Cross honour deemed unlawful by Privy Council: article by David Brown

This article relates to the Trinity Cross and the Privy Council have designated the honour is unlawful in today's society. This does not denigrate the honour nor who grants it, it brings an "honour" into the 21st Century requirements of legality. There is commonsense here as well as provision of equality to all. If litigation (public) or arbitration (private) case precedent are engaged then that is the methodology to bring the application of the rule of law up-to-date = progress: usually called "Justice", via judicial reasoning premised on "natural" law requirements [discovery of what law "ought" to be]. Statute law can become out of date and is "political" as the legislature of the day create it [and "is" the law and required to be obeyed]: unless there is a codification exercise law discovered or created can become dated and remain out of date over centuries. This story is therefore good news = progress. Well done.

Unfortunately, there is also some nonsense occurring: we are in absolute disgrace concerning the Ghurkas and politicians expenses - can a newspaper publish a list of anyone left standing who has not abused their expense claims and show us we have a measure of decency left amongst those who hold public office and supposed to be "beyond reproach".