Archive for May, 2013


The Kirk’s annual meeting, which takes place each May,  in the General Assembly Hall atop the mound next to Edinburgh University’s New College was attended by nearly 1000 people.  Some 800 plus commissioners and press from around U.K. came to what had been billed as a key year for the Kirk.   Would there be a schism?  would droves leave the Kirk over the issue of Gay Clergy?  would the law of the land force the gay issue and would the Kirk continue being involved in Marriage?

The opening of the Assembly, an excellent visual enactment of the distinction between Church and State as the Ministers, Elders (commissioners as they are labelled) and the Moderator and former Moderators enter first before the State is invited to arrive and take its place in the Royal Gallery.  This opening and the welcoming of the new Moderator, this year Rt.Rev. Lorna Hood, confirmed by the Assembly starts off the proceedings which last for seven days.

The key debate which highlighted the divisions was over the issue of Gay clergy.  Since in 2009  the Rev. Scott Rennie, who was chosen by the Queens Cross Church, Aberdeen, congregation and as he was openly gay this was challenged as a result in 2011 the thological commission was asked to research the issue and report back to this General Assembly with a way forward in this thorny issue.   Only two congregations have left the Kirk over this issue so far, however,  whatever this Assembly decided  was going to be controversial and perhaps divisive.

     Yet again you could say divine inspiration moved the issue into the future.    An eleventh hour move by the immediate former Moderator – Very Rev. Albert Bogle,  worded a way through the divisions towards a more flexivble way forward in this issue.   His move succeeded with a narrow majority and was accepted as the way ahead.







Convener of the Theological Commission.

   Terms such as sea change for the kirk and departure from traditional ways were bandied around but in terms of what the move achieved there is no change in the Kirk.  The freeze on Gays into the ministry remains at least for another two years.  The Gay ministers in place and any who aquietly became mininsters prior to 2009 will remain in place.   However, the Legal committee will have to work over the next year to form church legislation which will be in tune with government and european Human rights legislation to come to the 2014 General Assembly and the commissioners there that year will vote to accept it or not.  However even if it is successful this will return to the Presbyteries before it can be ratified.  If the more conservative Presbyteries vote down this legislation then it falls meaning that the way the 2013 voted means Status Quo could be what remains in place.   

a heart shaped cloud over Scotland.

a heart shaped cloud over Scotland.





In a complex world today even more hectic with global communication you would think it hard to cover up things,  Yet those adept at this live in the spook world and work supposedly at the behest of those in power.  Politicians being their paymasters.

As the Festival approaches im looking forward to hearing some of those lost voices fictional though they may be perhaps they speak the truth?


Watch out for a play called LOCKERBIE   LOST VOICES   It will be at the Storytelling centre on the royal mile in August.


This is being put on this site again to

try to highlight the lack of truth coming

from U.S. government.

another U.S. guest editor

What No One Wants to Hear About Benghazi


ron paul's texas straight talk

Congressional hearings, White House damage control, endless op-eds, accusations, and defensive denials. Controversy over the events in Benghazi last September took center stage in Washington and elsewhere last week. However, the whole discussion is again more of a sideshow. Each side seeks to score political points instead of asking the real questions about the attack on the US facility, which resulted in the death of US Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans.

Republicans smell a political opportunity over evidence that the Administration heavily edited initial intelligence community talking points about the attack to remove or soften anything that might reflect badly on the president or the State Department.

Are we are supposed to be shocked by such behavior? Are we supposed to forget that this kind of whitewashing of facts is standard operating procedure when it comes to the US government?

Democrats in Congress have offered the even less convincing explanation for Benghazi, that somehow the attack occurred due to Republican sponsored cuts in the security budget at facilities overseas. With a one trillion dollar military budget, it is hard to take this seriously.

It appears that the Administration scrubbed initial intelligence reports of references to extremist Islamist involvement in the attacks, preferring to craft a lie that the demonstrations were a spontaneous response to an anti-Islamic video that developed into a full-out attack on the US outpost.

Who can blame he administration for wanting to shift the focus? The Islamic radicals who attacked Benghazi were the same people let loose by the US-led attack on Libya. They were the rebels on whose behalf the US overthrew the Libyan government. Ambassador Stevens was slain by the same Islamic radicals he personally assisted just over one year earlier.

But the Republicans in Congress also want to shift the blame. They supported the Obama Administration’s policy of bombing Libya and overthrowing its government. They also repeated the same manufactured claims that Gaddafi was “killing his own people” and was about to commit mass genocide if he were not stopped. Republicans want to draw attention to the President’s editing talking points in hopes no one will notice that if the attack on Libya they supported had not taken place, Ambassador Stevens would be alive today.

Neither side wants to talk about the real lesson of Benghazi: interventionism always carries with it unintended consequences. The US attack on Libya led to the unleashing of Islamist radicals in Libya. These radicals have destroyed the country, murdered thousands, and killed the US ambassador. Some of these then turned their attention to Mali which required another intervention by the US and France.

Previously secure weapons in Libya flooded the region after the US attack, with many of them going to Islamist radicals who make up the majority of those fighting to overthrow the government in Syria. The US government has intervened in the Syrian conflict on behalf of the same rebels it assisted in the Libya conflict, likely helping with the weapons transfers. With word out that these rebels are mostly affiliated with al Qaeda, the US is now intervening to persuade some factions of the Syrian rebels to kill other factions before completing the task of ousting the Syrian government. It is the dizzying cycle of interventionism.

The real lesson of Benghazi will not be learned because neither Republicans nor Democrats want to hear it. But it is our interventionist foreign policy and its unintended consequences that have created these problems, including the attack and murder of Ambassador Stevens. The disputed talking points and White House whitewashing are just a sideshow.

Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.