The dismantling of the Stalin landmark is liable to offend many Georgians, especially older citizens who remain proud that the former Soviet leader was a native son. Stalin was born Ioseb Besarionis dze Jughashvili on 18 December, 1878.

A Guardian article includes a few comments by Zaza Gachechiladze, editor of the Georgian Messenger newspaper:

I think it's a sign of Georgia's western orientation, and of cutting links with the communist past.

But it's also a controversial move. There are still some sentiments towards Stalin in Georgia. He's seen as a local boy who achieved great heights and for 30 years was No 1 in the world together with Hitler.

There is a kind of local patriotism here. This will be a personal insult for many elderly people in particular, who still love and worship him.

In place of Stalin, Georgia's president Mikheil Saakashvili plans to erect a monument to the victims of the 2008 Russia-Georgia war. According to a culture ministry spokesperson there will be a competition for the design of the monument.

The decision to erect a monument to recent war casualties on the same spot as the former Stalin statue, is likely to anger the Kremlin. There is the not-so-subtle suggestion that Stalin's crimes can be equated with the actions of the current Russian leadership. Moscow believes that its military response in 2008 was morally justified by what it viewed as Georgian aggression.

Opinions on the removal of the Stalin statue were divided. A woman named only Irina, said on Georgia public television: "How could they remove it? ... Stalin was a great individual and the most famous Georgian in the world."

Culture minister Nika Rerua was less impressed: "There is no place for such an ugly idol in Georgia."

According to reports it was a quiet Saturday afternoon in the pub. The campaigns officer for the group, James Murray, said members carried an "innocuous" banner bearing the slogan: "Only Labour can deliver equality." Murray said there was no problem except for one customer who appeared to take exception to the group's presence. He added "that seemed to start something going."

Members were reportedly refused drinks and a manager told them he wouldn't have accepted the booking if he had known the group was gay. The group got word out on Twitter: "Manager at The Greencoat Boy near Westminster told members he would have refused the #LGBT Labour booking if he'd known it was an LGBT group!"

The story attracted attention and prominent Labour Party figures weighed in. Sarah Brown posted: "Very sad to hear that the Greencoat Boy shown as homophobic in taking LGBT booking – but good to see so many are concerned here."

Former deputy PM John Prescott also offered support: "40 years ago we campaigned against a Hull pub that banned 'women & queers' This is disgraceful. Fully back you #greencoatboy."

As of last check over a thousand people had signed up for a Facebook campaign to protest the incident and to call for a boycott.

A Metropolitan police spokeswoman said: "We can confirm an allegation that a homophobic incident took place at a premises in the SW1 area and was reported to police on Saturday 5 June... Enquiries by officers continue."

The Greencoat Boy is owned by Punch Taverns which has "apologized unreservedly" for the incident. A spokesman said the company had contacted all pubs in the chain to remind them of equality standards.

He said: "We would like to stress that this is an isolated incident, we have a good track record on equal opportunities and we do not tolerate homophobia in our pubs, whether from guests to other guests, or involving our employees... We are currently conducting a full investigation of the incident and the deputy general manager will not be on site until the investigation is concluded."

The incident is reminiscent of discriminatory practices directed toward homosexuals in the not-so-distant past. As a society we like to believe we have moved beyond that type of anti-gay bigotry but homophobic attitudes remain entrenched in certain quarters and it doesn't take a lot to bring it out.

Not long ago a gay couple, Michael Black and John Morgan, were turned away from a B & B in Cookham, Berkshire, because the proprietor had objections to them sharing the same bed.

But not every Israeli buys the official version.

Burston goes on to say:

We explain, time and again, that we are not at war with the people of Gaza. We say it time and again because we ourselves need to believe it, and because, deep down, we do not.

There was a time, when it could be said that we knew ourselves only in wartime. No longer. Now we know nothing. Yet another problem with refraining from talks with Hamas and Iran: They know us so much better than we know ourselves.

They know, as the song about the Lebanon War suggested ("Lo Yachol La'atzor Et Zeh") that we, unable to see ourselves in any clarity, are no longer capable of stopping ourselves.

Also in Haaretz, Gideon Levy's article "Operation Mini Cast Lead" points out the mistakes Israel seems doomed to keep repeating:

If Cast Lead was a turning point in the attitude of the world toward us, this operation is the second horror film of the apparently ongoing series. Israel proved yesterday that it learned nothing from the first movie.

Yesterday's fiasco could and should have been prevented. This flotilla should have been allowed to pass and the blockade should be brought to an end.

This should have happened a long time ago. In four years Hamas has not weakened and Gilad Shalit was not released. There was not even a sign of a gain.

And what have we instead? A country that is quickly becoming completely isolated. This is a place that turns away intellectuals, shoots peace activists, cuts off Gaza and now finds itself in an international blockade. Once more yesterday it seemed, and not for the first time, that Israel is increasingly breaking away from the mother ship, and losing touch with the world - which does not accept its actions and does not understand its motives.

Former Israeli PM Abba Eban once said that when it comes to peace the Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. It could be said of Israel that when it comes to turning the world against it - Israel never misses an opportunity to seize an opportunity.

The attack on the aid convoy in international waters will further deepen Israel's isolation, and in the eyes of many confirm its status as a pariah state. Yet many in Israel who seek security, seem blind to the truth that the siege and the actions of the IDF in Gaza and now at sea is doing deep and lasting damage to the prospect of peace and security.

No security concerns gives Israel the right to effectively imprison one and a half million Palestinians. The use of force to maintain the untenable situation in Gaza can never and will never lead to anything constructive... just ongoing barriers, deepening hate and distrust.

The plight of the Palestinian people and the ramifications of the siege have consequences that go well beyond Israel's borders. Israel cannot be allowed to persist along its blinkered path when so much is at stake.

Minister of Culture, Nelson McCausland, recently made a request of the Ulster Museum in Belfast. He wrote to the board of trustees to say that the museum ought to be more reflective of creationism and intelligent design theories. McCausland believes that since a third (by his claim) of the population of N. Ireland believes in either the creationist tale or intelligent design it therefore follows that the Ulster Museum should reflect those views - kind of like Sky News at six.

While it's true that Northern Ireland has the reputation for being religious, there are a few problems with McCausland's point of view. If the majority in some hypothetical country happen to believe that pointy headed pink dwarves inhabit the dark side of the moon is science obliged to reflect that conviction in museums and other institutions? Creationist myths are no less fantastical. There is no more evidence to support them than there is evidence for UFO's and the Tooth Fairy.

If the number of 'ayes' determines what position a museum takes on matters relating to human origins we could be in deep trouble. Scientific theory and the manner in which those findings are reflected in institutions such as museums is about standards a little higher than a politician's urge to represent the views of a segment of society. As Richard Dawkins put it "If the museum was to go down that road then perhaps they should bring in the stork theory of where babies come from..."

Aside from creationism, McCausland holds views that even eccentrics might find well... eccentric. According to a Guardian article he believes that Ulster Protestants are one of the lost tribes of Israel. He also believes that the inclusion of anti-Darwinian theory in the museum is no less than a "human rights issue." No mention if lack of compliance will result in picketing by outraged Free Presbyterians and activist Orangemen.

But then as the Guardian article points out oddball beliefs aren't uncommon in the religious community of Northern Ireland:

The belief that the Earth was divinely created in 4004 BC originates with the writings of another Ulster-based Protestant, Archbishop of Armagh James Ussher, in 1654. Ussher calculated the date based on textual clues in the Old Testament, even settling on a date and time for the moment of creation: in the early hours of 23 October.

McCausland, who has been suspended twice by the Northern Ireland Assembly for using unparliamentary language, by his own account wrote a "very balanced" letter to the museum trustees because he wanted to "reflect the views of all the people in Northern Ireland in all its richness and diversity."

McCausland's party colleague, Mervyn Storey, is a former chair of the Northern Ireland Assembly's education committee. Storey believes in the literal truth of the bible, so is presumably a believer in the Garden of Eden... talking snake... clay-sculpting-God version of events.

As the Guardian article notes, a stumbling block to the 'young earth' theory is posed by a famous Irish landmark - the Giant's Causeway. According to geological evidence it is millions of years old. Despite his lack of scientific expertise in the area, Storey has raised objections to this finding, believing as he does that the earth was created several thousands of years before the birth of Jesus.

Link to Guardian

Link also to "Northern Ireland culture is apparently cuckoo" on Pharyngula

'Brian' from Tahlequah, Oklahoma, also informed Van Susteren that her "brain is empty." He elaborated: "Matter of fact, it is so empty, if you put a pea in your skull it would rattle around like a BB in a boxcar."

Van Susteren decided to take the bait and commented on her blog "Why does Brian watch if he thinks I am so stupid?... How stupid is that????"

She went further and polled the viewing audience on who is dumber - Greta Van S or Brian... the dude who watches a show he claims is hosted by a dimwit?

Perhaps Van Susteren naively imagined her fans would rally in her defence. If so, it was a rash calculation. As of May 29, 78% of the respondents agreed with the view that Van Susteren is dumber than Brian.

Van Susteren posted on her blog Friday that the poll was meant to be "a joke." She said: "Well...turns out that I am now losing the poll but only in the last 18 hours have the votes spiked. It turns out that since midnight, the poll has gotten an inexplicable number of hits even though it is 4 days old... Of course this is now a cyberspace game and I think it funny. I lost."

It's not difficult to understand why 'Brian' might view Van Susteren as challenged. She's not exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer. When she interviews big name guests she comes across like an ingenue, a bit like a kid who appears slightly overawed to be in adult company. She seems more about stroking her guest's ego and facilitating responses than asking hard questions.

Van Susteren's fluffball Alaska interviews with Sarah Palin lacked critical rigor and were mainly about showcasing Palin as an Alaskan chili-making-mom-next-door type who Americans only need to know a little better in order to love. Van Susteren's partisan approach when it came to the Palin interviews speaks poorly of her objectivity as a journalist.

Her down-home persona and distinctive look, add up in the minds of some viewers to credibility. It's her middle-of-the-road facade that makes her approach all the more insidious... after all she works in the Murdoch trenches and is a facilitator of a brand of right-wing ideology that America doesn't need.

Whether or not she has a "mind like a sieve" is open to debate, but there is no doubt that Greta Van Susteren knows how to make her seeming deficits work to her advantage.

Link also to Raw Story - Yahoo News