www.owohrod.com.

For thousands of years, humans, first the priests, shaman, and the clergy, and then the ordinary people, have sought to speak with the gods, and then for the gods, always being secure in the knowledge that the gods would not denounce what they have reported of these conversations. So, why have the gods remained silent? Why have the gods chosen not to speak for themselves? We can, ipso fact, take it that it is indeed the case that a sentient and humanised god cannot be one made of 'flesh and blood.'   This means that my essential being has to be of some other substance. And thus we arrived at the theory that I am formed of a 'spiritual matter.'  T.: I am, of course, au fait with that theory, G. Yet, I still find it rather problematic.  Although I can well understand how the theory came about, as part of human's quest to appear to be rational and logical, even when they, we, are patently demonstrating the opposite of rationality and logic. G.: A

And here I am, listening to the great man, the man being no other than Brook Benton, belting out sweet music which appeals to the essence of my being.  To my ergosumness, to that enquiring entity within me, which filters what I hear, what I see and what I feel and tries to make sense of it all.  Even probably when there really is no sense at all in it, except the esoteric sense which I make of it. I listen to the great man, one of the great men of music, beautifully singing such songs as Hotel Happiness, My True Confession, It's Just a House Without You, et al, and I am enthralled. I am de-stressed and feeling a sense of serenity, of happiness. And all this as a result of listening to what I have come to know as real music.  The music which speaks to my soul, to my inner being, which takes me to a higher level.  Yes, and so it seems to me that great musicians such as Brook Benton, B B King, Otis Redding, Ray Charles, Charlie Parker, Chuck Berry, et al, are wort

So, there I was watching what seemed to be a very informative and interesting panel debate on India's international TV Channel, NDTV.  The panel debate was being facilitated by one of the Channel's broadcaster, Ms Nidhi Razdan. Who presents as a very engaging and compassionate journalist, who is demonstrably shocked by the incident.  Which concerned two Nigerian students being setup on by a hyena-like mob of local Indians and being viciously beaten.  An attack which seemed all the more shocking, because of the reported failure of any Indians.  Who were not physically and/or verbally participating in the attack, to raise a voice or hand in an attempt to discourage or stop the attack. Ms Razdan's debating panel included a member of the BJP Party, a Mr Roa, who made a valuable and heartfelt contribution.   A former Indian Diplomat, a Mr KC Singh, who might consider his contribution to be 'pragmatic', but which I consider to be pathetic and unsy

Of course, whereas it is a kind of natural process for people getting older, and, probably, learning from their experiences and becoming wiser. To clothe themselves in increasing cynicism.  The cynicism of the older generations can become a dangerous obstacle for the younger ones.  The younger generations need to retain the hope that things can indeed change.  That they can get better and that the ideals of the young people are really worth fighting for; irrespective of how many failures have taken place in the past.  They need to approach the future with optimism and enthusiasm, as not to do so, is a way of guaranteeing that nothing will change; except for the worse. And so it is that the older generations should be circumspect and be prudent in how they display their cynicism.  Towards the expressed messages of hope, of changing things for the better, which the younger generations bring to the discussion table.  The hope, the enthusiasm and the innovation of the

This is a video of some of the sights you would see, if you had joined my friend and me on a wet and, at times, muddy pre-walk orientation we did, during one rainy day in mid-March. Please take a look and see what pleasure you might derive from it.

Had he too easily conceded the psychological battle with Verstappen. By deciding that he could not overtake him, thereby reducing his chances, however slim, of overtaking him?  Did Hamilton gave up on his car doing the business for and with and with him and his Team?  Did he, by thinking and then voicing it as an impossibility, made it also a reality? Did Lewis Hamilton betrayed 'the winner's creed'?  That of not giving up on your self-belief and believing that it is your duty to attempt to make the perceived impossible, possible, and to make the probably happens. Yes, we will never know, now, whether, had Hamilton hammered it and remained persistent in his attempt to get close to and overtake Verstappen.  He might not have placed himself closer and nipped in front of Vettel, as the latter exited the Pit after changing his tyres.  It says something about having the indomitable spirit of not believing that you have lost the race until is is won.  And dem

We could see this incipient inverted racism amongst our own ethnic groups, as the beginning of the probably more pernicious racism which we do or can develop and display towards other ethnic groups. And how do we display our racism? Quite simply, we think less of the people who do not share our ethnic characteristics, and think of 'our group' as being better than then.  Of being superior to them, not necessarily intellectually, culturally and societally, but in terms of our physical attributes There are times when black and minority ethnic people can become annoyed and resentful of debates about racism being expanded to include the issue of gender, class and sexism.  While this annoyance is sometimes understandable. Such as when it is being used to deflect attention from the subject matter.  For example, when the inclusion of sexism and genderism or LGBT issues are being used by white participants, to avoid having to face the uncomfortableness of discussing raci