Four topics attracted my attention today when I scoured the BBC’s website. Here they are in no particular order.

Sycamore Saplings
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-68497720

Much has been written about the wanton destruction in September 2023 of the iconic mature sycamore tree that grew in a dip along Hadrian’s Wall Path. The 84-mile/135-km path is one of the UK’s National Trails. The construction was started by Emperor Hadrian in 122 CE as a fortification to keep out raiders from north of the wall in what is now Dumfriesshire in Scotland and Northumberland in England. My wife and I walked the trail in September 2010, taking five consecutive days to cross from the eastern end bordering the North Sea to the Solway Firth at the western end. The National Trail follows the wall and we found it to be a captivating and slightly challenging walk.

Along the way, we would have walked past the lone sycamore tree at Crag Lough, close to the remains of the Roman fort at Housesteads. We may have briefly stopped at the tree for a rest, or remarked upon its solitude or, possibly, its symmetry. I don’t recall and, unfortunately, took no photo, but last year’s destruction deeply saddened me. Today, I am much heartened by the BBC’s article stating that seedlings taken from the fallen tree have taken root and are thriving in a secret location in Devon. If nothing grows from the still-healthy stump of the tree, the seedlings will be used to replace the original tree, and in 25 years, walkers will again admire a full-grown sycamore in the dip.

I hope so; I genuinely do.

The Singing Sisters in Afghanistan
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-68500111

Years ago, when I read Khaled Hosseini’s excellent 2007 novel A Thousand Splendid Suns, about life for women in Afghanistan, I learned about the rules imposed by the Taliban during their first period of governmental control between 1996 and 2001. There were general rules such as no singing, no dancing, no kite flying, and a section devoted to what women could and could not do, mostly could not. For example, stay at home most of the time, always wear a burqa if outside the home, apply no cosmetics, wear no jewellery or ‘charming’ clothes, only speak when spoken to, no laughing, no eye contact with men, no education, and so on. Since the USA and its allies withdrew their troops from Afghanistan in August 2021, the Taliban has resumed political control of the Afghan population and re-imposed their earlier societal laws and codes of conduct based on extreme Sharia law.

I have commented elsewhere about the Taliban’s controversial interpretation of Islamic law based on the Qur’an and have no wish to re-state my opinions here, but I admire and applaud the singing sisters reported in today’s BBC article. Calling themselves the Last Torch, the two sisters, living in Kabul, have decided to rebel against the ‘no singing’ rule and have started posting videos of themselves clad in full burqas singing anti-Taliban protest songs. My heart goes out to them. They risk harsh punishment, including execution. They are aware of this.

“Singing and listening to music is very harmful,” said Sawabgul, an official who appeared in one of the [Taliban’s] ministry’s propaganda videos. “It distracts people from God’s prayers… Everyone should stay away from it.”

“We have seen their [Taliban] threats on social media: ‘Once we find you, we know how to remove your tongue from your throat,'” says Mashal [one of the sisters, not her real name].

The BBC article includes a short video of the sisters singing one of their songs. I urge you to play it. You may not understand the words (there are subtitles) but the imagery and vocal messages are unmistakable.

Lord Arthur Balfour’s Painting Damaged
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-68515368

Recently, I posted a blog describing an imaginary conversation between Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s Prime Minister, and Arthur Higgins, a journalistic figment of my imagination. In it, Arthur questioned Benjamin about the Israeli-Gaza war and brought up the role of Arthur Balfour, Britain’s Foreign Secretary between 1916 and 1919. Many historians consider the 1917 Balfour Agreement to be the root cause of the Israel-Palestine conflict. They opine that although the agreement supported the existence of both an Israeli state and a Palestinian state, the creation of the state of Israel in 1948, following the withdrawal of the post-WW2 British mandate over the area called Palestine, was not accompanied by the creation of the state of Palestine. This omission has been a bone of contention ever since.

Until this morning, I was unaware of the existence of a painting of Arthur Balfour. I am now. The painting is, or was, hung at Trinity College, part of Cambridge University. Yesterday, activists from the protest group Palestine Action slashed the lower part of the painting and splashed red paint over the upper out-of-reach part. I never understand such actions of destruction. It serves a need for publicity but rarely engenders sympathy for a cause. We’ve seen it elsewhere; the toppling of the statue of Edward Colston, for example.

The damage to the painting was stupid, meaningless, and served no positive purpose.

UCL: London’s Chinese University
https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-the-papers-68518849

And, finally, are we about to witness a significant change for University College London, UCL?

In 1997, my daughter, Helen, graduated from UCL with a BSc (Hons) in Physiotherapy. What would she and her graduate friends make of one of today’s front-page headlines in The Daily Telegraph? Michelle Shipworth, an energy and resources associate professor at the university, has been banned from presenting her seminar about slavery. In it, she uses data from The Global Slavery Index 2014, which claims that ‘China has the second highest prevalence of modern slavery in the world.’ Okay, so what? The Global Slavery Index, published by Walk Free, is a reputable publication whose data and insights contribute to many informed discussions and policy directions. UCL is a reputable university. The UK has a law that defends freedom of speech (Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998). Why has Ms Shipworth been banned from giving her seminar at UCL; a seminar she has presented at least ten times?

The answer surprised me and may surprise you. Here is a quote from the Telegraph’s article: ‘UCL has the highest number of Chinese students anywhere in the UK, making up almost a quarter of its total student population. More than 10,000 Chinese students are at the university, typically paying two to three times the fees of home-grown students—up to £40,000 a year [per student].’

Yes folks, it’s protection of commercial interest by censorship of any criticisms. Ms Shipworth’s head of department has banned her saying that ‘to be commercially viable, the university’s courses need to retain a good reputation amongst future Chinese applicants.’ Make of that what you will. I firmly believe in freedom of speech and am dismayed that a prestigious member of the UK’s 24 world-class research-intensive Russell Group universities has placed commercial interests over freedom of speech. I hope Ms Shipworth will be reinstated as the presenter of her seminar. If it doesn’t happen, I expect UCL to be renamed University of Beijing (London Branch).

(^_^)