Latest news with #Bono
Spectator
6 hours ago
- Entertainment
- Spectator
Why Jews aren't enjoying Glastonbury
I've never been to Glastonbury. As more of a heavy metal girl, it's not really my music scene and, frankly, I don't believe in camping. Did it once. Not happening again. That said, I do quite enjoy watching the festival from the comfort of my own home. There are always some bands I already like performing and you can discover some exciting news artists too. Frankly, it's hard to avoid. The coverage tends to dominate almost every aspect of the BBC and it is well underway for this year. Almost every Jewish music lover I know has been dreading this weekend for weeks Unfortunately, but entirely predictably, Glastonbury is set to be an anti-Jewish, anti-Israel hatefest, with Palestinian flags and bile-filled rants galore. Even before the first artists took to the Pyramid Stage, I received a video from a friend that showed people at Worthy Farm dancing around and singing 'free Palestine'. I've also seen some merchandise featuring a bulldozer, body bags and an Israeli flag. There is even a Palestine museum on site. That this is all being done at a music festival, after Hamas massacred so many at the Nova Festival on 7 October, is an utterly grotesque irony. One that is clearly lost on those partaking in such behaviour and feeling pleased with themselves for doing so at 'Glasto'. It made me want to keep the TV off and not watch any of the coverage, but I refuse to let the bullies win. So, with some trepidation, I headed to iPlayer and turned on the dedicated Glastonbury streaming channel. My fears were confirmed within seconds. The first thing I saw was a giant Palestinian flag – almost every subsequent shot featured at least one as well, as the flag wavers placed themselves strategically to get on air. Playing on stage was CMAT, a singer who has already pulled out of playing Latitude Festival because it is sponsored by Barclays and the bank has allegedly increased its investment in arms firms that trade with Israel. Elsewhere, U2 singer Bono's son has performed and a friend on site told me that he dedicated a song to the 'people of Palestine'. It will surely not be the last we see over the weekend. People are, of course, entitled to their views, however misguided they may be. What is not OK is creating an environment so hostile that almost every Jewish music lover I know has been dreading this weekend for weeks, knowing what was about to be broadcast across our screens by the BBC. Missing out on a major cultural event or watching a sea of hate is not a great or fair choice for Jews to have to face. Why should we have to sit around waiting for some smug performer to say something ill-informed or even anti-Semitic? How has it got to the point where you need to Google and check every artist's view on a foreign war before deciding whether or not to take in their set? Sorry to break it to you Rod Stewart, but Benjamin Netanyahu isn't going to change his approach to Gaza because you claim that 'what Netanyahu is doing to the Palestinians is exactly what happened to the Jews'. Just play 'Maggie May' instead. And then there is Kneecap. The now infamous Northern Irish rap trio's performances have caused such concern that counter-terror police reviewed footage of them. One band member found himself in court on a terror charge. He will return in August after being granted unconditional bail. Thankfully, the BBC has decided not to show their set on the West Holts Stage, which is likely to take place in front of one of the biggest crowds of the whole week. It is exhausting for Jews to have to constantly approach events like Glastonbury with such a sense of foreboding, but it's the circumstances we have found ourselves in for 20 months now. Saying 'well don't watch it then' is not an acceptable answer. No minority should be forced out of enjoying the arts, whether that is in person or on television, because they fear intimidation or abuse. And make no mistake, waving giant Palestinian flags on national TV is intimidating. It's meant to be. It would be nice if, just for once, performers and audience members alike could put down their flags and Keffiyehs and just worry about the music. Instead, I'll be watching Glastonbury slightly on edge, and remembering all those that went to the Nova festival and never came back.
Irish Examiner
14 hours ago
- Entertainment
- Irish Examiner
Online sales of affordable art reflect current global trends
The Irish art market reflects global trends, and right now these trends are particularly favourable to online sales of the type that Whyte's will hold on Monday, June 30, and Morgan O'Driscoll on Tuesday, July 1. Auctions of affordable art by popular Irish and international artists are where the market is at. The value of art sold last year went down but the number of transactions grew because of greater activity at lower levels. Even as the market remains in a state of flux the interest in acquiring art is on the up. In Ireland and around the world, more and more people are prepared to buy online at lower prices even as global uncertainty contributes to a situation where fewer records are being broken at the top. Celebrity sells and Whyte's will have offerings by Bono (a self-portrait, though not one that you recognise him in) and Damien Hirst among their offerings. The screenprint by Bono — Self Portrait - Baked Bean Boy — is estimated at just €300-€400. Self Portrait – Baked Bean Boy by Paul Hewson (Bono) at Whyte's. Heart Spin, the acrylic by Damien Hirst, is among the most expensive offerings in the auction with an estimate of €2,500-€3,500. Among the art at the Morgan O'Driscoll sale is a poster by Tracey Emin and a preparatory design by Mainie Jellett for The Stations of the Cross. The latter artist is currently on show at the National Gallery, where The Art of Friendship exhibition featuring paintings, stained glass and preparatory drawings by Mainie Jellett and Evie Hone continues until August 10. One of a set of six prints from the Irish animal series by Pauline Bewick at Whyte's. With estimates from €80 and €100 up at both Whyte's and Morgan O'Driscol,l there should be more than enough to tempt newcomers to the exciting world of Irish art auctions. They will join a growing band of seasoned collectors. Choices from 286 lots at Whytes include work by Gerard Byrne, Cecil Maguire, Desmond Carrick, Susan Webb, Peter Curling, Banksy, Pauline Bewick, John B Yeats, Tom Nisbet, Harry Kernoff and Joseph Sloan. On Watch by Graham Knuttel at Morgan O'Driscoll. The were will be 430 lots at Morgan O'Driscoll's sale with work by Graham Knuttel, Donald Teskey, Brian MacMahon, Gretta O'Brien, Ken Hamilton, Bridget Flannery, Ivan Sutton, Annemarie Bourke, Louis le Brocquy, Arthur Armstrong, Maria Simonds-Gooding and Maurice Desmond. The auction at Whyte's is on view this afternoon and all day Monday in Dublin. Morgan O'Driscoll viewing is in Skibbereen from 11am to 5pm on Monday and Tuesday. The catalogues for both sales are online. Read More Antiques: A hot Georgian wine cooler and a cool Edwardian desk in Cork
Irish Examiner
14 hours ago
- Politics
- Irish Examiner
Jennifer Horgan: Why moral clarity won't bring peace — the case for radical acceptance
I'd like to thank Terry Prone for her respectful disagreement with my column on Botox last week. Someone respectfully disagreeing means a lot. In a world of noise and distraction it is a considerable honour. I had a less public disagreement with another of my columns a few weeks back - a letter that came through my door. When I read it first, I felt wounded. Then I re-read it. Like the articulate and always insightful Terry Prone, the reader simply had a different take – an intelligent and considered one. The response was to a column I wrote about Bono mentioning Hamas at the Ivor Novello awards. I suggested that Bono avoided side-taking to achieve peace, even, yes, in the context of genocide. The letter accused me of 'moral blindness' for seeing genocide as equivalent to war. The reader had interpreted my column correctly. Peace to me is the absence of violence – it can be called for anywhere, at any time. It is the most important thing, never redundant. It is also far more important than right and wrong. We need a kind of 'moral blindness' if we are to survive as a species. In the most extreme cases, we must all become temporarily and wilfully 'blind' to right and wrong. Let me explain. I have spent my whole life thinking and teaching about right and wrong. I'm an ethics teacher. I studied philosophy and have taught it too. I've spent hours on the 'trolley problem'. I've debated with teenagers over the morality of travelling back in time to kill Hitler. But I realise now that the right and wrong debate is a surface one. For peace and survival, we must travel a lot deeper - stepping into what is uncomfortable and confronting – the undergrowth of human difference. In this murky slop, lies peace. The most important thing, if we are to get on with each other, is not morality; it is belief in humanity – an unshakeable belief in humanity, no matter what. It has been a terrifying week. Humans in Gaza continue to starve and die. In South Sudan, 45 million children live through crises intensified by cholera outbreaks, malnutrition, drought and floods. Bombs are flying between Iran and Israel. America is taking the return to violence as a petty, personal insult. Trump had wanted to package away the '12-day war' neatly, like a gift, a perfectly wrapped win for America. He had wanted to keep it in his office drawer, taking it out every so often for show and tell, evidence of America being great again. President Donald Trump had wanted to keep the '12-day war' between Israel and Iran in his office drawer, taking it out every so often for show and tell, evidence of America being great again. File photo: AP/Alex Brandon Leaders and their domestic broadcasters are feeding their people stories about winners and losers, goodies, and baddies. It is a tale of right and wrong, one that changes with the teller and the telling. Trump is pushing it to the comical. He was laughing, I presume, when he posted a video with a mash-up of The Beach Boys Barbara Ann on Truth Social. 'Bomb Iran' is the new hook, the song containing the sophisticated lyrics: 'Went to a mosque/Gotta throw some rocks/Tell the Ayatollah gonna put him in a box.' But look at how the rest of us react. We all talk about countries like Israel in absolute terms. To say anything else is to be accused of 'moral blindness', as I was in that letter. Israel are the bad guys, right? They are no longer human beings. The reaction is understandable, but it doesn't solve anything. To solve it, we need psychology. It is not moral philosophy but psychology that has the power to change politics. I am thinking particularly of Unconditional Positive Regard (UPR), a concept developed by Carl Rogers, one of the founding fathers of Humanistic Psychology. It's a tough pill to swallow – to think that even Benjamin Netanyahu deserves radical acceptance. Radical acceptance absolutely isn't about accepting someone's behaviour. We still condemn the action. We condemn genocide. It's about remembering that the other is, ultimately, always a human being. File photo: Ronen Zvulun via AP Radical Positive Regard doesn't mean agreement – it is a temporary moral blindness only, a suspension of morality if you will. It can even mean violence to stop what is happening in the short term, but it demands we engage, listen, and communicate. The driving force is not right and wrong but a belief in humanity – even when the human in question is behaving like a devil. Netanyahu is a human. He is a human facing corruption charges. A human whose reputation was destroyed on October 7 when he failed to protect his people, a traumatised people, and he is doing anything he can do to regain their trust. He is a human with motivations and feelings. The attacks on Iran are increasing his popularity. His people have a bloodlust we must try to understand. Not condone – no. That is not what this is about. We must maintain our positive regard for them as human beings only to engage and bring about change. We will have plenty of time for morality. The need for this approach exists at a local as well as a global level. Look at the research shared by this paper on crime this week. Criminals in Cork, as I have written about before, are far more likely to come from our Northside. Our prison is overpopulated with people with stories of abuse, deprivation and addiction. The behaviours may be morally wrong and abhorrent, but they come from somewhere. Labelling men behind bars 'bad' or worse, 'scumbags', won't change anything; the cycle continues. We must suspend our moral condemnation long enough to listen, thereby putting an end to violence, conflict and anti-social behaviour. The local is global. Rogers proved it in his lifetime by applying his 'person-centred approach' to politics and national conflicts, working with groups in Northern Ireland and Central America. In the early 70s, he worked with the 'Steel Shutter' group of Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland. They shared their experiences and their hatred for one another but by the end of it, they felt differently. Rogers didn't have the funds to carry on the work, but the group continued to meet in the home of one of the participants - an ex-British colonel, because his home was the safest. Then they went out in pairs, one Catholic and one Protestant, to show the film of their conversation to community groups, schools, and parishes. 'Radical acceptance' The Israelis have a story to tell. The Palestinians have a story to tell. The Iranians have a story to tell. They all have feelings and motivations. Whether we think they are right or wrong is of secondary importance if we are interested in ending violence. Thankfully, there are people carrying the Rogerian baton – thinkers like Mick Cooper, a UK academic who explains the approach in his recent book Psychology at The Heart of Social Change. It's a tough pill to swallow – to think that even Netanyahu deserves radical acceptance. In terms of responding, that must be balanced against his actions. Radical acceptance absolutely isn't about accepting someone's behaviour. We still condemn the action. We condemn genocide. It's about remembering that the other is, ultimately, always a human being, with human wants and needs like the rest of us, and that few people do things out of 'pure evil'. To create a more compassionate world, we need to understand what people are striving for and dividing the world into 'good people like us' and 'bad people like them' is exactly what Netanyahu is doing, or Hamas, or Trump. If we just buy into that narrative, we perpetuate a world of polarisation and, ultimately, violence. 'Radical acceptance' is about trying to step off that treadmill for good. This week, another letter, by Eddie O'Brien, Director of The Thinking Centre, addressed Ursula von der Leyen in this paper. It drew attention to her comment while attending the G7 summit in Canada, that, 'Israel has the right to defend itself, Iran is the principal source of regional instability, and Iran is the source of terror in the Middle East.' Mr O'Brien writes: 'By so prematurely and so publicly announcing of the taking of the side of Israel against Iran, how can Iran be expected to listen, trust, or have any kind of constructive relationship with any peace initiative the European Union may later propose?' It is a fine letter. Read More Iranian response in Doha was only a carefully choreographed demonstration
Irish Examiner
2 days ago
- Politics
- Irish Examiner
Jennifer Horgan: Radical acceptance means treating people like humans - even those doing evil
I'd like to thank Terry Prone for her respectful disagreement with my column on Botox last week. Someone respectfully disagreeing means a lot. In a world of noise and distraction it is a considerable honour. I had a less public disagreement with another of my columns a few weeks back - a letter that came through my door. When I read it first, I felt wounded. Then I re-read it. Like the articulate and always insightful Terry Prone, the reader simply had a different take – an intelligent and considered one. The response was to a column I wrote about Bono mentioning Hamas at the Ivor Novello awards. I suggested that Bono avoided side-taking to achieve peace, even, yes, in the context of genocide. The letter accused me of 'moral blindness' for seeing genocide as equivalent to war. The reader had interpreted my column correctly. Peace to me is the absence of violence – it can be called for anywhere, at any time. It is the most important thing, never redundant. It is also far more important than right and wrong. We need a kind of 'moral blindness' if we are to survive as a species. In the most extreme cases, we must all become temporarily and wilfully 'blind' to right and wrong. Let me explain. I have spent my whole life thinking and teaching about right and wrong. I'm an ethics teacher. I studied philosophy and have taught it too. I've spent hours on the 'trolley problem'. I've debated with teenagers over the morality of travelling back in time to kill Hitler. But I realise now that the right and wrong debate is a surface one. For peace and survival, we must travel a lot deeper - stepping into what is uncomfortable and confronting – the undergrowth of human difference. In this murky slop, lies peace. The most important thing, if we are to get on with each other, is not morality; it is belief in humanity – an unshakeable belief in humanity, no matter what. It has been a terrifying week. Humans in Gaza continue to starve and die. In South Sudan, 45 million children live through crises intensified by cholera outbreaks, malnutrition, drought and floods. Bombs are flying between Iran and Israel. America is taking the return to violence as a petty, personal insult. Trump had wanted to package away the '12-day war' neatly, like a gift, a perfectly wrapped win for America. He had wanted to keep it in his office drawer, taking it out every so often for show and tell, evidence of America being great again. President Donald Trump had wanted to keep the '12-day war' between Israel and Iran in his office drawer, taking it out every so often for show and tell, evidence of America being great again. File photo: AP/Alex Brandon Leaders and their domestic broadcasters are feeding their people stories about winners and losers, goodies, and baddies. It is a tale of right and wrong, one that changes with the teller and the telling. Trump is pushing it to the comical. He was laughing, I presume, when he posted a video with a mash-up of The Beach Boys Barbara Ann on Truth Social. 'Bomb Iran' is the new hook, the song containing the sophisticated lyrics: 'Went to a mosque/Gotta throw some rocks/Tell the Ayatollah gonna put him in a box.' But look at how the rest of us react. We all talk about countries like Israel in absolute terms. To say anything else is to be accused of 'moral blindness', as I was in that letter. Israel are the bad guys, right? They are no longer human beings. The reaction is understandable, but it doesn't solve anything. To solve it, we need psychology. It is not moral philosophy but psychology that has the power to change politics. I am thinking particularly of Unconditional Positive Regard (UPR), a concept developed by Carl Rogers, one of the founding fathers of Humanistic Psychology. It's a tough pill to swallow – to think that even Benjamin Netanyahu deserves radical acceptance. Radical acceptance absolutely isn't about accepting someone's behaviour. We still condemn the action. We condemn genocide. It's about remembering that the other is, ultimately, always a human being. File photo: Ronen Zvulun via AP Radical Positive Regard doesn't mean agreement – it is a temporary moral blindness only, a suspension of morality if you will. It can even mean violence to stop what is happening in the short term, but it demands we engage, listen, and communicate. The driving force is not right and wrong but a belief in humanity – even when the human in question is behaving like a devil. Netanyahu is a human. He is a human facing corruption charges. A human whose reputation was destroyed on October 7 when he failed to protect his people, a traumatised people, and he is doing anything he can do to regain their trust. He is a human with motivations and feelings. The attacks on Iran are increasing his popularity. His people have a bloodlust we must try to understand. Not condone – no. That is not what this is about. We must maintain our positive regard for them as human beings only to engage and bring about change. We will have plenty of time for morality. The need for this approach exists at a local as well as a global level. Look at the research shared by this paper on crime this week. Criminals in Cork, as I have written about before, are far more likely to come from our Northside. Our prison is overpopulated with people with stories of abuse, deprivation and addiction. The behaviours may be morally wrong and abhorrent, but they come from somewhere. Labelling men behind bars 'bad' or worse, 'scumbags', won't change anything; the cycle continues. We must suspend our moral condemnation long enough to listen, thereby putting an end to violence, conflict and anti-social behaviour. The local is global. Rogers proved it in his lifetime by applying his 'person-centred approach' to politics and national conflicts, working with groups in Northern Ireland and Central America. In the early 70s, he worked with the 'Steel Shutter' group of Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland. They shared their experiences and their hatred for one another but by the end of it, they felt differently. Rogers didn't have the funds to carry on the work, but the group continued to meet in the home of one of the participants - an ex-British colonel, because his home was the safest. Then they went out in pairs, one Catholic and one Protestant, to show the film of their conversation to community groups, schools, and parishes. 'Radical acceptance' The Israelis have a story to tell. The Palestinians have a story to tell. The Iranians have a story to tell. They all have feelings and motivations. Whether we think they are right or wrong is of secondary importance if we are interested in ending violence. Thankfully, there are people carrying the Rogerian baton – thinkers like Mick Cooper, a UK academic who explains the approach in his recent book Psychology at The Heart of Social Change. It's a tough pill to swallow – to think that even Netanyahu deserves radical acceptance. In terms of responding, that must be balanced against his actions. Radical acceptance absolutely isn't about accepting someone's behaviour. We still condemn the action. We condemn genocide. It's about remembering that the other is, ultimately, always a human being, with human wants and needs like the rest of us, and that few people do things out of 'pure evil'. To create a more compassionate world, we need to understand what people are striving for and dividing the world into 'good people like us' and 'bad people like them' is exactly what Netanyahu is doing, or Hamas, or Trump. If we just buy into that narrative, we perpetuate a world of polarisation and, ultimately, violence. 'Radical acceptance' is about trying to step off that treadmill for good. This week, another letter, by Eddie O'Brien, Director of The Thinking Centre, addressed Ursula von der Leyen in this paper. It drew attention to her comment while attending the G7 summit in Canada, that, 'Israel has the right to defend itself, Iran is the principal source of regional instability, and Iran is the source of terror in the Middle East.' Mr O'Brien writes: 'By so prematurely and so publicly announcing of the taking of the side of Israel against Iran, how can Iran be expected to listen, trust, or have any kind of constructive relationship with any peace initiative the European Union may later propose?' It is a fine letter. Read More Iranian response in Doha was only a carefully choreographed demonstration
Morocco World
2 days ago
- Sport
- Morocco World
RB Salzburg vs Real Madrid: When, Where, How to Watch, Score Prediction
Rabat – Real Madrid and RB Salzburg are set to clash on Thursday at the Lincoln Financial Field in Philadelphia as part of the FIFA Club World Cup. With both teams tied at 4 points in the group stage of the 2025 FIFA Club World Cup, this match will determine who takes the top spot in Group H. Kick off is at 2 a.m. Moroccan time (GMT+1), and fans can watch the game on DAZN, TNT, TBS, and TruTV. Real Madrid enters the match with confidence after a 3-1 victory over Pachuca, while Salzburg struggled to score against Al Hilal, with goalkeeper Bono blocking every shot and leaving them frustrated. The losing team will be at serious risk of elimination from the tournament, as a victory of Al Hilal over Pachuca would guarantee their exit. Predicted Lineups Real Madrid : Courtois; Alexander-Arnold, Tchouaméni, Huijsen, F. García; Valverde; Güler, Bellingham; Mbappe, G. García, Vinícius Júnior RB Salzburg : Zawieschitzky; Lainer, Gadou, Rasmussen, Krätzig; Nene, Bidstrup, Diabate, Gloukh; Baidoo, Onisiwo Predicted Score MWN thinks RB Salzburg with a 3 – 1
