That statistic! I don't know who those three families are (but I bet Bush is one of them) but having a shared income greater than the 48 poorest countries! That is a statistic to quote in any discussion of global justice!
Thursday, September 27, 2007
this site is awesome!
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
head of Catholic Church in Mozambique publically states that condoms come preinfected with HIV
Archbishop Francisco Chimoio is a perfect example of the idiocy of religion. Darwin award for that man!
electoral dysfunction
Johann brought out this old article he wrote during the last general election. Its pretty damning of the pseudo-democratic state of UK politics.
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a twat
Let's see how the cristo-fascists of the US will respond to the content of his speech today. He denied that homosexuals exist in Iran and he denied that Iran had any intention of developing nuclear warheads. At least one of those two statements is blatantly false, so why not the other?
Nice one, you savage, mysogynistic fuckwit!
Nice one, you savage, mysogynistic fuckwit!
Monday, September 24, 2007
Nick Cohen is a right twat but I agree with his position on Wahhabism
An interesting point to note about Nick's argument is that although he compares massive Saudi cash inputs to a hypothetical European Protestant evangelism in Saudi, this isn't a very good example. Much of Europe is now avowedly secular and so a better example, and one that is very much a reality in Saudi Arabia at the moment- unlike the banned evangelism of other religions- would have been the promotion of secular democracy. The Saudis are just as resistant to that particular piece of philosophy and it reveals a lot more of the insanity of their extremist position than any example of bible-bashing Jesus freak religion does (just as bad in my eyes).
Sunday, September 16, 2007
Iraq
Interesting background to the insurgency and how small a part in it Al Qaeda play.
A fascinating book review from Znet. Anthony Arnove has written a text that lays out comprehensive arguments for a withdrawal from Iraq.
"The reality of the current and perhaps subsequent administrations is that any conjecture that relies “on the intelligence, rationality, or humanity ofU.S.
Johann Hari also suggested a strategy for withdrawal which oozes common sense. It is the product of a US Senator called Geroge McGovern, a Vietnam Vet to boot.
"it begins with a simple apology from the US, Britain and other invaders for the catastrophe we have wrought – the opposite of Bush’s deranged demands for thanks. There must then be a commitment to dismantle all permanent US bases on Iraqi soil, and to allow the ownership of Iraqi oil by all Iraqi citizens – with the royalties divided equally between every Iraqi and paid out as a regular cheque, like they do in Alaska.
The US then needs to convene a regional conference, at which they pledge to pay full-whack for an international stabilization force to police Iraq, manned exclusively by Muslim countries like Morrocco, Tuinisia, Egypt, and Jordan. These countries will need all sorts of financial inducements to send troops. Tough. Pay them. McGovern calculates that even at top-rate, this would cost $5.5bn – just 3 percent of keeping the US forces there for the next two years. Once the police are fellow-Muslims, the often-murderous insurgents will be much more isolated. Al Qaeda’s tiny presence (estimated by US generals to be fewer than 500 fighters) will be even more despised. Only troops like this could have the legitimacy needed to stop a genocide."
A fascinating book review from Znet. Anthony Arnove has written a text that lays out comprehensive arguments for a withdrawal from Iraq.
"The reality of the current and perhaps subsequent administrations is that any conjecture that relies “on the intelligence, rationality, or humanity of
Johann Hari also suggested a strategy for withdrawal which oozes common sense. It is the product of a US Senator called Geroge McGovern, a Vietnam Vet to boot.
"it begins with a simple apology from the US, Britain and other invaders for the catastrophe we have wrought – the opposite of Bush’s deranged demands for thanks. There must then be a commitment to dismantle all permanent US bases on Iraqi soil, and to allow the ownership of Iraqi oil by all Iraqi citizens – with the royalties divided equally between every Iraqi and paid out as a regular cheque, like they do in Alaska.
The US then needs to convene a regional conference, at which they pledge to pay full-whack for an international stabilization force to police Iraq, manned exclusively by Muslim countries like Morrocco, Tuinisia, Egypt, and Jordan. These countries will need all sorts of financial inducements to send troops. Tough. Pay them. McGovern calculates that even at top-rate, this would cost $5.5bn – just 3 percent of keeping the US forces there for the next two years. Once the police are fellow-Muslims, the often-murderous insurgents will be much more isolated. Al Qaeda’s tiny presence (estimated by US generals to be fewer than 500 fighters) will be even more despised. Only troops like this could have the legitimacy needed to stop a genocide."
this is really fucking scary
The Guardian's article declaring that open warfare could erupt imminently is an appalling piece of journalism. Firstly it does not condemn the open aggression on the part of the US. It does not question any of the US's groundless excuses for their aggression and it simply comments that Gordon Brown will be faced with some sort of dilemma as to with whom to side in any ensuing confrontation- the answer to which should be obvious to anyone with the slightest trace of humanity. But the most alarming piece is the open statement by some ex-CIA source that the decision to go to war has already been taken without any evidence being presented to support such a threat to the already badly destabilised global security situation.
Basically, this is an open declaration of the of editorial team's indifference to another war of aggression by the US.
More on the US escalation.
More.
More.
Possible consequences.
Basically, this is an open declaration of the of editorial team's indifference to another war of aggression by the US.
More on the US escalation.
More.
More.
Possible consequences.
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
this blogger predicts the collapse of the iraqi state within a year
Johann Hari says this:
"Almost every institution of the Iraqi state – the police, army, even the hospitals – are now bisected into Shia and Sunni wings who detest each other. What we are seeing in Iraq today is, in slower motion, what happened in India and Pakistan sixty years ago: the hellish ethnic cleansing of mixed areas, until everyone is trapped in homogenous blocks. There is a real and hefty risk that this will metastasize into an attempt to physically eliminate one of the groups. There is also a risk of the neighbouring countries invading, turning it into a Congo-on-the-Tigris, with the Saudis marching into defend the Sunnis, the Iranians invading to protect the Shia, and the Turks invading to prevent the creation of a mini-Kurdistan in the North.
But is this a case for keeping the US forces there? A recent, much-discussed-in-DC article in the New York Times by Brookings Institute scholars Michael O’Hanlan and Kenneth Pollack said so. They argued that ‘the surge’ of 21,000 troops into Iraq is finally working, and creating momentum away from sectarian violence.
If this was true, it would be important - but their own Institute’s figures show it is the opposite of the truth. It makes no sense to compare statistics on violence in Iraq month-to-month, because the violence fluctuates seasonally (as it does in most cities in the world). For reliable figures, you have to compare this July to last July. And what do you find in Brookings’ statistics? Iraqi military and police killed are up 23 percent. The number of people killed in multiple fatality bombings is up 19 percent. US troop fatalities are up 80 percent. The size of the insurgency is up 250 percent. Attacks on oil and gas pipelines are up 75 percent. The refugee outflow has doubled. Hours of electricity available per day are down 14 percent. Far from creating the space for political compromise among Iraqis, the Sunnis and secularists have marched angrily out of the Maliki government."
I reckon there's not long to go now. The US won't pull troops out whilst Bush is in power. For any reason, no matter how perversely motivated by their domestic political agenda and sheer selfishness. So the state will wobble on and on until some massive suicide bomb makes into the parliament and kills half the MPs and the state simply collapses. Then we have genocide whilst US soldiers stand by, not caring because fewer people are shooting at them now.
"Almost every institution of the Iraqi state – the police, army, even the hospitals – are now bisected into Shia and Sunni wings who detest each other. What we are seeing in Iraq today is, in slower motion, what happened in India and Pakistan sixty years ago: the hellish ethnic cleansing of mixed areas, until everyone is trapped in homogenous blocks. There is a real and hefty risk that this will metastasize into an attempt to physically eliminate one of the groups. There is also a risk of the neighbouring countries invading, turning it into a Congo-on-the-Tigris, with the Saudis marching into defend the Sunnis, the Iranians invading to protect the Shia, and the Turks invading to prevent the creation of a mini-Kurdistan in the North.
But is this a case for keeping the US forces there? A recent, much-discussed-in-DC article in the New York Times by Brookings Institute scholars Michael O’Hanlan and Kenneth Pollack said so. They argued that ‘the surge’ of 21,000 troops into Iraq is finally working, and creating momentum away from sectarian violence.
If this was true, it would be important - but their own Institute’s figures show it is the opposite of the truth. It makes no sense to compare statistics on violence in Iraq month-to-month, because the violence fluctuates seasonally (as it does in most cities in the world). For reliable figures, you have to compare this July to last July. And what do you find in Brookings’ statistics? Iraqi military and police killed are up 23 percent. The number of people killed in multiple fatality bombings is up 19 percent. US troop fatalities are up 80 percent. The size of the insurgency is up 250 percent. Attacks on oil and gas pipelines are up 75 percent. The refugee outflow has doubled. Hours of electricity available per day are down 14 percent. Far from creating the space for political compromise among Iraqis, the Sunnis and secularists have marched angrily out of the Maliki government."
I reckon there's not long to go now. The US won't pull troops out whilst Bush is in power. For any reason, no matter how perversely motivated by their domestic political agenda and sheer selfishness. So the state will wobble on and on until some massive suicide bomb makes into the parliament and kills half the MPs and the state simply collapses. Then we have genocide whilst US soldiers stand by, not caring because fewer people are shooting at them now.
Sunday, September 09, 2007
Saturday, September 08, 2007
Friday, September 07, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)