So five or so US generals have threatened to resign if ordered to attack Iran? Isn’t it great that serving generals can openly communicate to Iran the mindset of the USA and lack of resolve of the USA military?
Is it any surprise that their own officers and soldiers openly mutiny against being sent to serve in Iraq? Many would argue that these generals should be arrested and locked up for a long time for revealing such discontent.
This of course strengthens Iran’s resolve to thumb it’s nose at the west and all it’s threats. Iran knows that the west lacks the resolve and guts to carry out any threats, despite what Dick Cheney may have said yesterday. Iran also knows that whatever hot air that spineless and morally bankrupt organisation, the UN, may spout, they can just ignore it.
The Iranian leadership continues to occasionally throw into the public relations pot for gullible western consumption that they are being persecuted and very reasonable and open to discussing the suspension of their nuclear programme if everybody else also suspends theirs.
What masters of negotiation the Iranians are. Particularly now that they are negotiating from a position of control, knowledge and consequently strength, unlike their opponents the USA and the west who have already revealed all their cards in the free media and now have no credible threats left to use! I wonder how long it will be before the west reaps the potentially horrific consequences of this insane game!
Sunday, 25 February 2007
Thursday, 22 February 2007
WHY CAN’T I HAVE INSTANT VICTORY WITH MY INSTANT COFFEE?
Instant mash potatoes, instant coffee, instant almost anything you want to buy, but surprise, surprise, no instant victory in Iraq!
According to Britain’s former ambassador to Baghdad, Sir Jeremy Greenstock, Tony Blair has been choking on his cup of instant soup (if he drinks such stuff) over the speed at which control has been, or hasn’t been, achieved in Iraq. Okay, I made up the bit about choking over his instant soup, but the reality is that it seems that Blair, like the majority of the western world, has expected victory as instant as the instant everything which the fat west have got used to! According to Sir Jeremy, Blair was “tearing his hair” at the slow progress. Well that would explain what has happened to his hair over the last few years!
I wonder what it is about the western mentality which expects everything to fall instantly into it’s lap? Why do we all come apart when it doesn’t all happen instantly for us the way we planned it? Why do we then inflict the consequences of that mentality upon our allies who have relied on us and trusted us at our word when we said that we would see it through with them, when we really meant that we would see it through as long as it didn’t go beyond our expectations of an instant victory and beyond our capacity to take failure on the way to the victory? So, the Iraqi’s are being left to largely to their own devices to tidy up the mess we have made, something infinitely more annoying than a child having friends around to play with his toys and then being left to take the punishment for and put right the breakages and mess made by the friends who suddenly upped and left when it all got too messy. “Wasn’t me sir! Not my mess! I’m off!”
Unfortunately, the majority of people in the west seem to have lost the ability to ‘take it on the chin’ any more! Imagine how strange we would think it to be if a boxer entered the ring with the expectation that they would not get hit. They simply look to be able to absorb the hits better than their opponent and hopefully receive less than they give.
The allied western forces, rightly or wrongly, entered the fray in Iraq with a commitment to the people of Iraq that they would not abandon them until stability was achieved in the region. Now I don’t want anybody to think that I am belittling the sacrifices made by the young men and women of the allied forces in Iraq; but that should not be the reason for our withdrawing from Iraq is happening now.
How are we perceived by the average honest, law abiding and peace yearning Iraqi who is being abandoned in their hour of need because we have lost soldiers of the allied forces. It is easy to argue that it’s not our war, we should never have been there in the first place, we were deceived into supporting the war in the first place, or any of the other arguments which we read of in the news every day. But the point is that we are responsible for the war, we did give the Iraqi people certain expectations as to our commitment and now, with our eyes only on appeasing the people at home about the cost in terms of lives and money right now, we are pushing towards withdrawal and the sacrifice of tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of Iraqis in the bloody civil war which will escalate in a battle for control as the allied troops withdraw. There is also no thought from those pushing for withdrawal, to the incredible cost we will pay for many years to come due to the immense instability of the region. All those people think about is the ‘instant fix’. The easy, instant solution which makes themselves feel better about life today.
The Iranians, Syrians and every other Islamic militia with an eye on Iraq will not count the cost in the same way. The cost to them is just a public relations tool to use against the west. We need to be prepared to persevere, to stick with it. In fact we have a duty and obligation to persevere. We need to take a lesson from Thomas Edison who knew all about perseverance and said, “our greatest weakness lies in giving up. The most certain way to succeed is always to try just one more time”.
According to Britain’s former ambassador to Baghdad, Sir Jeremy Greenstock, Tony Blair has been choking on his cup of instant soup (if he drinks such stuff) over the speed at which control has been, or hasn’t been, achieved in Iraq. Okay, I made up the bit about choking over his instant soup, but the reality is that it seems that Blair, like the majority of the western world, has expected victory as instant as the instant everything which the fat west have got used to! According to Sir Jeremy, Blair was “tearing his hair” at the slow progress. Well that would explain what has happened to his hair over the last few years!
I wonder what it is about the western mentality which expects everything to fall instantly into it’s lap? Why do we all come apart when it doesn’t all happen instantly for us the way we planned it? Why do we then inflict the consequences of that mentality upon our allies who have relied on us and trusted us at our word when we said that we would see it through with them, when we really meant that we would see it through as long as it didn’t go beyond our expectations of an instant victory and beyond our capacity to take failure on the way to the victory? So, the Iraqi’s are being left to largely to their own devices to tidy up the mess we have made, something infinitely more annoying than a child having friends around to play with his toys and then being left to take the punishment for and put right the breakages and mess made by the friends who suddenly upped and left when it all got too messy. “Wasn’t me sir! Not my mess! I’m off!”
Unfortunately, the majority of people in the west seem to have lost the ability to ‘take it on the chin’ any more! Imagine how strange we would think it to be if a boxer entered the ring with the expectation that they would not get hit. They simply look to be able to absorb the hits better than their opponent and hopefully receive less than they give.
The allied western forces, rightly or wrongly, entered the fray in Iraq with a commitment to the people of Iraq that they would not abandon them until stability was achieved in the region. Now I don’t want anybody to think that I am belittling the sacrifices made by the young men and women of the allied forces in Iraq; but that should not be the reason for our withdrawing from Iraq is happening now.
How are we perceived by the average honest, law abiding and peace yearning Iraqi who is being abandoned in their hour of need because we have lost soldiers of the allied forces. It is easy to argue that it’s not our war, we should never have been there in the first place, we were deceived into supporting the war in the first place, or any of the other arguments which we read of in the news every day. But the point is that we are responsible for the war, we did give the Iraqi people certain expectations as to our commitment and now, with our eyes only on appeasing the people at home about the cost in terms of lives and money right now, we are pushing towards withdrawal and the sacrifice of tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of Iraqis in the bloody civil war which will escalate in a battle for control as the allied troops withdraw. There is also no thought from those pushing for withdrawal, to the incredible cost we will pay for many years to come due to the immense instability of the region. All those people think about is the ‘instant fix’. The easy, instant solution which makes themselves feel better about life today.
The Iranians, Syrians and every other Islamic militia with an eye on Iraq will not count the cost in the same way. The cost to them is just a public relations tool to use against the west. We need to be prepared to persevere, to stick with it. In fact we have a duty and obligation to persevere. We need to take a lesson from Thomas Edison who knew all about perseverance and said, “our greatest weakness lies in giving up. The most certain way to succeed is always to try just one more time”.
Tuesday, 20 February 2007
IS IT A DOVE OF PEACE? IS IT A PLANE OF WAR? NO, IT'S CONFUSION!
A variety of reports over the past 24 hours suggest Iran is moving steadily closer to achieving its first nuclear goal, which, according to Iran, is for "energy" reasons only.
Yet at the same time, Tehran has launched its largest 'war games' in a year and, according to the BBC, could find all of its military installations targeted in a United States attack on the country. As this Report is being written, the BBC are reporting that Washington’s plan includes strikes against air, naval and missile sites in addition to taking out nuclear facilities. Tehran’s nuclear program is the subject of intense diplomatic activity this week. International Atomic Energy Agency head Muhammad Al-Barade’i is meeting with Iran’s chief negotiator ‘Ali Larijani in Vienna ahead of a possible United Nations vote to impose tougher sanctions on Iran than those already in place. It is understood that any such attack ~ if ordered ~ would target Iranian air bases, naval bases, missile facilities and command-and-control centres. However, the US insists it is not planning to attack, and is trying to persuade Tehran to stop uranium enrichment.
In reports this week, the US appear to be aiming for conflicting results. On one hand, they appear unfazed by the threat of attacking Iran if Mahmoud Ahmadinejad does not curtail his plans for alleged nuclear weapons. Yet at the same time, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is chairing a seemingly pointless meeting between Palestinian leader Mahmoud ‘Abbas and Israeli premier Ehud Olmert on the "only way for real peace" by insisting on a "two State solution". Israel however, has made it clear it will not deal with the soon-to-be-formed Palestinian "unity government" (see next section of this Report), with Washington making similar if slightly less forthright noises. Domestically, Olmert has been under pressure not to go ahead with the meeting, since ‘Abbas shook hand with Hamas leaders over the unity agreement a week and a half ago. Jerusalem and Washington are insisting that Hamas, which will be the largest force in the new government, openly recognises Israel, something the organisation’s leaders are refusing to do.
Meanwhile, the UN has urged Iran to stop their programme of Nuclear energy or face economic sanctions. But sources have stated that as a fallback plan, senior officials at Central Command in Florida have already selected their target sets inside Iran. Middle East analysts have recently voiced their fears of catastrophic consequences for any such US attack on Iran. Britain's previous ambassador to Tehran, Sir Richard Dalton, told the BBC recently that it would backfire badly by probably encouraging the Iranian government to develop a nuclear weapon in the long term. Last year Iran resumed uranium enrichment - a process that can make fuel for power stations or, if greatly enriched, material for a nuclear bomb. Tehran insists its programme is for civil use only, but Western countries suspect Iran is trying to build nuclear weapons. The UN Security Council has called on Iran to suspend its enrichment of uranium by 21st February. That list includes Iran's uranium enrichment plant at Natanz. Facilities at Isfahan, Arak and Bushehr are also on the target list, the sources say.
While pressure is being applied to Iran, most of the world appear to be blind to another growing danger ~ that of the Hezbollah. According to Israel National Radio, Hezbollah continue to smuggle weapons into southern Lebanon, and has surpassed pre-war abilities. Member of Knesset Shalom stated, "If this is so, the war was a failure." Brig.-Gen. Yossi Beiditz, head of the Israeli Defence Force's (IDF)Intelligence Wing Research Division, told the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee that Hezbollah has "returned to its pre-war capabilities, and has even become stronger." Just a few days ago, Hezbollah terrorist chief Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah boasted publicly about the continuing smuggling of weapons into southern Lebanon. "We say this openly; after all, we didn't fight Israel with sticks, but with rockets," he said. "Israel doesn't know where we are hiding them." Nasrallah added that Hezbollah would not disarm, as called for in the ceasefire agreement ending last summer's war. Hezbollah fired some 4,000 Katyusha rockets at Israel last summer, killing 41 civilians (including 17 Arabs and Druze); 119 soldiers were also killed in the war. It was estimated that Hezbollah had not used even half of its rocket strength.
Should America decide to attack Iran, it could produce a huge wave, which would clearly affect Israel. On the other hand, would it be more dangerous to leave Iran alone and allow Ahmadinejad's grip of terror to continue? As for Condoleezza Rice seeking peace in her "two State" talks, the question has to be asked, "At what cost?" And by giving in to Islamic Terrorism and Terrorists leaders (don't be fooled by their western style suits), what then for the only Jewish State in the world?
Yet at the same time, Tehran has launched its largest 'war games' in a year and, according to the BBC, could find all of its military installations targeted in a United States attack on the country. As this Report is being written, the BBC are reporting that Washington’s plan includes strikes against air, naval and missile sites in addition to taking out nuclear facilities. Tehran’s nuclear program is the subject of intense diplomatic activity this week. International Atomic Energy Agency head Muhammad Al-Barade’i is meeting with Iran’s chief negotiator ‘Ali Larijani in Vienna ahead of a possible United Nations vote to impose tougher sanctions on Iran than those already in place. It is understood that any such attack ~ if ordered ~ would target Iranian air bases, naval bases, missile facilities and command-and-control centres. However, the US insists it is not planning to attack, and is trying to persuade Tehran to stop uranium enrichment.
In reports this week, the US appear to be aiming for conflicting results. On one hand, they appear unfazed by the threat of attacking Iran if Mahmoud Ahmadinejad does not curtail his plans for alleged nuclear weapons. Yet at the same time, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is chairing a seemingly pointless meeting between Palestinian leader Mahmoud ‘Abbas and Israeli premier Ehud Olmert on the "only way for real peace" by insisting on a "two State solution". Israel however, has made it clear it will not deal with the soon-to-be-formed Palestinian "unity government" (see next section of this Report), with Washington making similar if slightly less forthright noises. Domestically, Olmert has been under pressure not to go ahead with the meeting, since ‘Abbas shook hand with Hamas leaders over the unity agreement a week and a half ago. Jerusalem and Washington are insisting that Hamas, which will be the largest force in the new government, openly recognises Israel, something the organisation’s leaders are refusing to do.
Meanwhile, the UN has urged Iran to stop their programme of Nuclear energy or face economic sanctions. But sources have stated that as a fallback plan, senior officials at Central Command in Florida have already selected their target sets inside Iran. Middle East analysts have recently voiced their fears of catastrophic consequences for any such US attack on Iran. Britain's previous ambassador to Tehran, Sir Richard Dalton, told the BBC recently that it would backfire badly by probably encouraging the Iranian government to develop a nuclear weapon in the long term. Last year Iran resumed uranium enrichment - a process that can make fuel for power stations or, if greatly enriched, material for a nuclear bomb. Tehran insists its programme is for civil use only, but Western countries suspect Iran is trying to build nuclear weapons. The UN Security Council has called on Iran to suspend its enrichment of uranium by 21st February. That list includes Iran's uranium enrichment plant at Natanz. Facilities at Isfahan, Arak and Bushehr are also on the target list, the sources say.
While pressure is being applied to Iran, most of the world appear to be blind to another growing danger ~ that of the Hezbollah. According to Israel National Radio, Hezbollah continue to smuggle weapons into southern Lebanon, and has surpassed pre-war abilities. Member of Knesset Shalom stated, "If this is so, the war was a failure." Brig.-Gen. Yossi Beiditz, head of the Israeli Defence Force's (IDF)Intelligence Wing Research Division, told the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee that Hezbollah has "returned to its pre-war capabilities, and has even become stronger." Just a few days ago, Hezbollah terrorist chief Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah boasted publicly about the continuing smuggling of weapons into southern Lebanon. "We say this openly; after all, we didn't fight Israel with sticks, but with rockets," he said. "Israel doesn't know where we are hiding them." Nasrallah added that Hezbollah would not disarm, as called for in the ceasefire agreement ending last summer's war. Hezbollah fired some 4,000 Katyusha rockets at Israel last summer, killing 41 civilians (including 17 Arabs and Druze); 119 soldiers were also killed in the war. It was estimated that Hezbollah had not used even half of its rocket strength.
Should America decide to attack Iran, it could produce a huge wave, which would clearly affect Israel. On the other hand, would it be more dangerous to leave Iran alone and allow Ahmadinejad's grip of terror to continue? As for Condoleezza Rice seeking peace in her "two State" talks, the question has to be asked, "At what cost?" And by giving in to Islamic Terrorism and Terrorists leaders (don't be fooled by their western style suits), what then for the only Jewish State in the world?
Tuesday, 13 February 2007
GO TO THE TOP OF THE CLASS ARAB WORLD
Whatever one may think about their aims, one has to admire how clever the Arab world seems to have become in the last year or two when it comes to generating support from the West. It’s as if they suddenly hired Saatchi & Saatchi to advise them on a public relations ‘hearts-and-minds’ campaign.
Gone are the days of simply relying on brutality through the bullet and bomb to make their point or achieve their objectives without any regard of what the ‘unbelievers’ in the world may think. Suddenly much of the Arab world seem to be working the PR angle to make the ‘enemy’ look bad and win over the hearts of many in their enemy’s camp, as they appeal to the westerner’s culturally ingrained sense of right, wrong, justice, mercy, fair play and automatic support for the ‘underdog’ no matter what.
Has the Arab world taken lessons on the cultural aspects of the westerner’s heart and mind; what makes the westerner tick? Have they taken that knowledge to put together a plan which pushes all the right buttons in the westerner’s psyche in each and every conflict which arises? The one great lesson they seem to have learnt well about the west’s democracy, is that the truth doesn’t really matter - it’s the ‘perception’ which matters! Push the right buttons and the media will create support for your cause.
Create a conflict based on the westerner’s cultural psyche and the Palestinian can enhance the perception of total oppression when the Israeli’s go to simply repair some crumbling walls and walkways, then you get enough people to shout loudly, “see, we told you, those Israeli’s are always plotting against us! Not even the Arab world’s holiest sites are safe from them! They want to destroy our mosque and all of us. Why are they always picking on us? Why do they hate us so much? We weren’t even doing anything to them!”
Keep quietly working on developing a nuclear capability which defies logic in a country which is the third largest oil producer in the world who already produce over ten billion kilo watt hours more electricity than their whole country uses each year! Who already have so much oil that they export nearly three million barrels per day and still have over 130 billion barrels in reserve, as well as producing around 100 billion cubic metres of natural gas each year. Keep spending billions on this development of nuclear fuel despite having over 40% of your population living below the poverty level and a rising unemployment rate of nearly 15%. Then anytime the western governments speak out against this dangerous project, just start shouting loudly, “see, we told you, the west is always plotting against us! They just don’t want us to have the benefits which they have! They want us to stay in the dark ages. Why are they always picking on us? Why do they hate us so much? We weren’t even doing anything to them!”
Closer to home, plant your extremists in the ‘enemy’s’ countries, let them take full advantage of the freedom and support which those countries offer and plot against your own hosts, then when the security forces of the country attempt to block your plans, start shouting, “see, we told you, we are trying to live a good western life amongst you and yet you are always plotting against us! Non of us are safe from you! You think we’re all terrorists. You hat our religion! Why are they always picking on us? Why do you hate us so much? We weren’t even doing anything to you!”
There are enough free westerners who never look below created perception to think about the underlying reality of a situation and being good, honest people, always looking for a cause, particularly where they can support a perceived underdog, will always take on the self appointed position of ‘guardian of the oppressed’, even standing against their own government and against those who are working hard to protect them and their rights which allow them to make that stand against their own government.
So, Arab world. Go to the top of the class. You have learnt to manipulate and take advantage of the western world and their hearts and minds better than anybody else. Even better than the western citizens themselves!
Gone are the days of simply relying on brutality through the bullet and bomb to make their point or achieve their objectives without any regard of what the ‘unbelievers’ in the world may think. Suddenly much of the Arab world seem to be working the PR angle to make the ‘enemy’ look bad and win over the hearts of many in their enemy’s camp, as they appeal to the westerner’s culturally ingrained sense of right, wrong, justice, mercy, fair play and automatic support for the ‘underdog’ no matter what.
Has the Arab world taken lessons on the cultural aspects of the westerner’s heart and mind; what makes the westerner tick? Have they taken that knowledge to put together a plan which pushes all the right buttons in the westerner’s psyche in each and every conflict which arises? The one great lesson they seem to have learnt well about the west’s democracy, is that the truth doesn’t really matter - it’s the ‘perception’ which matters! Push the right buttons and the media will create support for your cause.
Create a conflict based on the westerner’s cultural psyche and the Palestinian can enhance the perception of total oppression when the Israeli’s go to simply repair some crumbling walls and walkways, then you get enough people to shout loudly, “see, we told you, those Israeli’s are always plotting against us! Not even the Arab world’s holiest sites are safe from them! They want to destroy our mosque and all of us. Why are they always picking on us? Why do they hate us so much? We weren’t even doing anything to them!”
Keep quietly working on developing a nuclear capability which defies logic in a country which is the third largest oil producer in the world who already produce over ten billion kilo watt hours more electricity than their whole country uses each year! Who already have so much oil that they export nearly three million barrels per day and still have over 130 billion barrels in reserve, as well as producing around 100 billion cubic metres of natural gas each year. Keep spending billions on this development of nuclear fuel despite having over 40% of your population living below the poverty level and a rising unemployment rate of nearly 15%. Then anytime the western governments speak out against this dangerous project, just start shouting loudly, “see, we told you, the west is always plotting against us! They just don’t want us to have the benefits which they have! They want us to stay in the dark ages. Why are they always picking on us? Why do they hate us so much? We weren’t even doing anything to them!”
Closer to home, plant your extremists in the ‘enemy’s’ countries, let them take full advantage of the freedom and support which those countries offer and plot against your own hosts, then when the security forces of the country attempt to block your plans, start shouting, “see, we told you, we are trying to live a good western life amongst you and yet you are always plotting against us! Non of us are safe from you! You think we’re all terrorists. You hat our religion! Why are they always picking on us? Why do you hate us so much? We weren’t even doing anything to you!”
There are enough free westerners who never look below created perception to think about the underlying reality of a situation and being good, honest people, always looking for a cause, particularly where they can support a perceived underdog, will always take on the self appointed position of ‘guardian of the oppressed’, even standing against their own government and against those who are working hard to protect them and their rights which allow them to make that stand against their own government.
So, Arab world. Go to the top of the class. You have learnt to manipulate and take advantage of the western world and their hearts and minds better than anybody else. Even better than the western citizens themselves!
Friday, 9 February 2007
THE DYNAMIC TRIO!
What do Oprah Winfrey, Al Gore and Leonardo DiCaprio all have in common?
Following posting my blog yesterday on the United Nations IPCC reported sleight of hand over climate change, I really couldn’t resist sitting down and passing the time with a bit of light entertainment by going over the global warming edition of the Oprah Winfrey show again, with her special guest Al Gore, or “our Noah” as Oprah adoringly referred to him.
Now I do accept that the whole subject of global warming is a very serious one and not something to be taken too lightly, but when it is made so difficult to get to the truth, perhaps it is inevitable that we are going to want to laugh at the absurdity of it all, if only as a defense mechanism kicking in due to the feeling of impotency we can have through not being able to get to the bottom of the truth!
I’m afraid to say that watching the show straight after writing and posting that blog, just made the intensity of the presenter and her guest seem so comic.
With “Our Noah” Gore, that Energizer Bunny of global warming, incessantly beating his drum, powered by his carbon-neutral battery, it would have been very difficult, if not impossible for anybody watching the show the first time round not to watch that rehash of his documentary, 'An Inconvenient Truth' without feeling a least a slight rising tide (no pun intended) of panic at the promise of apocalyptic catastrophe as he forecast the worst-case scenario, referring to it as “a nature walk through the Book of Revelation.”
Combine that scenario of an intense Gore pushing all the fear buttons of global warming, perhaps with the picture in our minds of the recent ‘Times’ magazine front cover of a polar bear in danger of drowning, hanging onto an ice floe with the warning: “Be Worried. Be Very Worried” and then add Oprah as serious as you have ever seen her, saying “wow”, “wow” with dramatic concern every so often and looking like an adoring groupie hanging onto her hero’s every word as if it has been carved by The hand of God Himself and presented to her in stone tablet form, and we have a show guaranteed to either have you reaching for your happy pills or alternatively falling about the floor in laughter at such a staged exhibition, depending on your disposition.
Actually, I thought the highlight of the show which really had me clutching my sides in laughter was when Oprah, with all the wide eyed, serious intensity of my young daughter assuring me that everything is okay and she knows what she is doing, looked directly at our Noah and confessed that she had no idea all these “terrible things” were happening until one day when she interviewed Leonardo. Yes folks, she was speaking of that noted world authority on global warming, Leonardo DiCaprio!
Now you may mock, but let me be the first to inform you, if you don’t already know, that young Leonardo is currently making his own documentary on the subject of global warming. Our Noah didn’t comment on whether he was worried about the possibility that Leonardo’s ‘feardoc’ might divert votes – sorry, I meant attention – from his own bid for something he might be doing in 2008. Actually, I think that Oprah would have a better chance of winning the presidency if she ran! Perhaps she should make her own Oprah for President campaign film? It would certainly solve the quandary of all those Black American women who don’t know whether they should be voting for the first woman to run or the first Black American man to run for the Presidency!
So folks, we now know what Oprah Winfrey, Al Gore and Leonardo DiCaprio all have in common………… Or do we?
Following posting my blog yesterday on the United Nations IPCC reported sleight of hand over climate change, I really couldn’t resist sitting down and passing the time with a bit of light entertainment by going over the global warming edition of the Oprah Winfrey show again, with her special guest Al Gore, or “our Noah” as Oprah adoringly referred to him.
Now I do accept that the whole subject of global warming is a very serious one and not something to be taken too lightly, but when it is made so difficult to get to the truth, perhaps it is inevitable that we are going to want to laugh at the absurdity of it all, if only as a defense mechanism kicking in due to the feeling of impotency we can have through not being able to get to the bottom of the truth!
I’m afraid to say that watching the show straight after writing and posting that blog, just made the intensity of the presenter and her guest seem so comic.
With “Our Noah” Gore, that Energizer Bunny of global warming, incessantly beating his drum, powered by his carbon-neutral battery, it would have been very difficult, if not impossible for anybody watching the show the first time round not to watch that rehash of his documentary, 'An Inconvenient Truth' without feeling a least a slight rising tide (no pun intended) of panic at the promise of apocalyptic catastrophe as he forecast the worst-case scenario, referring to it as “a nature walk through the Book of Revelation.”
Combine that scenario of an intense Gore pushing all the fear buttons of global warming, perhaps with the picture in our minds of the recent ‘Times’ magazine front cover of a polar bear in danger of drowning, hanging onto an ice floe with the warning: “Be Worried. Be Very Worried” and then add Oprah as serious as you have ever seen her, saying “wow”, “wow” with dramatic concern every so often and looking like an adoring groupie hanging onto her hero’s every word as if it has been carved by The hand of God Himself and presented to her in stone tablet form, and we have a show guaranteed to either have you reaching for your happy pills or alternatively falling about the floor in laughter at such a staged exhibition, depending on your disposition.
Actually, I thought the highlight of the show which really had me clutching my sides in laughter was when Oprah, with all the wide eyed, serious intensity of my young daughter assuring me that everything is okay and she knows what she is doing, looked directly at our Noah and confessed that she had no idea all these “terrible things” were happening until one day when she interviewed Leonardo. Yes folks, she was speaking of that noted world authority on global warming, Leonardo DiCaprio!
Now you may mock, but let me be the first to inform you, if you don’t already know, that young Leonardo is currently making his own documentary on the subject of global warming. Our Noah didn’t comment on whether he was worried about the possibility that Leonardo’s ‘feardoc’ might divert votes – sorry, I meant attention – from his own bid for something he might be doing in 2008. Actually, I think that Oprah would have a better chance of winning the presidency if she ran! Perhaps she should make her own Oprah for President campaign film? It would certainly solve the quandary of all those Black American women who don’t know whether they should be voting for the first woman to run or the first Black American man to run for the Presidency!
So folks, we now know what Oprah Winfrey, Al Gore and Leonardo DiCaprio all have in common………… Or do we?
Thursday, 8 February 2007
MORE HOT AIR FROM THE UN?
I really wish that all these scientists would get their act together and agree on whether we’re all doomed to die in a combination of floodwaters rising, extreme storms and C02 levels gassing us or whatever else is supposed to be happening through global warming. Should I be buying a new boat or not? Should I be repairing my water wings? Should I begin stockpiling oxygen tanks? I’m in such as tizz as to what I should expect and what I should be doing that I wouldn’t be surprised if all this stress generated over climate change catastrophes is financed by the big drug companies in an effort to sell more of their ‘happy pills’!
Well…. Don’t despair folks. A consistent story is being drummed up even as we speak! The good old United Nations' climate panel, IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), is fiddling (sorry, I should have said ‘adjusting’) the results of it’s fourth report on climate change which has been widely reported over the last few days as predicting that the imminent global apocalypse is going to be even worse than previously anticipated! Hand me another happy pill mother! Come to think about it, the way the media love to dramatise all this worrying news one would think that they were in cahoots with the drug companies as well! I feel a conspiracy theory coming on….. but then I digress. Back to the IPCC.
What seems to have been largely overlooked by all the media hype is that what has been released by the IPCC is merely the summary for policymakers, while the actual science on which that summary is allegedly based will not be formally published for a further three months! As with previous IPCC reports, the summary is a political document written not by scientists but by officials. Needless to say, various folk who have read the draft scientific material for the fourth report are saying that the IPCC summary bears little relation to the IPCC science which tells a very different story indeed — namely, that previous IPCC forecasts of the climate change apocalypse were exaggerated and wrong and that accordingly current forecasts have been drastically scaled back.
So, will we hear about that? Not if the IPCC has it’s way! Why? Because, as has already been reported in the ‘Wall Street Journal’ - one of the few papers to keep sane and sensible observations on this emotive subject - and supported by a number of scientists, we will not be able to judge for ourselves when the IPCC scientific reports are finally published because it appears that the IPCC intends to make the scientists falsify the science!
An appendix on procedures for the IPCC publication states: “The content of the authored chapters is the responsibility of the Lead Authors, subject to Working Group or Panel acceptance. Changes (other than grammatical or minor editorial changes) made after acceptance by the Working Group or the Panel shall be those necessary to ensure consistency with the Summary for Policymakers or the Overview Chapter. These changes shall be identified by the Lead Authors in writing and made available to the Panel at the time it is asked to accept the Summary for Policymakers, in case of reports prepared by the Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories by the end of the session of the Panel which adopts/accepts the report.”
What’s that again? The IPCC has said that the authors of the scientific papers will have to change their findings if they depart from the summary in order to bring them into line with it? In other words, research which apparently shows that the panic over man-made global warming is exaggerated, misleading and wrong is to be altered to support the summary’s view that man-made global warming is even worse than previously thought!
As I said earlier, there have been protests from leading scientists who are aware of this. Amongst them, Harvard University physicist Lubos Motl, who puts it into clear English for us saying, “These people are openly declaring that they are going to commit scientific misconduct that will be paid for by the United Nations. If they find an error in the summary, they won’t fix it. Instead, they will ‘adjust’ the technical report so that it looks consistent.”
Furthermore, the atmospheric physicist Richard Lindzen, who produced evidence on the study of clouds and water vapour for the IPCC’s third assessment report in 2001, said of the requirement to bring the research into line with the summary statement: “If you were doing that with a business report, the federal trade commission would be down your throat”.
All this messing about with scientific research by politicians, despite the fact that on their own website the IPCC clearly states that “The IPCC does not carry out research nor does it monitor climate related data or other relevant parameters. It bases its assessment mainly on peer reviewed and published scientific/technical literature”. Hmmm…. Doesn’t sound like that to me. But then what can I know when the truth is that well messed about with?
So there we are folks. Are we any the wiser? Do we really know what to believe now? Unfortunately, it seems that nothing is too important to be messed around with in order that somebody can promote their own political agenda.
Well…. Don’t despair folks. A consistent story is being drummed up even as we speak! The good old United Nations' climate panel, IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), is fiddling (sorry, I should have said ‘adjusting’) the results of it’s fourth report on climate change which has been widely reported over the last few days as predicting that the imminent global apocalypse is going to be even worse than previously anticipated! Hand me another happy pill mother! Come to think about it, the way the media love to dramatise all this worrying news one would think that they were in cahoots with the drug companies as well! I feel a conspiracy theory coming on….. but then I digress. Back to the IPCC.
What seems to have been largely overlooked by all the media hype is that what has been released by the IPCC is merely the summary for policymakers, while the actual science on which that summary is allegedly based will not be formally published for a further three months! As with previous IPCC reports, the summary is a political document written not by scientists but by officials. Needless to say, various folk who have read the draft scientific material for the fourth report are saying that the IPCC summary bears little relation to the IPCC science which tells a very different story indeed — namely, that previous IPCC forecasts of the climate change apocalypse were exaggerated and wrong and that accordingly current forecasts have been drastically scaled back.
So, will we hear about that? Not if the IPCC has it’s way! Why? Because, as has already been reported in the ‘Wall Street Journal’ - one of the few papers to keep sane and sensible observations on this emotive subject - and supported by a number of scientists, we will not be able to judge for ourselves when the IPCC scientific reports are finally published because it appears that the IPCC intends to make the scientists falsify the science!
An appendix on procedures for the IPCC publication states: “The content of the authored chapters is the responsibility of the Lead Authors, subject to Working Group or Panel acceptance. Changes (other than grammatical or minor editorial changes) made after acceptance by the Working Group or the Panel shall be those necessary to ensure consistency with the Summary for Policymakers or the Overview Chapter. These changes shall be identified by the Lead Authors in writing and made available to the Panel at the time it is asked to accept the Summary for Policymakers, in case of reports prepared by the Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories by the end of the session of the Panel which adopts/accepts the report.”
What’s that again? The IPCC has said that the authors of the scientific papers will have to change their findings if they depart from the summary in order to bring them into line with it? In other words, research which apparently shows that the panic over man-made global warming is exaggerated, misleading and wrong is to be altered to support the summary’s view that man-made global warming is even worse than previously thought!
As I said earlier, there have been protests from leading scientists who are aware of this. Amongst them, Harvard University physicist Lubos Motl, who puts it into clear English for us saying, “These people are openly declaring that they are going to commit scientific misconduct that will be paid for by the United Nations. If they find an error in the summary, they won’t fix it. Instead, they will ‘adjust’ the technical report so that it looks consistent.”
Furthermore, the atmospheric physicist Richard Lindzen, who produced evidence on the study of clouds and water vapour for the IPCC’s third assessment report in 2001, said of the requirement to bring the research into line with the summary statement: “If you were doing that with a business report, the federal trade commission would be down your throat”.
All this messing about with scientific research by politicians, despite the fact that on their own website the IPCC clearly states that “The IPCC does not carry out research nor does it monitor climate related data or other relevant parameters. It bases its assessment mainly on peer reviewed and published scientific/technical literature”. Hmmm…. Doesn’t sound like that to me. But then what can I know when the truth is that well messed about with?
So there we are folks. Are we any the wiser? Do we really know what to believe now? Unfortunately, it seems that nothing is too important to be messed around with in order that somebody can promote their own political agenda.
Wednesday, 7 February 2007
I’M A DRUG ADDICT – PASS ME A CHEQUE! HALLELUJAH, I’M CURED!
I was amazed to read an article describing a scheme, originally pioneered in the USA, which has been proposed by the NHS’s, 'National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence' (NICE) – perhaps as in “nice work if you can get it”?.
NICE have come up with a proposal for the NHS to help cure the ‘disease’ of drug addiction. This new ‘miracle cure’ is a proposal to give sufferers of this ‘disease’ £10 gift vouchers every time they test negative for illegal drugs! Yes folks - that’s it!
Well, I might be cynical about this, but I have been proved wrong in the past. Regular readers may remember that a few years ago I was just as cynical when the UK’s education authority came up with a similar scheme to ‘cure’ youngsters who fail to attend school, of their penchant (disease?) for skiving. I know my words all those years ago have come back to haunt me, when I stated that it was one of the daftest ideas I had ever heard and that it probably qualified as singularly the daftest? Well, I’ve been proved wrong! No…. not because it did work, but because it clearly wasn’t the ‘daftest’ idea after all! This one outdoes that one!
So, I’m not going down in print to state that this is the ultimate of all daft ideas, because I have faith in the glorious system! Perhaps in the future the British government will want to take this to the next ‘logical’ level? After all, youngsters stealing cars and joy-riding is a serious issue in the UK. So why not offer youngsters money every week that they refrain from stealing a car? Perhaps they could even qualify for a gift of a car if they go for three months without joy-riding?
Then, there’s burglary. Why not offer burglars a cheque each week they refrain from burgling? I’m sure that all these schemes could be ‘proven’ by some highly paid research to be cheaper than the cost of trials and prison!
There's no end to where this idea could go!
NICE have come up with a proposal for the NHS to help cure the ‘disease’ of drug addiction. This new ‘miracle cure’ is a proposal to give sufferers of this ‘disease’ £10 gift vouchers every time they test negative for illegal drugs! Yes folks - that’s it!
Well, I might be cynical about this, but I have been proved wrong in the past. Regular readers may remember that a few years ago I was just as cynical when the UK’s education authority came up with a similar scheme to ‘cure’ youngsters who fail to attend school, of their penchant (disease?) for skiving. I know my words all those years ago have come back to haunt me, when I stated that it was one of the daftest ideas I had ever heard and that it probably qualified as singularly the daftest? Well, I’ve been proved wrong! No…. not because it did work, but because it clearly wasn’t the ‘daftest’ idea after all! This one outdoes that one!
So, I’m not going down in print to state that this is the ultimate of all daft ideas, because I have faith in the glorious system! Perhaps in the future the British government will want to take this to the next ‘logical’ level? After all, youngsters stealing cars and joy-riding is a serious issue in the UK. So why not offer youngsters money every week that they refrain from stealing a car? Perhaps they could even qualify for a gift of a car if they go for three months without joy-riding?
Then, there’s burglary. Why not offer burglars a cheque each week they refrain from burgling? I’m sure that all these schemes could be ‘proven’ by some highly paid research to be cheaper than the cost of trials and prison!
There's no end to where this idea could go!
Tuesday, 6 February 2007
NOW IT'S THE HERRING PASSING WIND?
Following my report of the end of the world as we know it possibly coming this spring, I thought we deserved something in a lighter vein.
Now I really don't want readers to begin to think that I have some sort of schoolboy fascination for passing wind as I commented on elephants passing wind just a few days ago, but I really couldn't resist sharing this fascinating piece of scientific research just published which is guaranteed to put you off your breakfast kippers forever.
Scientist Ben Wilson of the University of British Columbia Fisheries Centre in Vancouver and his British colleagues have discovered that herring make flatulent sounds at night and may be using them to talk to each other!
Apparently, researchers always knew herring have a heightened sense of hearing, (careful not to confuse my 'herring' with 'hearing'), but Wilson is looking into how herring squeeze bubbles out of swim bladders through an anal pore at night. The result is a strange warbling that resembles flatulence and Wilson and his team are trying to get to the bottom of why they do it. (Honestly, I didn't add that unintended pun, it really was in the report)!
The scientists go on to say it appears the fishy noises are playing a social role, (anti-social I would have said) as they tend to make it mostly in the company of others. (Definitely anti-social). Wilson also said the naughty noise could also be intended to keep predators away (I'm sure it would do) or could just be a side effect of staying buoyant. (What about it being a hitherto unknown propulsion system?)
The fish flatulence study on herring, mostly found in the waters of the northern hemisphere, appeared in the Web issue of the Royal Society's Biology Letters.
I wonder if all these herring passing wind also contribute to global warming?
Now I really don't want readers to begin to think that I have some sort of schoolboy fascination for passing wind as I commented on elephants passing wind just a few days ago, but I really couldn't resist sharing this fascinating piece of scientific research just published which is guaranteed to put you off your breakfast kippers forever.
Scientist Ben Wilson of the University of British Columbia Fisheries Centre in Vancouver and his British colleagues have discovered that herring make flatulent sounds at night and may be using them to talk to each other!
Apparently, researchers always knew herring have a heightened sense of hearing, (careful not to confuse my 'herring' with 'hearing'), but Wilson is looking into how herring squeeze bubbles out of swim bladders through an anal pore at night. The result is a strange warbling that resembles flatulence and Wilson and his team are trying to get to the bottom of why they do it. (Honestly, I didn't add that unintended pun, it really was in the report)!
The scientists go on to say it appears the fishy noises are playing a social role, (anti-social I would have said) as they tend to make it mostly in the company of others. (Definitely anti-social). Wilson also said the naughty noise could also be intended to keep predators away (I'm sure it would do) or could just be a side effect of staying buoyant. (What about it being a hitherto unknown propulsion system?)
The fish flatulence study on herring, mostly found in the waters of the northern hemisphere, appeared in the Web issue of the Royal Society's Biology Letters.
I wonder if all these herring passing wind also contribute to global warming?
NO POINT IN PLANTING SUMMER BULBS THEN I SUPPOSE?
According to a report in no less than an official Iranian government website, it seems that anybody who planted anything for this summer has wasted their time! Okay, I admit that they don’t exactly refer to planting bulbs or anything like that. It’s just the first thing which bizarrely came to my mind when I read they believe that the Islamic Messiah known as the "Twelfth Imam" or the "Mahdi" may come to earth in 2007 and could be revealed to the world as early as the Spring Equinox.
The Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB) website, an official government run site, says the world is now in its "last days." It claims that the Mahdi will first appear in Mecca, and then Medina. He will conquer all of Arabia, Syria, Iraq, destroy Israel, and then set up a "global government" based in Iraq, interestingly enough, not Iran. Such Islamic eschatology (end times theology) is driving the Iranian regime and helps explains why Iran has no interest in helping the U.S. and E.U. create peace in Iraq or the region, much less in ending its bid for nuclear weapons.
Anticipation of the imminent arrival or "illumination" of the Islamic Messiah has been steadily intensifying inside Iran since Mahmoud Ahmadinejad emerged as president of the country in June of 2005. A television series on IRIB called "The World Towards Illumination" has been running since last November to help answer the many questions Iranians have about the end of the world as we know it. The series explains the signs of the last days and what to expect when the Islamic Messiah arrives.
However, there is also some seemingly good news for Christians in the programme as well, in that it states that Jesus is coming back to earth soon! The not so good news for Christians is that they say He will be returning as a Shiite Muslim leader! He will be the ‘deputy’, the assistant, to the Mahdi!
So according to these Iranian beliefs, the Islamic Mahdi will "form an army to defeat Islam's enemies in a series of apocalyptic battles" and "will overcome his arch-villain in Jerusalem."
All this possibly as soon as the Spring equinox and the first thing that comes to mind when I read this is, “but what about the summer bulbs”? Actually, thinking about it, knowing that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is about to announce a herbal cure for AIDS, why bother when most of the world is supposed to die in this apocalypse anyway?
The whole thing would be almost laughable if we didn’t know how seriously Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the Iranian leadership take these prophesies and how strongly they believe that they can influence these events to help them along. Almost like a self-fulfilling prophesy!
The Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB) website, an official government run site, says the world is now in its "last days." It claims that the Mahdi will first appear in Mecca, and then Medina. He will conquer all of Arabia, Syria, Iraq, destroy Israel, and then set up a "global government" based in Iraq, interestingly enough, not Iran. Such Islamic eschatology (end times theology) is driving the Iranian regime and helps explains why Iran has no interest in helping the U.S. and E.U. create peace in Iraq or the region, much less in ending its bid for nuclear weapons.
Anticipation of the imminent arrival or "illumination" of the Islamic Messiah has been steadily intensifying inside Iran since Mahmoud Ahmadinejad emerged as president of the country in June of 2005. A television series on IRIB called "The World Towards Illumination" has been running since last November to help answer the many questions Iranians have about the end of the world as we know it. The series explains the signs of the last days and what to expect when the Islamic Messiah arrives.
However, there is also some seemingly good news for Christians in the programme as well, in that it states that Jesus is coming back to earth soon! The not so good news for Christians is that they say He will be returning as a Shiite Muslim leader! He will be the ‘deputy’, the assistant, to the Mahdi!
So according to these Iranian beliefs, the Islamic Mahdi will "form an army to defeat Islam's enemies in a series of apocalyptic battles" and "will overcome his arch-villain in Jerusalem."
All this possibly as soon as the Spring equinox and the first thing that comes to mind when I read this is, “but what about the summer bulbs”? Actually, thinking about it, knowing that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is about to announce a herbal cure for AIDS, why bother when most of the world is supposed to die in this apocalypse anyway?
The whole thing would be almost laughable if we didn’t know how seriously Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the Iranian leadership take these prophesies and how strongly they believe that they can influence these events to help them along. Almost like a self-fulfilling prophesy!
Monday, 5 February 2007
WHAT'S THAT SOUND?
An unusual sound to the ears of the citizens of the UK was being widely reported today. A sound which seems to have delighted almost all average citizens who heard it if the reader's comments on all the online newspapers are to be believed!
It was an unusual sound in that it is not a sound heard very often these days from those in positions of authority who normally all seem more interested in making sounds which appeal to a minority rather than the majority of citizens. This was the sound of common sense and reason! "What does that sound like" you may well ask? It seems to have been so long since Britain heard it from those in authority that many had to listen through twice to make sure they had heard right, and the amazing thing is, they had!
The Archbishop of York, Dr John Sentamu, who also happens to be number two in the Anglican Church, has condemned Muslim extremists as no more than criminals - and told them to cherish British traditions and respect the law! Then, instead of going on to attempt to soften his stance and offer some justification for why the extremists might be doing what they are doing, he went on to say that religion, poverty or prejudice are no excuse for killing.
"It doesn't matter what god you worship - if your god is sending you to maim and kill people, I say to myself, 'what kind of a god is that?'" he said.
Dr Sentamu added: "I am quite sure some people feel alienated from main, successful Britain, but again I would like to say alienated people do not necessarily resort to acts of violence."
It was interesting to hear his ringing rejection of the arguments that terrorism is inspired by "Islamophobia" or by British military intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan.
By this point, our fearless government ministers would be looking for something which could soothe any ruffled feathers over such remarks, wary of lost votes, but not the fearless Archbishop. Instead he dug deeper with no interest in leaving a ladder to get out with. "Some people talk about radicalised young Muslims," Dr Sentamu said. "I think that gives them a glamour they actually shouldn't have. For me, they are people with evil intentions, breaking the law. And if they are breaking the law, they should be dealt with as law-breakers, not as people who for some strange reason have been given some kind of political theological ideology."
Then digging still deeper, he added, "If you are in Britain and you are British, you should really cherish the traditions that are here."
But Dr Sentamu did not reserve his words only for the muslim extremists, he then went on to say, "What I am not going to accept is that suddenly, overnight, people use the war in Iraq as an excuse to maim and kill other people. I don't want to accept that the evil in another person invariably should breed evil in me."
He said: "If you don't subscribe to the things that make Britain, you are going to be in trouble. It is the upholding of British law that is the most important thing.
"We have to make sure that people are making their home here and together we want to build a big enough tent to include everybody."
All this added to a series of criticisms he has made in recent months of multiculturalism, the Liberal/Left-wing doctrine which encourages different ethnic groups to develop separate interests, and his calls for more respect for British history and traditions, seemed to have been sweet music to the average on-line newspaper readers who were falling over themselves on almost all the comments forum to praise what they heard.
Did you notice my careful use of the phrase "almost all..." a few time there? That was because it was very interesting to note how some papers chose to present Dr Sentamu's speech to their readers. Predictably there were those who chose to all but ignore most of what the Archbishop said, with some of them not reporting the above portions of his speech at all, but choosing to focus only on a single sentence at the end of his speech, where he added a criticism of the Government's plan for 90-day detention of terror suspects without trial, saying that he believed it could bring Britain dangerously close to the practices of the Ugandan dictator, Idi Amin, who was responsible for Dr Sentamu leaving Uganda in the 1970's. He said, "if you're not very careful, [it becomes] very close to a police state in which they pick you up and then they say later on we'll find evidence against you".
Isn't selective journalism interesting? And isn't it so interesting to note which papers would predictably choose to practice that form of selective journalism? There's nothing like getting your own politics across to the readers instead of the news, is there?
It was an unusual sound in that it is not a sound heard very often these days from those in positions of authority who normally all seem more interested in making sounds which appeal to a minority rather than the majority of citizens. This was the sound of common sense and reason! "What does that sound like" you may well ask? It seems to have been so long since Britain heard it from those in authority that many had to listen through twice to make sure they had heard right, and the amazing thing is, they had!
The Archbishop of York, Dr John Sentamu, who also happens to be number two in the Anglican Church, has condemned Muslim extremists as no more than criminals - and told them to cherish British traditions and respect the law! Then, instead of going on to attempt to soften his stance and offer some justification for why the extremists might be doing what they are doing, he went on to say that religion, poverty or prejudice are no excuse for killing.
"It doesn't matter what god you worship - if your god is sending you to maim and kill people, I say to myself, 'what kind of a god is that?'" he said.
Dr Sentamu added: "I am quite sure some people feel alienated from main, successful Britain, but again I would like to say alienated people do not necessarily resort to acts of violence."
It was interesting to hear his ringing rejection of the arguments that terrorism is inspired by "Islamophobia" or by British military intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan.
By this point, our fearless government ministers would be looking for something which could soothe any ruffled feathers over such remarks, wary of lost votes, but not the fearless Archbishop. Instead he dug deeper with no interest in leaving a ladder to get out with. "Some people talk about radicalised young Muslims," Dr Sentamu said. "I think that gives them a glamour they actually shouldn't have. For me, they are people with evil intentions, breaking the law. And if they are breaking the law, they should be dealt with as law-breakers, not as people who for some strange reason have been given some kind of political theological ideology."
Then digging still deeper, he added, "If you are in Britain and you are British, you should really cherish the traditions that are here."
But Dr Sentamu did not reserve his words only for the muslim extremists, he then went on to say, "What I am not going to accept is that suddenly, overnight, people use the war in Iraq as an excuse to maim and kill other people. I don't want to accept that the evil in another person invariably should breed evil in me."
He said: "If you don't subscribe to the things that make Britain, you are going to be in trouble. It is the upholding of British law that is the most important thing.
"We have to make sure that people are making their home here and together we want to build a big enough tent to include everybody."
All this added to a series of criticisms he has made in recent months of multiculturalism, the Liberal/Left-wing doctrine which encourages different ethnic groups to develop separate interests, and his calls for more respect for British history and traditions, seemed to have been sweet music to the average on-line newspaper readers who were falling over themselves on almost all the comments forum to praise what they heard.
Did you notice my careful use of the phrase "almost all..." a few time there? That was because it was very interesting to note how some papers chose to present Dr Sentamu's speech to their readers. Predictably there were those who chose to all but ignore most of what the Archbishop said, with some of them not reporting the above portions of his speech at all, but choosing to focus only on a single sentence at the end of his speech, where he added a criticism of the Government's plan for 90-day detention of terror suspects without trial, saying that he believed it could bring Britain dangerously close to the practices of the Ugandan dictator, Idi Amin, who was responsible for Dr Sentamu leaving Uganda in the 1970's. He said, "if you're not very careful, [it becomes] very close to a police state in which they pick you up and then they say later on we'll find evidence against you".
Isn't selective journalism interesting? And isn't it so interesting to note which papers would predictably choose to practice that form of selective journalism? There's nothing like getting your own politics across to the readers instead of the news, is there?
Saturday, 3 February 2007
WHACKER WILSON WAS WRONG THEN?
If only I had know when I was at school! I distinctly remember old Whacker Wilson wielding his wicked wood (cane didn't begin with 'w'), and shouting at all of us impressionable youngsters "I don't care what you think! What you think is totally unimportant, so shut up, sit quietly and listen!"
Now I find that he was totally wrong and we should have had him thrown out of school according to a BBC report which assures us that: "A supply teacher has been sacked from a secondary school following complaints from Muslim pupils. Andrew McLuskey was sacked from Bayliss Court Secondary School in Slough after a Religious Education lesson discussing the pros and cons of religion. Pupils at the predominantly Muslim school claimed Mr McLuskey said most suicide bombers were Muslim… The school authorities denied they were being heavy-handed and said their first priority was pupils’ welfare. ‘I don’t think it’s important what I think,’ said the school’s deputy head teacher Ray Hinds. ‘It’s what the pupils think that were in the classroom at the time. And they were very upset.’"
Poor little things. So they were very upset at their teacher? Well, there we go then. What a beast of a teacher he must have been, upsetting the poor, sensitive little souls like that! Hmmm, I wonder if perhaps I can have a close shave, use a little botox... okay, a lot of botox... and pass myself off as a young school kid again, then I can actually enjoy school this time round?
Now I find that he was totally wrong and we should have had him thrown out of school according to a BBC report which assures us that: "A supply teacher has been sacked from a secondary school following complaints from Muslim pupils. Andrew McLuskey was sacked from Bayliss Court Secondary School in Slough after a Religious Education lesson discussing the pros and cons of religion. Pupils at the predominantly Muslim school claimed Mr McLuskey said most suicide bombers were Muslim… The school authorities denied they were being heavy-handed and said their first priority was pupils’ welfare. ‘I don’t think it’s important what I think,’ said the school’s deputy head teacher Ray Hinds. ‘It’s what the pupils think that were in the classroom at the time. And they were very upset.’"
Poor little things. So they were very upset at their teacher? Well, there we go then. What a beast of a teacher he must have been, upsetting the poor, sensitive little souls like that! Hmmm, I wonder if perhaps I can have a close shave, use a little botox... okay, a lot of botox... and pass myself off as a young school kid again, then I can actually enjoy school this time round?
STOP IT! IT'S NOT MY FAULT I'M EASILY CONFUSED!
Ahhh, bless! The poor dears at the British Foreign Office are all confused again! Over the last few months it's been their confusion over such confusing matters as "which are the Shi-ite and which are the Sunni again? Which way round is it?" Amongst other such similar seemingly unimportant issues for a country's Foreign Office....
Now it's the British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett herself who is confused once again! After the human bomb murders in Israel last weekend, the British Foreign Secretary said: "There can be no justification for attacks such as these. Our thoughts are with the families of the people killed and injured. Such incidents only serve to escalate further an already tense situation in the region. In addition, we are also gravely concerned by the violence over the weekend in the Occupied Territories. We wish to see the restoration of order by the legally constituted Palestinian security forces." Is it just me, or is anybody else even slightly worried that the British Foreign Secretary doesn't seem to know that Israel has already disengaged from Gaza and that this territory is therefore no longer an 'Occupied Territory'? Unfortunatly is seems that not only is the British Foreign Office continually confused over who is who and what is what in foreign parts, but it seems that perhaps it goes deeper than that, in that they lack even an elementary relationship with the truth?
Now it's the British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett herself who is confused once again! After the human bomb murders in Israel last weekend, the British Foreign Secretary said: "There can be no justification for attacks such as these. Our thoughts are with the families of the people killed and injured. Such incidents only serve to escalate further an already tense situation in the region. In addition, we are also gravely concerned by the violence over the weekend in the Occupied Territories. We wish to see the restoration of order by the legally constituted Palestinian security forces." Is it just me, or is anybody else even slightly worried that the British Foreign Secretary doesn't seem to know that Israel has already disengaged from Gaza and that this territory is therefore no longer an 'Occupied Territory'? Unfortunatly is seems that not only is the British Foreign Office continually confused over who is who and what is what in foreign parts, but it seems that perhaps it goes deeper than that, in that they lack even an elementary relationship with the truth?
REALLY? I THOUGHT IT WAS THE ELEPHANTS PASSING WIND!
I was fascinated by the headline 'Global Warming Very Likely Caused by Humans, UN Says', which hit all the papers yesterday. Really? I thought it was the fault of all those elephants worldwide passing gas as a result of all the greenery they eat! So what an amazing piece of research at the cost of who knows how much money to the taxpayer to finally come up without anything conclusive! "Global warming is ``very likely'' caused by humans......."? Only 'very likely'! Even the result of this 'very likely human caused global warming' hardly seems all that specific, "Temperatures are likely to rise by 1.1 to 6.4 degrees Celsius by the end of this century relative to the last"? Starting at 1.1 degrees C, or perhaps 100% more at 2.2, or perhaps 200% at 3.3, or perhaps 300% at 4.4, or perhaps 400% at 5.5, or even.... well, I'm sure that you get the general gist of what I'm getting at? Sounds like the same level of commitment I get from a financial adviser whenever I dare to ask for an estimation on projected returns for some investment they are trying hard to sell!
So now we're all so much wiser and know what the reality is and what the potential for climate change is! Right?
So now we're all so much wiser and know what the reality is and what the potential for climate change is! Right?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)