A Fistful of Euros: Life outside of Europe
From the same lot, this is amusing..
"The Bible does not predict the establishment of the State of Israel, nor does it predict that the Antichrist will attack it when there is peace with the Palestinians. Yes, I've read the entire Bible. I even used to go to Sunday school. Whatever it is you think you're reading there, it isn't there. Frankly, if there has to be peace in Israel for the world to end, I wouldn't start cashing in my stocks yet anyway.
I don't care what Jesus would do; I worry too much about about what George W. Bush would do. And, I will accept Jesus Christ as my personal saviour when you accept that you've been brainwashed by your cult.
Yes, I'm from Europe and no, I don't like Heineken. I also don't drink Coors because I don't like the taste of horse urine in a can.
France and Germany have virtually identical policies towards Iraq and it's the US that has softened its stance, not the other way around. Yes, it is entirely fair that the US should pay nearly all of the bill for rebuilding Iraq, because if you broke it, you have to fix it.
They're euros, not euro-dollars. And they're not worth eighty cents, they're worth a buck fifteen. Get used to it.
I don't care if you were in Vietnam, you're still a drunk redneck in a pick-up truck."
Got that?
Wednesday, October 29, 2003
A Fistful of Euros: The trials of the Tories
A Fistful of Euros
Well, it finally happened. Letter number 25 arrived a day after IDS demanded that the plotters move by Wednesday. (not that he had any way of preventing them from writing in after Wednesday, but let that pass) Now we will all have the free entertainment of a Tory election. They aren't really very good at elections - after all, the original tories existed to limit the franchise and support the King - and last time around they managed to have an election that neither chose nor rejected anybody. It's usually only the Swiss who do this sort of thing, but then they mean it. The important bit is, naturally, what becomes of British democracy in the event of the strange death of Conservative England. Can a democracy fly with only a left wing? Especially in a country as rightwing as Britain. We've got to admit that - just look and listen to them!
I really wonder what the country would be like without Tories - would the Labour Party, or at least the Blair content of it, swing to the right and become something like a European christian democratic outfit, as Roy Hattersley frequently accuses Blair of being? That would imply a large Liberal Democracy to the left flank, overlapping on many economic issues but well to the left on the liberal/authoritarian scale, privatisation and foreign policy. And they would doubtless pick up the defectors from the new new Labour. Or would some of those go to the hard left? Even if the Blair party would probably be capable of gathering much of the conservative camp, surely the tribal right of the Conservatives would reject and struggle on as a rump (Real Tories?). Or would they go BNP? There are simply too many Conservative voters around for the right wing to remain empty. If Labour and the Liberals were to stay where they are on the spectrum and compete, they would be disenfranchised, easy meat for a British Le Pen phenomenon.
A vision of the future - a discredited Labour party sprawled over the centre, the Blair team following instinctively their Bill Clinton/Dick Morris 1995 triangulation obsession to the right, the party pulling left, Brown and Robin Cook competing for the spiritual leadership of the Left, a much bigger Liberal party to the Left - and a 30%+ BNP or similar block. Horrible, isn't it? Especially as whatever Tory representation was left would very likely be partly in sympathy with the fascists. I've always enjoyed the spectacle of Tories suffering, it's a gut Labour instinct that survives resignation, disillusion, betrayal - but we really have to worry about the social structure without them. Perhaps in the end the best thing would be the departure to the Right of some people in the Labour Party and greater pluralism in parliament. In a proportional representation world, you could imagine the Tory divisions resolving themselves into a Stahlhelmfraktion of Tebbitite diehards and a liberal, business-conservative grouping, as well as a big Lib Dem representation and a Green presence at the other end. It might make politics more complicated, but it would at least make for balance. Maybe the answer to the challenge of realignment is to have more realignment.
Well, it finally happened. Letter number 25 arrived a day after IDS demanded that the plotters move by Wednesday. (not that he had any way of preventing them from writing in after Wednesday, but let that pass) Now we will all have the free entertainment of a Tory election. They aren't really very good at elections - after all, the original tories existed to limit the franchise and support the King - and last time around they managed to have an election that neither chose nor rejected anybody. It's usually only the Swiss who do this sort of thing, but then they mean it. The important bit is, naturally, what becomes of British democracy in the event of the strange death of Conservative England. Can a democracy fly with only a left wing? Especially in a country as rightwing as Britain. We've got to admit that - just look and listen to them!
I really wonder what the country would be like without Tories - would the Labour Party, or at least the Blair content of it, swing to the right and become something like a European christian democratic outfit, as Roy Hattersley frequently accuses Blair of being? That would imply a large Liberal Democracy to the left flank, overlapping on many economic issues but well to the left on the liberal/authoritarian scale, privatisation and foreign policy. And they would doubtless pick up the defectors from the new new Labour. Or would some of those go to the hard left? Even if the Blair party would probably be capable of gathering much of the conservative camp, surely the tribal right of the Conservatives would reject and struggle on as a rump (Real Tories?). Or would they go BNP? There are simply too many Conservative voters around for the right wing to remain empty. If Labour and the Liberals were to stay where they are on the spectrum and compete, they would be disenfranchised, easy meat for a British Le Pen phenomenon.
A vision of the future - a discredited Labour party sprawled over the centre, the Blair team following instinctively their Bill Clinton/Dick Morris 1995 triangulation obsession to the right, the party pulling left, Brown and Robin Cook competing for the spiritual leadership of the Left, a much bigger Liberal party to the Left - and a 30%+ BNP or similar block. Horrible, isn't it? Especially as whatever Tory representation was left would very likely be partly in sympathy with the fascists. I've always enjoyed the spectacle of Tories suffering, it's a gut Labour instinct that survives resignation, disillusion, betrayal - but we really have to worry about the social structure without them. Perhaps in the end the best thing would be the departure to the Right of some people in the Labour Party and greater pluralism in parliament. In a proportional representation world, you could imagine the Tory divisions resolving themselves into a Stahlhelmfraktion of Tebbitite diehards and a liberal, business-conservative grouping, as well as a big Lib Dem representation and a Green presence at the other end. It might make politics more complicated, but it would at least make for balance. Maybe the answer to the challenge of realignment is to have more realignment.
Friday, October 24, 2003
BBC NEWS |Crash victims cheer rail overhaul
BBC NEWS | Business | Crash victims cheer rail overhaul
Well, it's finally happened - Network Rail has renationalised (well, I'm going to admit it even if the government won't) all maintenance of the railways. The workers' flag is deepest red... How odd, anyway. Like Christmas coming early for a lot of people. Puts the PFI arrangements for the Tube in a very bad position - how can (say) Jarvis be considered reliable on the tube but not on the main lines? And that's all gooood.
Well, it's finally happened - Network Rail has renationalised (well, I'm going to admit it even if the government won't) all maintenance of the railways. The workers' flag is deepest red... How odd, anyway. Like Christmas coming early for a lot of people. Puts the PFI arrangements for the Tube in a very bad position - how can (say) Jarvis be considered reliable on the tube but not on the main lines? And that's all gooood.
Wednesday, October 22, 2003
Europe: best when you don't notice it?
A Fistful of Euros has this article on the slow progress and near-zero profile of the European intergovernmental conference that is currently struggling to agree the final text of the EU's new constitution. According to another blogger quoted by Fistful, EuroSavant, a tougher and more power-political approach to the Constitution might have been more effective - for example, agreeing the text between the 15 current members and presenting it as part of the accession terms to the 10 new members. I can't say I agree - apart from the obvious implications in terms of democracy and fairness, nothing could have strengthened the hand of the various, more or less nasty Europhobes like Andrzej Lepper in Poland or Meciar in Slovakia more. People in the candidate states are worried enough about the terms of entry being dictated by the west without it being any more true than it already is.
Further, I was moved to leave a comment to the effect that European integration had always been deliberately low-key - a process founded on practical and incremental measures of concrete co-operation. Like electricity supply, it's one of those things that's working when you don't notice it. I don't think it would have lasted if it had been more politically dramatic, and I have the strong impression that the EU is at its least effective when it's at its most demonstrative. The fanfares tend to be followed by farts. Recall M. Jacques Poos's pronouncement that "The hour of Europe is at hand!" immediately before the union failed to do anything of use about Yugoslavia, or the lavish ceremonies attending the renewal of the Franco-German treaties this year while the union was tearing itself apart over Iraq, constitutional reform and agriculture. Closer to home, British prime ministers tend to make grand statements about Europe just before collapsing into the latest crisis with a burst of evil-smelling tabloid gas. The historic event of Germany being represented at a European Council meeting by France was somewhat devalued by the fact that nothing was decided at the meeting.
To return to the constitution, I am moving towards the view that perhaps the mistake has been to organise it like this. The two-stage process always presented the danger that the "conventionnels" (the conventionists? the convened?) would deliberately fudge or work in bad faith in the knowledge that national and institutional interests coul be re-asserted in the IGC, as well as the prospect of a workable draft being hacked to death or drowned in waffle once the diplomatic circus of an IGC got going. It might have been better to beef up the convention with more elected members and make its final document the final text. The ratification could have been national or perhaps by referendum. More drama, I know, but perhaps more simplicity.
By the way, who is this?
"Minister," you see, implies a sovereign state - and we don't want to give any support to the notion that this Constitution will in any way create a sovereign state."
You might be surprised. It's the Czech foreign minister Cyril Svoboda talking about the proposed European foreign ministership. Remarks like this, of course, are what keep High Euroscepticism going - the enduring fantasy that a Tory government could somehow create (just like that!) a Eurosceptics' Europe without any real institutions by allying itself with (the exact allies change under pressure) "the Scandinavians" or "the new members". Remember Iain Duncan Smith's "Prague Declaration" earlier this year. Of course you do. Go on. What, you don't remember? The problem is, of course, that the new members want to join the EU. They don't want to join some second-class outfit on the fringes - it looks far too much like the various ideas put forward to stall them in the 1990s. (the European Confederation, anyone?) And in fact Mr. Svoboda's position is far closer to Tony Blair's than anyone in the Conservative Party but (perhaps) Ken Clarke. It's not the thing he objects to, note, but the name.
Not that it will put the backbench Bismarcks like David Heathcoat-Amory off their pipes, though. Now, I suppose, they like this idea even more because Don Rumsfeld has made it sound American and exciting.
Further, I was moved to leave a comment to the effect that European integration had always been deliberately low-key - a process founded on practical and incremental measures of concrete co-operation. Like electricity supply, it's one of those things that's working when you don't notice it. I don't think it would have lasted if it had been more politically dramatic, and I have the strong impression that the EU is at its least effective when it's at its most demonstrative. The fanfares tend to be followed by farts. Recall M. Jacques Poos's pronouncement that "The hour of Europe is at hand!" immediately before the union failed to do anything of use about Yugoslavia, or the lavish ceremonies attending the renewal of the Franco-German treaties this year while the union was tearing itself apart over Iraq, constitutional reform and agriculture. Closer to home, British prime ministers tend to make grand statements about Europe just before collapsing into the latest crisis with a burst of evil-smelling tabloid gas. The historic event of Germany being represented at a European Council meeting by France was somewhat devalued by the fact that nothing was decided at the meeting.
To return to the constitution, I am moving towards the view that perhaps the mistake has been to organise it like this. The two-stage process always presented the danger that the "conventionnels" (the conventionists? the convened?) would deliberately fudge or work in bad faith in the knowledge that national and institutional interests coul be re-asserted in the IGC, as well as the prospect of a workable draft being hacked to death or drowned in waffle once the diplomatic circus of an IGC got going. It might have been better to beef up the convention with more elected members and make its final document the final text. The ratification could have been national or perhaps by referendum. More drama, I know, but perhaps more simplicity.
By the way, who is this?
"Minister," you see, implies a sovereign state - and we don't want to give any support to the notion that this Constitution will in any way create a sovereign state."
You might be surprised. It's the Czech foreign minister Cyril Svoboda talking about the proposed European foreign ministership. Remarks like this, of course, are what keep High Euroscepticism going - the enduring fantasy that a Tory government could somehow create (just like that!) a Eurosceptics' Europe without any real institutions by allying itself with (the exact allies change under pressure) "the Scandinavians" or "the new members". Remember Iain Duncan Smith's "Prague Declaration" earlier this year. Of course you do. Go on. What, you don't remember? The problem is, of course, that the new members want to join the EU. They don't want to join some second-class outfit on the fringes - it looks far too much like the various ideas put forward to stall them in the 1990s. (the European Confederation, anyone?) And in fact Mr. Svoboda's position is far closer to Tony Blair's than anyone in the Conservative Party but (perhaps) Ken Clarke. It's not the thing he objects to, note, but the name.
Not that it will put the backbench Bismarcks like David Heathcoat-Amory off their pipes, though. Now, I suppose, they like this idea even more because Don Rumsfeld has made it sound American and exciting.
Monday, October 20, 2003
Excessive force in Rafah
Ha'aretz story
"The Rafah operation, named "Root Canal," has been underway for 10 days. It involves large numbers of infantry, armor and engineering troops, backed up by attack helicopters. So far the operation has been only partially successful.Three tunnels have been found and demolished. But there is reason to believe that there are many more tunnels running under the border. The tunnels are not only used to move weapons that end up in the hands of the terror organizations, but also to smuggle in goods and merchandise. There's no disputing the justice of Israel's position that the tunnels are flagrant violations of past security commitments made by the Palestinian Authority to prevent the uncontrolled flow of arms into areas under its control. No less
understandable is Israel's frustration over Egypt's failure to do anything to block the smuggling routes.
But there is nothing in the justification of Israel's position that can sweepingly justify the military activity underway on the ground -
neither its dimensions nor the character of the operation, which appears to be violent and arbitrary. So far, the operation has led to the deaths of two children, aged 8 and 12, and
apparently other innocents, as well. The operation has destroyed the homes of hundreds of people, who unluckily lived along the border and their homes were searched by soldiers looking for the tunnels. In some cases, homes were demolished because tunnels were indeed found under them. But in other cases, it's been reported, multi-storey buildings were toppled for no reason."
"Root Canal". How amusing. Does anyone really think that this sort of bullying exercise serves any purpose at all? No. The problem is that the Sharon-ist mind assumes that the Palestinians will be bullied into submission, and that this can be achieved by the same means as when Sharon was commanding in Gaza in 1970 - bulldozing houses on a variety of quasimilitary pretexts ("fields of fire") as a form of preemptive intimidation. It isn't going to work again. An Irish comedian recently described the War on Terrorism as "like trying to swat a fly in your kitchen with a fridge". If anyone believes that they are really looking for individual terrorists with bulldozers, I suggest you think on that image.
"The Rafah operation, named "Root Canal," has been underway for 10 days. It involves large numbers of infantry, armor and engineering troops, backed up by attack helicopters. So far the operation has been only partially successful.Three tunnels have been found and demolished. But there is reason to believe that there are many more tunnels running under the border. The tunnels are not only used to move weapons that end up in the hands of the terror organizations, but also to smuggle in goods and merchandise. There's no disputing the justice of Israel's position that the tunnels are flagrant violations of past security commitments made by the Palestinian Authority to prevent the uncontrolled flow of arms into areas under its control. No less
understandable is Israel's frustration over Egypt's failure to do anything to block the smuggling routes.
But there is nothing in the justification of Israel's position that can sweepingly justify the military activity underway on the ground -
neither its dimensions nor the character of the operation, which appears to be violent and arbitrary. So far, the operation has led to the deaths of two children, aged 8 and 12, and
apparently other innocents, as well. The operation has destroyed the homes of hundreds of people, who unluckily lived along the border and their homes were searched by soldiers looking for the tunnels. In some cases, homes were demolished because tunnels were indeed found under them. But in other cases, it's been reported, multi-storey buildings were toppled for no reason."
"Root Canal". How amusing. Does anyone really think that this sort of bullying exercise serves any purpose at all? No. The problem is that the Sharon-ist mind assumes that the Palestinians will be bullied into submission, and that this can be achieved by the same means as when Sharon was commanding in Gaza in 1970 - bulldozing houses on a variety of quasimilitary pretexts ("fields of fire") as a form of preemptive intimidation. It isn't going to work again. An Irish comedian recently described the War on Terrorism as "like trying to swat a fly in your kitchen with a fridge". If anyone believes that they are really looking for individual terrorists with bulldozers, I suggest you think on that image.
Pakistanis Cross Border With Ease to Join Taliban (washingtonpost.com)
But on the other hand
The next crisis bubbles steadily away. How long before a new disaster? I seem to recall saying that having an entirely vacuous brawl with Iraq would take attention and resources off al-Qa'ida and the stabilisation of Afghanistan, and it looks like I was right.
The next crisis bubbles steadily away. How long before a new disaster? I seem to recall saying that having an entirely vacuous brawl with Iraq would take attention and resources off al-Qa'ida and the stabilisation of Afghanistan, and it looks like I was right.
Bush Says Pact With N. Korea Possible (washingtonpost.com)
Some good-ish news at last
Well, at least an edging back towards sanity. After all, why does North Korea want nuclear missiles? Because of fear. Address the fear and we can address the missiles. Further, recalling George Kennan's long telegram on the USSR mentioned yesterday, an insecure and repressive state needs to find enemies to justify its internal repressiveness. Wind down the military confrontation level, and you can expand detente to wider relations between North and South K. And that will make the "magnetic pull" of the South stronger yet - which will eventually lead to peaceful reunification. Yup, it's the old
Willy Brandt/Egon Bahr line again. Good to see a little professionalism seeping through.
Well, at least an edging back towards sanity. After all, why does North Korea want nuclear missiles? Because of fear. Address the fear and we can address the missiles. Further, recalling George Kennan's long telegram on the USSR mentioned yesterday, an insecure and repressive state needs to find enemies to justify its internal repressiveness. Wind down the military confrontation level, and you can expand detente to wider relations between North and South K. And that will make the "magnetic pull" of the South stronger yet - which will eventually lead to peaceful reunification. Yup, it's the old
Willy Brandt/Egon Bahr line again. Good to see a little professionalism seeping through.
Sunday, October 19, 2003
Spiralling downwards...
What really infuriates me about the Tories at the moment is that they are such an abject cluster fuck that no-one is paying any attention to the poisonous cancer of a government we are afflicted with. So the Highways Agency are planning for the possibility of sections of the motorway network jamming to such a degree that those stuck will have to be supplied there until the traffic can be reversed. So Diddy David Blunkett's new extradition treaty with the USA means that each and every one of us can be rousted and shipped to some undisclosed location on the mere say-so of some pissant small-town Republican bigwig promoted to a real job for his loyal campaign contributions without any evidence being presented to a court whatsoever, whilst the meanest, nastiest excuse for an American citizen may do whatever crime it likes in Britain with impunity as long as they reach home soil, as the Constitution forbids extradition. So Geoff "Iraqi mothers will be grateful for our cluster bombs" Hoon has decided all the armed forces' new equipment projects can be scrapped. Barely any new destroyers (the ones the navy are counting on for their air defence between now and whenever the new carriers and F35s come into service), one armoured brigade to go because Apache helicopters will do everything (so why were they useless in Iraq?), all supposedly for faster, whizzier expeditionary ops - but the network-centric warfare programme is to be shit canned as well. No connection there.
But the political shrapnel hurtling out of the Tory bomb site blocks the view. Everything keeps going catastrophically wrong and each time is worse than the last. When I formed this blog, I considered naming it "The Downward Spiral". But I felt that was overly pessimistic. Clearly, though, pessimism is the wave of the future. Look at this. Go on, look at it. LOOK AT IT!
"an 'undisclosed location' (a place the CIA calls 'Hotel California') - presumably a facility in another co-operative nation, or perhaps a specially designed prison aboard an aircraft carrier"
So that'll be as in "You can check out any time you like - but you can never leave!" Jesus. I will bet good money that this zone of horrors is right on British soil. RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus? Too accessible. The carrier can be ruled out - there are no secrets aboard a ship, however huge. Diego Garcia, most likely. The place we threw the people off so we could kowtow to the Pentagon better. What a fine example of George F. Kennan's argument that the Soviet Union needed external enemies to justify the illegitimacy of its internal terror. We are seeking external enemies to justify external terror to internal opinion, but the principle seems much the same.
But the political shrapnel hurtling out of the Tory bomb site blocks the view. Everything keeps going catastrophically wrong and each time is worse than the last. When I formed this blog, I considered naming it "The Downward Spiral". But I felt that was overly pessimistic. Clearly, though, pessimism is the wave of the future. Look at this. Go on, look at it. LOOK AT IT!
"an 'undisclosed location' (a place the CIA calls 'Hotel California') - presumably a facility in another co-operative nation, or perhaps a specially designed prison aboard an aircraft carrier"
So that'll be as in "You can check out any time you like - but you can never leave!" Jesus. I will bet good money that this zone of horrors is right on British soil. RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus? Too accessible. The carrier can be ruled out - there are no secrets aboard a ship, however huge. Diego Garcia, most likely. The place we threw the people off so we could kowtow to the Pentagon better. What a fine example of George F. Kennan's argument that the Soviet Union needed external enemies to justify the illegitimacy of its internal terror. We are seeking external enemies to justify external terror to internal opinion, but the principle seems much the same.
I don't want to buy your new honest Tories
As the shit storm about Iain Duncan Smith's wife being paid by the state to be his secretary, after the tax payer was already shelling out £121,000 a year for his salary as leader of the Opposition and he had the services of the party machine to answer his phone calls, brews up, a very curious phenomenon has appeared. That is the mysterious appearance of a whole volley of Mrs DS' supposed "friends from the school run" writing oddly similar letters to the press. (We shall, obviously, recall that the Conservatives' main argument in the great debate is that they are utterly free from "promises and spin".) Strangely enough they all seem to include the phrase "Crick thinks answering the phone in an office (with a skinny latte from Starbucks it took you half an hour to collect, in one version) counts as work but taking a call while cooking pasta for 10 doesn't". Now this would be all well and good if it wasn't so vilely hypocritical. Apart from the frantic spinning of the Tory-wife kitsch, we have to put up with the idea that grabbing as much public money as your well-heeled manners will permit is some kind of laudable feminist statement. Balls. BDS, as I suppose we have to call her, does and will never know anything about struggling - she was born rich and has got richer. It's typical of the Conservatives that the Duncan Smiths (TDSs?) found it necessary to grab the extra £18,000, and even more typical of the party of Peter Lilley ("I've got a little list/Of single mothers who get pregnant/just to jump the housing list")
to claim this as a blow against patriarchal injustice.
Equally, it's classically Tory to go on and on and - axewieldingly, acid in the woundly, desperate smackheadly - ON about something called spin which, we are supposed to believe, was invented overnight by Peter Mandelson (gay! Jewish! pro-European!) and Alastair Campbell (weirdly, it already seems odd to type the words) in May, 1997 whereas British politics before that instant had been so many repetitions of Gladstone's Midlothian campaign - whilst dragging out God knows how many utterly obscure women to pen paeans to the Leader's wife as a means of relieving their latest leadership crisis. Spin? Not a jot. Neither was there in the personalised e-mail I got from a conservative friend recently, which started off as if written by human hand but turned out to be a top-and-tail job on a standard Central Office newsletter, complete with the ritual announcement that "the Liberal Democrats are being investigated for false advertising".
Now this is too much. Trading Standards authorities, who the Tories will claim are doing the investigation if you press them, police such legislation as the Sale of Goods Act, the Trades Descriptions Act, Consumer Credit Act, and the Weights and Measures Regulations. I do not see that voting for a political party means engaging in a contract for the supply of goods or services. A contract must involve obligations on both parties and a consideration. Do the Tories really promote paying for votes? It's a myth. It's a lie. It is purest spin.
to claim this as a blow against patriarchal injustice.
Equally, it's classically Tory to go on and on and - axewieldingly, acid in the woundly, desperate smackheadly - ON about something called spin which, we are supposed to believe, was invented overnight by Peter Mandelson (gay! Jewish! pro-European!) and Alastair Campbell (weirdly, it already seems odd to type the words) in May, 1997 whereas British politics before that instant had been so many repetitions of Gladstone's Midlothian campaign - whilst dragging out God knows how many utterly obscure women to pen paeans to the Leader's wife as a means of relieving their latest leadership crisis. Spin? Not a jot. Neither was there in the personalised e-mail I got from a conservative friend recently, which started off as if written by human hand but turned out to be a top-and-tail job on a standard Central Office newsletter, complete with the ritual announcement that "the Liberal Democrats are being investigated for false advertising".
Now this is too much. Trading Standards authorities, who the Tories will claim are doing the investigation if you press them, police such legislation as the Sale of Goods Act, the Trades Descriptions Act, Consumer Credit Act, and the Weights and Measures Regulations. I do not see that voting for a political party means engaging in a contract for the supply of goods or services. A contract must involve obligations on both parties and a consideration. Do the Tories really promote paying for votes? It's a myth. It's a lie. It is purest spin.
Thursday, October 16, 2003
On that Chinese space theme..
So - you don't think this bulletin board posting might be a plant?
"Long live China! Long live the Chinese people! ! Long live the Chinese Communist Party! ! ! Long live the Chinese nation! ! ! !"
"Long live China! Long live the Chinese people! ! Long live the Chinese Communist Party! ! ! Long live the Chinese nation! ! ! !"
He's back safely
BBC NEWS | World | Asia-Pacific | China hails space hero
So - no need for all that secrecy in the end. An amazing thing, even if it does look like a bottle bank..
Yang Liwei keeps up the tradition of astronauts saying very little of interest, though. His first remark from space was "I feel good", which is quite up there with Alan Shepard's "Boy, what a ride!"
So - no need for all that secrecy in the end. An amazing thing, even if it does look like a bottle bank..
Yang Liwei keeps up the tradition of astronauts saying very little of interest, though. His first remark from space was "I feel good", which is quite up there with Alan Shepard's "Boy, what a ride!"
That Jiuquan picture
Has pushed the blog skew whiff. It's being removed until I've edited the swine into a more helpful shape.
Wednesday, October 15, 2003
China Ready for Human Spaceflight
China Ready for Human Spaceflight
And they've done it! I've seen a couple of sour grapes jokes about the mission today. Yeah, yeah, yeah - the ship may well be a copy of the Soyuz, but this is still amazing. Great - we haven't done anything new since 1968 - but we can still carp! Groan! Bitch! Whinge! Fantastic.
And they've done it! I've seen a couple of sour grapes jokes about the mission today. Yeah, yeah, yeah - the ship may well be a copy of the Soyuz, but this is still amazing. Great - we haven't done anything new since 1968 - but we can still carp! Groan! Bitch! Whinge! Fantastic.
Tuesday, October 14, 2003
British Monomarks Ltd.
Clients - British Monomarks Ltd.
Well, this is where the postcode our friend from "England First" gave points to through the Royal Mail postcode finder. What a surprise! It's a mailbox company. But their "clients" page doesn't seem to mention the fascists. Rather shy, wouldn't you say?
Well, this is where the postcode our friend from "England First" gave points to through the Royal Mail postcode finder. What a surprise! It's a mailbox company. But their "clients" page doesn't seem to mention the fascists. Rather shy, wouldn't you say?
Dog taught to make Nazi salute
Link to story
Original Berliner Kurier article
Vienna's Der Standard reports that a Berlin man will appear in court on Thursday charged with "using the characteristic marks of an unconstitutional organisation", an offence under German legislation forbidding neo-Nazi activities, Paragraph 86a of the Federal Criminal Code. The nature of the alleged offence is unusual - he trained a dog to make the Nazi salute on command.
The 54-year old man apparently cried "Sieg heil!" and made the salute himself first before giving the dog the command "Adolf - sitz! Mach den Gruß!" (Sit, Adolf! Make the salute!) at which cue the hound (a German Shepherd cross called "Adolf") raised his right paw to the prescribed (and indeed proscribed) position. The court will first decide whether or not he (the man not the dog) is fit to stand trial, probably a wise precaution given that he put the beast through its paces in the presence of two police officers.
Here's a picture of the dog, unfortunately not doing its party piece -
Original Berliner Kurier article
Vienna's Der Standard reports that a Berlin man will appear in court on Thursday charged with "using the characteristic marks of an unconstitutional organisation", an offence under German legislation forbidding neo-Nazi activities, Paragraph 86a of the Federal Criminal Code. The nature of the alleged offence is unusual - he trained a dog to make the Nazi salute on command.
The 54-year old man apparently cried "Sieg heil!" and made the salute himself first before giving the dog the command "Adolf - sitz! Mach den Gruß!" (Sit, Adolf! Make the salute!) at which cue the hound (a German Shepherd cross called "Adolf") raised his right paw to the prescribed (and indeed proscribed) position. The court will first decide whether or not he (the man not the dog) is fit to stand trial, probably a wise precaution given that he put the beast through its paces in the presence of two police officers.
Here's a picture of the dog, unfortunately not doing its party piece -
Revisiting the Battle for Baghdad (washingtonpost.com)
Thunder Run: Revisiting the Battle for Baghdad (washingtonpost.com)
Very interesting interview with the leader of the first assaults into Baghdad. It was his lot who were visible over the Information Minister's shoulder whilst he was denying they existed.
"in the process, you want to create as much chaos as possible out here. Why is that? In the end, my forces can deal with chaos better than theirs can" Interesting, if rather Sharon-ish.
Very interesting interview with the leader of the first assaults into Baghdad. It was his lot who were visible over the Information Minister's shoulder whilst he was denying they existed.
"in the process, you want to create as much chaos as possible out here. Why is that? In the end, my forces can deal with chaos better than theirs can" Interesting, if rather Sharon-ish.
Monday, October 13, 2003
Something I forgot about IDS
By the way, I noticed this the day after Iain Duncan Smith made his "speech". All those orchestrated jokes about the Liberal Democrats were mysteriously missing from the text given to the Press by the Tories. Did I hallucinate it? Or did the Tories - totally straight and honest and opposed to any of that evil spin! - give a different and slightly less childishly vicious version of the speech to the media than IDS did to the delegates?
Admin: RSS feed
After much trying we finally have an outgoing RSS feed that works. For anyone who wants to syndicate the Ranter, go to that "BlogRSS" graphic on the sidebar. All right?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
