Thursday, May 31, 2007
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
Sunday, May 27, 2007
BAE Systems were, and still are, the heart of British foreign politics. If Cook's attempt to transplant them and replace them with an ethical dimension was genuine, then he must have underestimated the company's political strength. It didn't matter if the decision on the Hawks was made by Cook or Number Ten, British Aerospace had their way. Three months after toasting the ethical foreign policy, Cook had been publically bitch-slapped by the arms trade."
Its funny how this sits in the light of the current furore over the sale, by BAE to Saudi Arabia- one of the most corrupt, authoritarian and downright inhuman regimes in the world- of several billion pounds worth of advanced fighter jets.
Interestingly BAE's iron grip on UK politics is revealed in an even more sinister light by George Monbiot.
This quote stuck out when he was interviewing one Richard Carrier:
BF: “Let me give you a scenario- you’re dead- I hope of old age. . . . and you find yourself in hell and your being roasted on a pit and every hour, on the hour, you have to suck Satan’s greasy cock, or whatever they make you do there, its really bad. Don’t you wish that you’d have believed? I mean it would have been so easy just to have believed?”
RC: “Well no, because it wouldn’t really be any better. If I had to sit in heaven for ever knowing that there are these people- these millions and millions . . . probably billions of people- suffering these eternal, horrible torments and knowing that there was nothing I could ever do for them. That, for me, would be hell.”
This has never occurred to me before but as a humanist it is inherently inhuman to condone such fates for other humans. Therefore the concept of heaven and hell is profoundly inhuman.
Here's a new quote from the bible for all you Jesus freaks to follow to the letter too:
“Those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them- bring them here and kill them in front of me.”
Luke 19:27AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHahhaHAHAHAHAhAHHAHAhHAHahAHA H ah HAHAhAH ah AH ah AHAHahhahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa . . . . . . cunts.
Thursday, May 17, 2007
"This is an excellent article and I wholly agree with blanket health visits for all new mothers until a degree of maternal competence has been demonstrated. The moral of this story is that mothering is too important to be left to drunken, chain-smoking, soap-obsessed 16 year olds. To make such an observation publically is brave and groundbreaking. The tabboo of ignoring social dysfunction in the hope that rationality and parental love will win over teenage irresponsibility and the lust for booze and independence is naive in the extreme and must be quashed. Additionally, the naivety of targeted support for new mothers is also laid bare and Gordon must surely be reading this thinking "now where can I skim the extra millions from to fund this . . .?".
Other pioneering statements come in the observation that large families are inherently sociopathic and one is driven to endorse Yvonne Robert's tongue-in-cheek suggestion of banning large families wholeheartedly. The enormous opposition that such legislation would face from ethnic minorities and those others from cultural backgrounds that advocate such sociopathy as some sort of demonstration of health or wealth is a mountain that must be climbed for the benefit those of us with more pragmatic and humanitarian visions for the United Kingdom.
The essence of this article is a balancing of the rights of an unborn child against those of its mother. One of them has to take precedence.
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
LGF Watch has more on shite MEMRI translations . . .
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
"In Australia, John Howard, another active Christian, has spent years pooh-poohing climate change warnings only to find his country facing the most serious drought in its history. His solution? "Pray for rain.""
Monday, May 14, 2007
Big, fucking surprise.
Some chap called Avi Shlaim agrees.
"Blair has the audacity to say that God will be his judge over the Iraq war. This is a curious attitude for a democratic politician to adopt. History will surely pass a harsh judgment on Blair. He has the worst record on the Middle East of any British prime minister in the past century, infinitely worse than that of Anthony Eden, who at least had the decency to accept responsibility for the Suez debacle."
Saturday, May 12, 2007
Wednesday, May 09, 2007
On a similar subject, a passage from the first link really made my blood boil:
"research from professors John Curtice and Pippa Norris shows that those with the least political knowledge are far more likely to vote under proportional systems, up from 38% in first-past-the post systems to 54%."
I would like to know why it is a good thing for those with the least political knowledge to vote? Why should we be bothered that the Sun readers of the country do not vote? Does no-one comprehend the danger of letting people vote who don't vote rationally? This is a recipe for the sort of reactionary politics that runs much of the US system and look where its got them. I'm not saying that people should be prohibited from voting, quite the opposite- I believe strongly that democracy requires every single person to register their political stance be it Monster Raving Loony, BNP (cnuts) or a simple abstention. The obligation to vote would require that people take an interest and would encourage engagement with the political system.
Tuesday, May 08, 2007
The Israeli government must be fuming! Ha!
Monday, May 07, 2007
I know it sounds utterly absurd but this is a viewpoint espoused by the 2nd most powerful character in the state of texas.
Digby will tell you more.
"Everyone in the country should be very concerned about any group that lies for our own good, whether it's politicians in Washington lying about an unnecessary war, anti-choice activists who make up statistics to advance their cause or religious folks who claim they just want "all theories" taught in science class. It's all part of the same thing. They know they will not prevail if they tell the truth. That is fundamentally undemocratic --- and unamerican."
Add to that last bit "inhuman".
Sunday, May 06, 2007
when will the absurdity of the formula, more roads = less congestion finally be perceived by government?
These links might elucidate the matter further.
In response to the comments I would like to rephrase a sentence above. It should read: "Can anyone ever imagine the government allocating £5.1bn to spend directly on the rail network and rolling stock instead of penalty payments to the regulator, director's bonuses and marketing campaigns?
Saturday, May 05, 2007
There is hope, yet.
Friday, May 04, 2007
Britain doesn't have an empire any more!
Blair doesn't realise this. Maybe someone should tell him.
Oh well then.
Wednesday, May 02, 2007
The way I see it, this demonstrates misgovernment on an enormous scale. How can you neglect to plan for the long-term security of your country's energy supply? The opportunities offered by development of renewable technology, the urgent need to reduce carbon emissions and the significant returns on offer for those who develop such technology have been made clear to government time after time. The continued failure to take the difficult decision to move away from conventional generation- for whatever reason, be it economic, strategic or environmental- has been passed from one administration to another. I am fully aware of the enormous cost involved in constructing such generation capacity but there is no excuse for avoiding it because it was too difficult or too expensive when this government is pissing money into an illegal war, illegal weapons of mass destruction, a near-mediaeval education system and a struggling NHS that haemorrages money like a cash-cow impaled upon the spear of New Labour's arrogance.