The previous thread “A Lebanese Trigger…” was getting a bit too long, causing loading problems for some. So, here is a general thread for those who wish to continue on the subject of the ongoing Israeli attacks on Lebanese infrastructure, civilians and Hezbollah. These ongoing attacks, apart from those directed at legitimate Hezbollah targets, are by any reasonable objective standard disproportionate, unnecessary, reprehensible and repugnant, precisely because they are killing scores of innocent Lebanese. Some are being killed while fleeing after warnings, but many deaths are the result of the deliberate, wanton destruction of infrastructure. All those innocent civilians had no part to play in Hezbollah’s provocative attacks which kidnapped Israeli soldiers. War crimes have on the face of it been committed by both sides, but with the death rate approaching 400 Lebanese, compared to a total of around 20 Israeli civilian deaths, the geopolitical stakes are getting much higher for the long term consequences of ever finding peace in the Middle East. Escalation to an all out regional war is not beyond the realms of possibility.
We appear to be in unknown territory: the asymmetric warfare we are witnessing is, in my opinion, the new paradigm of non-state/state warfare of the 21 st century, whereby an organisation such as Hezbollah can withstand all the Israelis can throw at it for two weeks, when by comparison the whole Egyptian army was fought to a standstill within seven days in the 1973 Yom Kippur war.
This as a byline does not look good for the statist paradigm existing since the Treaty of Westphalia and notions of sovereignty we have been accustomed to.
We are living in dangerous times.
Continue reading ‘A Lebanese Disaster’
Following LP’s earlier posts on the Lebanese war below, by Shaun and Mark, it appears necessary for a small update and to stitch together some loose ends in the “Great Game” of the Middle East, currently being played out, to predict likely consequences up to the American mid-term elections in November.
Diplomacy to settle the present conflict in Lebanon; ceasefires and messy compromises may possibly begin within a week, but this represents in a way, merely history repeating itself, with the exception of the ferocity and level of damage to Lebanon. Opportunity has knocked. A by-product of the conflict has arrived, and produced a new brighter windfall trigger allowing bigger fish to be fried by both the USA and Israel, namely Iran. Perceived or actual Iranian participation in Hezbollah’s acts, and supply of aid and allegedly missiles to Hezbollah is what I refer to as the “Lebanese trigger” giving another rationale for the end game of Neo-con and Likudnik policy: to erase the perceived Iranian threat once and for all. Like John Howard with double dissolution triggers, the more the better.
There are two main assumptions necessary for the “Lebanese trigger” to unfold.
In a radio interview (18/07/06) with both Robert Fisk and ex CIA analyst Ray McGovern respectively, their commentary on Syria/Israel/Lebanon and the nexus of Neo-cons/Israel/Iran is highly persuasive and confirms my view that the USA will nuke Iran before the mid-term elections, or at the very least use tactical nuclear weapons in response to Iranian counter-attacks (into Iraq) resulting from a conventional bombing attack on Iranian nuclear infrastructure.
Continue reading ‘A Lebanese Trigger: Iran, War and the Neo-Cons.’
Toyota has given us the Prius and Honda the Insight. These are called “hybrid” cars meaning they are electric cars, with batteries and an electric motor, but this propulsion system is married to a conventional gasoline engine which charges up the batteries. The combination of gasoline/electric drive systems gives excellent fuel economy. One way of looking at the economics is that the additional capital cost means you may have to drive one for 10 years or so for the fuel savings to pay for that increased capital cost. That’s the only negative of the deal. 1000 km or so per tankful of go go juice is the positive if one forgets about the higher capital cost.
My question is: Where is the “all electric car”? A 4 seat car with an electric motor and batteries only, with a light fibreglass shell, that we can plug into 240 volt power sources at night for recharging, that will allow a minimum 50 kilometers travelling at 50-60 km/hour in the town/city.
Anything on the market that resembles a vehicle with these parameters is not being made by the big manufacturers, no perceived market perhaps? But good on the Japanese for making a serious start with the hybrid.
In the USA, there is a DIY solution or “ready to go” all electric vehicles.
Continue reading ‘Conservation: Where is the All Electric Car?’
Seeing as there is a lot going on in the history wars right now, I’ve found myself on various threads being sidetracked to the subject war of Vietnam, which also appears to be the subject of revisionism as well, so time for the subject to be elevated to a post, especially also given recent Anzac celebrations, and our troops in Vietnam at the time suffering some 500 deaths.
There were two belligerent parties that sought an agreement at the Geneva Conference in 1954, after the loss by the French of the battle of Dien Ben Phu. Ho Chi Minh’s Viet Minh and the French were the prime parties. France had by international law as occupiers the authority to negotiate and realised then its colonial ambitions in Vietnam were in complete ruins. An honourable way out was sought by the aged old method of peace agreements. A little known person called Diem, later leader of South Vietnam, was not involved with the battle of Dien Ben Phu and was not a legitimate party to the Geneva Accords, obviously never signed it, as he had no standing. Bao Dai, on the other hand was there in his capacity as the puppet creation of France of “The State of Vietnam” He didn’t sign the Accord either, being (as a puppet) essentially represented by France, despite the fact he was given status at the Conference. The French and the North were making peace; the puppets and the latent usurper Diem were not, but the latter was planning doubtlessly to get rid of Bao Dai at the earliest opportunity with a very cunning plan.
Continue reading ‘Vietnam: Revisionist Wars Revisited.’
My great-uncle George Berrie was both a Gallipoli and Middle East veteran, falling sick in the Gallipoli campaign and sent on to England for medical treatment and recuperation. He wrote his book on his experiences “Morale,” as a novel, probably because the memory of losing his best friend, “Snow” was too painful to relate in autobiographical form. He called himself the “Bushman” in the novel, and he was one in every sense, independent, knowledgeable and like so many others prepared to fight and die for “King and Country.”
I met and remembered uncle George in the mid fifties as a child, near Yeppoon Qld, and luckily he did something that enabled me to imprint his face in my mind for all time. With a wicked sense of humour he gave me a small green chili and told me to eat it “They call them chilies because they are cold” he said. Having never seen a chili before, I bit down on it with the inevitable results. Mother was not impressed, but I had uncle George firmly fixed in my mind from then on, and otherwise would probably never have become interested in his life and the two books he wrote.
This short chapter from the book, gives an insight on how the Brits treated our diggers in London, overflowing kindness seems to be a simple way of expressing it.
CHAPTER XI. SEPTEMBER 1915.
The hospital, as such, was undoubtedly a model, but in one respect it resembled a gaol. If you were let out for exercise you were well guarded and carefully returned. When the authorities were satisfied that the Bushman had been there long enough, he walked out a free man for two weeks, subject to certain supervision by military policemen and some unwritten laws. He broke one of the latter before he had been loose an hour, for he went into the swankiest hotel he could see and asked to be shown to the dining room. It had never been considered necessary to put this hotel out of bounds; its tariff and yards of red tabs and gold braid did that automatically. The Bushman in his innocence had butted into a holy of holies of the regular army. He took his time over a huge lunch, and it was nearly three o’clock before he ordered a liqueur and cigar. He felt that after a few more similar feeds he might begin to draw level.
Continue reading ‘Uncle George: An Anzac in London 1915′
There’s nothing more embarrassing than a sore loser. Berlusconi has it in spades and is trying to cling to power like a drowning person grasps at straws. “We have the moral victory because the election was rigged… blah blah.” An election BTW in which his government was in control, and a media which Berlusconi personally controls a large chunk of, but which didn’t report to my knowledge any such gross irregularities.
The BBC reports Berlusconi’s goose is cooked as figures issued by the interior ministry lowering the number of votes being contested from 80,000 to 5,000 cuts the ground right out of any possibility that the result could be reversed.
After such a narrow win Prodi now faces a difficult time holding a fractured group of parties together but that’s democracy and the possibility of a new election within months cannot be ruled out.
Meantime spare a thought for the vertically challenged (but horizontally unchallenged) guy, out on his pat malone, unable for the present at least, to perpetuate a chronic record of faux pas, insults galore and boorishness beyond belief, crying himself to sleep possibly with these words on his lips:
Mumma mia, Porca Romani Prodi…
Postscript: If this La Repubblica article (via the independent.co.uk) is correct, it gives an insight to Berlusconi’s real democratic beliefs.
The Italian interior ministry’s acknowledgement that the number of ballots in question for the lower house of parliament was not near enough to overturn his rival Romano Prodi’s 24,000-vote majority discredited Mr Berlusconi’s claim that he lost to Mr Prodi through “cheating”.
The announcement was made in a statement just hours after La Repubblica newspaper reported that Mr Berlusconi had ordered the interior minister, Giuseppe Pisanu, to annul the election hours after balloting ended but that Mr Pisanu had refused.
There’s something quite disgusting about the latest boat people shenannigans. The Howard government has effectively excised Australia from the mainland, meaning anyone who lands here will be processed offshore and if granted refugee status sent on to a third country. The chances of that third country being us is a moot point, but with this decision, the Geneva Convention on refugees has been thoroughly trashed.
Some are not taking this too well; in the Sydney Morning Herald today:
FURTHER toughening of the immigration laws is an “act of moral abandonment and a decline in Australia’s commitment to human rights”, the head of the Uniting Church says.
The church’s president, Dr Dean Drayton, said yesterday that the changes could be in breach of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. “We are appalled that the Government is willing to take advice from other governments rather than exercise its own moral leadership.
Mark Baker in The Age is likewise not impressed:
The Howard Government’s decision this week to deny resettlement to any more boat people - however desperate their plight and however certain their status as genuine refugees - is as damaging, unprincipled and needless as the nation’s embrace of the old White Australia policy last century.
What appears to be certain is that the old mantra of 2001 has been modified, it’s now:
We and Indonesia will decide who comes to this country and the manner in which they come.
Postscript over the page.
Continue reading ‘We and Indonesia will Decide who Comes…’
Given that the laws on defamation in Australia have been standardised across states, something that has taken 150 years to achieve, and in NSW and all other states in effect on 1 January 2006, one might ask what those new laws change in the old regimes. Defamation is broadly, material including that which tends to lower the person in the estimation of others, or that would tend to result in the person being shunned or avoided or that is likely to expose the person to hatred, contempt or ridicule.
In summary the uniform law changes include:
* “preventing corporations (other than non-for-profit organisations or small businesses) from suing for defamation, addressing current community concerns that large companies could stifle legitimate public debate by beginning defamation action;
* establishing a defence of “truth” to replace the previous defence of “truth and public benefit [the public interest defence]”;
* reducing the time limit for bringing a defamation action from six years to one year (or three years if the court is satisfied an action could not have been brought within one year);
* abolishing the awarding of exemplary and punitive damages in civil defamation proceedings; and
* limiting juries to determining whether a person has been defamed, leaving the awarding of damages to judges.”
An interesting development of libel on the internet has concluded in the UK with a case reported in the Guardian.
Continue reading ‘Defamation and the Internet.’
Zbigniew Brzezinski has written an interesting piece: long but thoughtful, on the present American dilemma. With a sideswipe at
The foreign policy of 9/11: Political triumph and strategic vulnerability,
Brzezinski analyses current American foreign policy and the strategic mistakes creating:
…unprecedented hostility towards American (and especially presidential) credibility. Contributing to the decline of America’s stature were the demagoguery surrounding WMD, the disgrace of…Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, the dangerous over-stretching of U.S. military capabilities, and the concomitant decline in America’s ability to prevent North Korea from acquiring nuclear weapons.
Iraq and the GWOT generally are in effect symptomatic of America’s foreign policy malaise:
In brief, America’s post-9/11 foreign policy is too short range in its focus, overly alarmist in its rhetoric, and has been too costly in its still early consequences. Its overall effect has been to increase America’s national vulnerability while undermining the legitimacy of its international primacy. Even worse, the strategic diagnosis on which it rests does not provide an historically relevant, nationally unifying or internationally legitimatingdefinition of America’s long-term global role.
Brzezinski makes some interesting points in elaborating on an historical factor now repeating itself, being political awakening, firstly with “contagious populist activism” from France’s revolution of 1789 which spread through Europe to the nationalist movements of the late 19th and 20th centuries inclusive of mass movements, Facism, Communism and anti-colonialism in India and elsewhere up to the present time of the 21st century, where much of the developing world now is in a state of “seething unrest.”
Continue reading ‘The Dilemma of the last Sovereign.’
The “mainstream� Anglo-Celtic narrative , the left/right divide and the rhetoric of tolerance.
It can now safely be assumed that many or most former One Nation voters have crossed over to the LNP coalition since One Nation’s demise. It is no coincidence that John Howard’s anti-multiculturalist views mirror that of Pauline Hanson and her supporters. It is sometimes difficult to separate the content of their public announcements from the personalities:
Abolishing the policy of multiculturalism will save billions of dollars and allow those from ethnic backgrounds to join mainstream Australia, paving the way to a strong, united country.�(14)
The last part of this statement could well have been a Howard quote, “mainstreamâ€? being a concept that John Howard has been reiterating for some time. Both viewed Hawke/Keating period immigration as inextricably linked to “pressure group” multiculturalism creating divisiveness. In Howard’s words in 1988 on immigration: “…the intake must be adjusted to the capacity of Australia to accept and absorb change.â€?(15) The word “adjusted” turned out to be ironic in that the very “capacity…to accept” would be directly tied to the legally incorrect,(16) year 2001 election speech by Howard “We will decide who comes to this country and the manner in which they come;â€?(17) and rapidly became an approximate 70% electoral capacity to not accept. Divisiveness from the Tampa incident raises some obvious causation and moral questions on political tactics referred to by some in the Labor party as the “wedge” and “hitting below the belt.” Accusations by Howard that Labor was “soft on border protection” and the later “soft on terrorism” has ruined prior bipartisanship and undoubtedly created considerable bitterness in the Australian polity.
Australia became a sovereign state with racism built into the Constitution. Section 25 of the constitution (until 1998 at least) includes “if…persons of any race are disqualified…â€?(18) which signified the division of powers between the Commonwealth and the States.(19) The inherent acknowledgement then in 1901 of white supremacy and homogeneity, arguably remains strong in the collective consciousness of Australia’s Anglo-Celts today. Jon Stratton states that assimilation and multiculturalism (newly conceived) both held to the same assumption, being: “the fundamental unity of Australian national culture being expressed in homogeneity.â€?(20) I would argue that that assumption was and remains flawed given the cumulative effects of major waves of immigrants in the 20th century post World War II, and along with the usual English, Scots, Welsh and Irish of the nineteenth century, a prior largely unacknowledged wave of Prussian-Germans, many post 1848,(20a) and Italians post 1880, (20b) among many others. We were losing the Anglo-Celtic homogeneity a hundred years before the southern European (post war) exodus ever began. Continue reading ‘Multiculturalism. Has it Failed? (part 2)’
This is a serious look at multiculturalism from a leftist perspective. Gratuitous insults in response to those of the Islamic faith are unwelcome.
For those who may be unfamiliar with the terminology:
Assimilationist: The policy we had before multiculturalism, involving a belief that migrants would automatically become “assimilated” without much assistance.
Melting Pot: An American idea in the early 20th century that the mix of people could convert the Anglo-American culture into a new hybrid.
Cultural Pluralism: The best example is Canada where two major but different cultures of French and English descent people live together in one nation.
Moral Panic: Usually a media instigated tactic to blow up incidents of particular crimes out of all proportion creating a public panic. Obviously this sells more newspapers. (In criminology this is know as deviance amplification.)
“Yellow Peril” Doctrine: The belief after federation that Asian people would descend upon and destroy our nation.
The failures or otherwise of multiculturalism are difficult to quantify as the terminology “multiculturalismâ€? itself is nebulous to the extent that across the political spectrum it attracts such hotly contested and reductionist views (reducing complexity to simplistic slogans for example). I shall define multiculturalism in this post as “the recognition in public policy that a society is composed of various elements, especially those based on language, nationality or religion.â€?(1) When the subject matters of immigration and national identity inevitably converge with multiculturalism, the ongoing John Howard promoted “Anglo-Celtic mainstreamâ€? narrative post 1996, appears to be highly persuasive and arguably pervasive. While the government of John Howard has reduced institutions of multiculturalism, ongoing Labor state/territory governments continue to support it as do communities at a non-institutional level. It is my argument that any “failuresâ€? of multiculturalism overall, are largely functions of immigration politics allied to beliefs on race and/or religion, John Howard’s “Anzac monoculturalismâ€? and media inspired moral panics. Continue reading ‘Multiculturalism: Has it failed? (Part 1)’
Evo Morales gave a speech (extract over the fold) a week ago, so what is really happening in that part of the world? The usual knee jerk reaction of the right is to bring out the “commy” and ”narco” labels, among others, but hey, if a nation elects a lefty government, isn’t that their sovereign right? Or is that such governments only get elected by “cheating” and skulduggery, like the way they run presidential elections in Florida? Now while Cuba is certainly no democracy, the rest of Latin America, to varying degrees, seems determined to democratically soften all those hard edges of neo-liberalism which arguably has structurally entrenched poverty and misery at the bottom of the socio-economic heap.
Now Evo Morales may crash and burn, he may even have some forces of darkness from the north support a coup against him as happened to amigo El Presidente Hugo Chavez in Venuezuala. Les Gringos lost that battle but it threatened their oil supply at the same time as now Bolivia, joins the ranks of those who are re-negotiating the perceived unfair oil deals made under former complaisant Latin American administrations.
Is using oil wealth to lift up the poor so bad? Is selling it preferentially to polite countries like China and India a heinous offence in international law? What will les Gringos reaction be to all of this ultimately?
In answer to perhaps some of these questions, we turn to the man of the moment:
By EVO MORALES
Continue reading ‘Neo-liberalism: Hasta La Vista in Latin America?’
Over at Bob Geiger’s blog in the USA an invitation was issued to Aussies recently to email him opinion on US/Australian relations. (Scroll down to Tuesday December 20th)
When Australians Don’t Like Us, We’ve Got Problems
Here’s the Yellow Dog Blog’s foreign-policy litmus test for America: Are Australians pissed at us? If so, it may be time for some introspective thinking on what the hell we’re doing.
When one thinks of Australia, one thinks of a nation of fun-loving, informed, decent people – always on the bleeding [sic] edge of the Internet and technology – and a country with whom, for the most part, we have enjoyed a long relationship of friendship and trust.
Because of an article today in the Sydney Morning Herald that mentions our humble blog, I have a unique opportunity to ask a question of our Australian friends – that query comes at the end of this piece….
Said Peter Costello, Treasurer of the Commonwealth of Australia, in a speech in August: “It is common in this country, like so many others, to come across anti-American sentiment. It is always there but it rises at times of Australia’s military engagement in coalition with the United States. Most recently Australia’s engagement in Iraq has raised these sentiments.”
Wow. There’s a shocker. A country whose people think we did the wrong thing in Iraq. Don’t you just hate it when these allies think for themselves?
In a poll of almost 22,000 people in 21 countries, conducted between November 2004 and January 2005 by the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) at the University of Maryland, 61 percent of Australians viewed President Bush’s re-election as negative for world peace and security.
Sadly, with a White House more concerned with the daily exercise of covering its butt for the wrong-doing du jour, we should not look for an ounce of the self-reflection required to ask why such a steadfast friend seems a bit disenchanted with our relationship.
But, hey, that’s just me giving an opinion. I’m hoping to use this unique burst of Australian readership to get some real comments from our friends Down Under on how they feel about America right now and why. If you still feel the love for the U.S.A., tell me that too.
In response to that I emailed Bob this reply, extracts of which he may post if my return email meets the deadline:
Continue reading ‘Are we ‘Pissed’ with Uncle Sam?’
For the past two years, the lefty media particularly the ABC and SBS has been more than willing to help broadcast the allegations made by the anti-war crowd that “Bush, Blair and Howard lied, soldiers and civilians died.” However, no matter how many times the likes of the ABC and the lefties have made this allegation, they’ve never been able to make it stick, not even with the lies of that Lancelot report.
The only thing they’ve proven thus far is that they hold to a twisted hatred of America and feel consumed with resentment toward Australia’s economic and political superiority attained solely by the wise leadership of John Howard. All that talk of economic reforms under the Hawk guvernment is merely lefty propaganda BTW.
Is it any wonder then, that some of us do indeed question the patriotism of the anti-war crowd? Don’t they get the message ”If you’re not with us, you are against us?” Don’t they understand that brave Americans and Brits are with us fighting terrists in Iraq?
Continue reading ‘Patriotism and the Iraqi War’
Here: is some more evidence of what US contractors get up to in Iraq.
URGENT
052300Z JAN 2005
FROM: SEC DIRINTEL TAMPA FL US TO: //DERVISH// BAGHDAD IZ
INFO: //SCORPION SEVEN ONE// BAGHDAD IZ SEC OPS TAMPA FL US
C O N F I D E N T I A L PROPIN
COUNTRY: (U) IRAQ (IZ)
SUBJ: (C/PR) REPORT OF DOUBLE HOMICIDE BY PMC PSD TEAM DEC 2004
IR 00 8 004 0105 1500 05
DOI: (C/PR) [050105] SOURCE: (C/PR) //MAKIDJ//
INSTR: (C/PR) PRIORITY INVESTIGATION DIRECTED.
REPORT TO DIRINTEL VIA OPSO //SCORPION SEVEN ONE//
SUMMARY: (C/PR) //MAKIDJ// FORWARDS INFO REPORTING POSSIBLE DOUBLE HOMICIDE OF UNARMED IRAQI TRUCK DRIVERS BY PMC PSD TEAM OPERATING IRAQ EARLY DEC 2004 WEST-BOUND ON AMMAN- BAGHDAD HIGHWAY NEAR JORDANIAN BORDER.
Continue reading ‘Hijinks and Blood on the Road from Ramadi to Jordan.’
Recent comments
Adrien, Ambigulous, Adrien, Liam, Mark, Liam [...]
David Rubie, Paul Burns, Brian, David Irving (no relation), kymbos, kymbos [...]
Adrien, Katz, Paul Burns, Kingsley, Mark, Liam [...]
Paul Burns, David Rubie, Mark, Brian, Paul Burns, Baraholka [...]
equaseks, Peter Wood, Mark, Peter Wood, Peterc, Tim Macknay [...]
Adrien, Legal Eagle, Michael Sutcliffe, Mark, Tyro Rex, Adrien [...]
Ambigulous, dylwah, murph the surf, wizofaus, David Rubie, Mindy [...]
jrbarch, Mindy, Mark, Mark, Leon, Derek [...]
Mindy, Admin!!! HELP!!!, FDB, David Rubie, FDB, David Rubie [...]
Ambigulous, suz, Colin, un ami des beaux arts, adrian, suz [...]
Bilko, Paul Burns, Dave Bath, Bilko, Nabakov, Adrien [...]
RobWindt, Pappinbarra Fox, Ai! Que Dolor!, Patrick B, peter jones, Paul Burns [...]