Free Speech: President Sarkozy Eats Babies!

                                                                                                                                                                     

It is reasonable for a reader to ask whatever prompted me to compose the eccentric headline above.

Well I am simply exercising my right to free speech, supposedly guaranteed by the United Nations, The European Union, and by all the countries that subscribed to the Helsinki accord.

You could argue that by making such a childish statement (sorry for the pun) I am abusing my right of free speech; of course it was inspired by the nonsense propaganda that circulated in England during the First World War concerning Kaiser Wilhelm II.  Further than this the real prompt was quite another matter.

A friend has sent me a news item from PCinpact.com concerning an appointment at the Elysée Palace - the official residence of the President of the Republic of France.  The appointee is a 24-year-old, Nicolas Princen by name; he was appointed last March.

His function? To monitor blogs, websites etc. for "false rumours and misinformation" concerning le Président de la République.  The Elysée helpfully commented that it is quite normal for the République to monitor such things, as it does with press and radio etc.  Apparently there is no plan for a particular course of action in the event of abusive content: the function of this office is merely to inform...

However the plot thickens.  The French Ministry of Education has issued an invitation to tender for further monitoring, including identifying the themes and assessing the likely impact and many other criteria, including "locating the opinion leaders" and "to alert and make recommendations."

Now on the face of it this doesn't seem so terrible, but having reported British plans connected with the Internet, let us say that I am at least sceptical if not downright suspicious.

So I shall just wait and see if my silly headline causes panic at the Elysée...

And by the way, it's not just the politicians and departments of state: a while back I wrote a piece about the Raytheon drone "Killer Bee." And the very same day, I found that my blog had been visited by someone in the corporate offices of Raytheon itself; my hopes that I had a new loyal supporter in high places were dashed however, as I do not think they have ever come back for another look at all the wonderful stuff I post here.  So disappointing...

Until the next time

Damn' Right!

The subject of Free Speech is one guaranteed to get my blood pressure up into to the red part of the scale - principally because of course despite its being guaranteed by various international treaties and charters and well-meaning bodies it seems not to exist in many parts of the world.

I have written here on this subject a number of times - for example on 1st March and 3rd March this year.

For once something good has happened. Today the BBC reports that the Centre for Social Cohesion, a British organisation has, citing the cases of 27 writers who have been threatened for criticising the Muslim religion, stated that "governments have a duty to ensure free speech for all citizens" (or of course in Great Britain, subjects).

This sort of thing is long overdue: I considered it outrageous that a foreign government could threaten the life of a British subject with seeming impunity. I refer to the case of Salman Rushdie, who was obliged to live in hiding for nine years, all because he wrote a book. And what about this case (from the BBC article):

"And Syrian-born Danish MP Naser Khader, who founded the organisation Democratic Muslims, in the wake of the Prophet Muhammad cartoon row, lives under 24-hour police protection, said the think tank's report. "

Britain needs a new Lord Palmerston: he would have known how to deal with these religious fatheads.

That's right: they make me bloody angry with their insufferable arrogance and barbaric medieval behaviour, all in the name of their god.

Until the next time

US Presidential Update

Image source: here

Those of you who live in England will be familiar with the "Party-Political Broadcast", ten minutes of mind-numbing stuff from the various political parties, that usually appears around nine o'clock in the evening.

Once upon a time, I think it might have been in the 1970s, a Conservative General Election victory was followed up by some party-political broadcasts entitled "Report to the People" which I suppose was intended to demonstrate that all the promises made in the election campaign had been, or were being, met.  Of course this series of broadcasts ceased relatively quickly.

This lengthy introduction relates to the fact that I am determined to be "difficult" about Mr Obama's election as President of the United States.  This is not because I believe that Mr Obama will be a bad president - far from it - but I am determined to do my little bit to stop the nauseating self-congratulation that I have witnessed here in France on television.  The gullibility of the general public beggars belief, but really I should know well enough by now not to be surprised.  Whatever are they expecting from Mr Obama?  Do they imagine that as a true American he does not believe in "America First"?

There was a "special" after the news today on France 2 TV, showing various black - and white - people in tears following the announcement of the election result.  There was one individual in a t-shirt bearing a likeness of Mr Obama, accompanied by a red star!  There was a group of misguided individuals chanting "Af-ri-ca, Af-ri-ca".  They should visit the Congo or Zimbabwe rather than visit that on us... EDIT: or Nigeria for that matter.

Now to the real stuff - realpolitik - the things a real US President does and deals with; forget the touchy-feely nonsense: let's start with the US plan to install a missile defence shield in central Europe.  I quote from this BBC article:

In a statement published on his website on Saturday, Poland's president said Mr Obama had "emphasised the importance of the strategic partnership of Poland and the United States and expressed hope in the continuation of political and military co-operation between our countries."

"He also said that the missile defence project would continue," the statement added.

When asked about the declaration, McDonough said that the US president-elect had had "a good conversation" with Mr Kaczynski about the American-Polish alliance and discussed missile defence, but "made no commitment on it".

"His position is as it was throughout the campaign, that he supports deploying a missile defence system when the technology is proved to be workable," Mr McDonough told the Associated Press. 

This is bullshit: the US has already declared that the system is in no way intended or designed to, shoot down Russian missiles - indeed I recall that the US invited senior Russian military personnel to inspect the facilities etc.  Politics in action No  1.

Here's No 2: concerning Iran.  The International Herald Tribune, one of my favourite sources for news items, is associated with the New York Times and Boston Globe.  These are not right-wing publications and indeed I get the impression that they are more inclined to a Democratic point of view.  In an article published today I read:

Iran's head of parliament on Saturday criticised U.S. President-elect Barack Obama for saying its development of a nuclear weapon would be "unacceptable" and repeated the Islamic state's call for fundamental policy change.

"Obama must know that the change he talks about is a fundamental change and not changing of colours or tactics," Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani said in comments on state radio.

Larijani, echoing Iran's official line, called on Obama to carry out his campaign slogans of U.S. foreign policy change, including change to U.S. dealings with Iran.

"Repeating objections to Iran's nuclear programme will be taking a step in the wrong direction."

Obama, at his first news conference since Tuesday's election, said on Friday an international effort must be made to keep Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, adding that the country's development of a nuclear weapon was "unacceptable."

President-elect Obama is an American, further he is about to become President and Commander-in-Chief of the USA.  As I wrote on 5th November, he is not likely to be a cuddly little pussycat; his achievements to date suggest that he is a tough egg and I see no reason why he should change.  The "touchy-feelies" should take note.

If you have read this far, you might wonder at the purpose of my rather lengthy introduction to this article.  Well, it was just to indicate that I have no intention of publishing regular updates for the next four years!

Until the next time.

Oxford University Acts on Horrid English

A view of part of Oxford University

Image source: here

Wired.com reports today that a group of researchers at Oxford University has compiled a list of "The ten most irritating expressions in the English language."

The list is as follows:

1 - At the end of the day

2 - Fairly unique

3 - I personally

4 - At this moment in time

5 - With all due respect

6 - Absolutely

7 - It's a nightmare

8 - Shouldn't of

9 - 24/7

10 - It's not rocket science

Readers are invited to add their own choices in the comments section.  My contribution to this most satisfying project are as follows:

"Parenting", and even worse "birthing" - one bears children, one does not "birth" them.

"Gifted"(in the verbal sense): pathetic: What's the matter with "given"?

"Having said that" or "that said". Irritating.

"Chair" meaning "chairman"; "actor" meaning "actress"

Finally "innit" as in e.g. "I'm goin' dahn uh pub, innit". Horrible.

More have come to mind since I posted my comment:

"Going forward" e.g. "I should like you to take more responsibility going forward."  Rubbish.

"Negative growth"  Pathetic euphemism.

"To grow one's business"  Stupid.

"Logistics" - meaning transport; grossly affected and pretentious.

There'll probably be more...

Meanwhile how about a comment or two from some of you?  I am sure you have your own pet hates.

Until the next time.

#44...

Is Senator Barack Obama, voted in as President with a very substantial majority.

I think that anyone who is expecting a gentle pussycat is in for a shock; I thought that Mr Obama's victory speech demonstrated a degree of tough determination that of course, a US President should possess. I believe that he will be good for America and notwithstanding his obvious steely qualities, good for the world too.

Credit is due to Senator McCain for his dignified acceptance of defeat; I feel he is a decent man, hamstrung by his inept choice of a vice-presidential candidate (despite his generous and gentlemanly comments after his defeat) and further hamstrung by the eight years preceding his presidential campaign.

I have one gripe: what is all this rubbish about Senator Obama being "America's first black president"? The president-elect is as much white as he is black.

Perhaps that's a good thing?

Until the next time

United States Presidential Election 4th November 2008

I should like to take this opportunity to say "hello" to all my American readers, who far outnumber those I have from other countries.

Thank you for your support and regular visits - some comments would be nice from time to time though - and I hope that you will continue to look in at my various ramblings.

Meanwhile, I wish you all the best for tomorrow and good luck to your preferred candidate! (Tonight I am being strictly neutral).

Until the next time