|
|||||
|
The author of an article I read this morning wonders if the approach of the USS Nimitz Forced Iran’s Decision to release the British hostages. It is an interesting read but I can personally neither confirm nor deny the truth of it. I do not think the regime in Iran is going to have a long life. Between their economic problems and falling birth rates they have serious problems, ones which a theocracy with delusions of grandeur will simply not be able to deal with. April 5th, 2007 | 8 comments - (Comments are closed)
 I think this whole episode proves that – as usual – Noam Chomsky is correct: The West will lie about everything. These marines were not patrolling, they were probably planting WMDs on board Arab vessels on behalf of “Hallel”burton. Mr. Ajehhijihad, Ajamaamadad, Arimenmejood, well, however what’s-his-name’s name is pronounced (we arrogant Westerners rarely take the time to learn the names of foreign dignitaries), is the true Nobel prize candidate here. He treated these ‘sovereignty violators’ with courtesy and decency, even giving what’s-her-name (the non-male, Fay something) her own Islamic scarf … because Her Royal Navy is presumably too racist to supply one. Anyhow, I’m glad this is all over, and that it ended in a way that proves my theory that if you are sufficiently patient and obsequious, the so-called tyrants of the world will see the light of reason, if you give them enough apologies – tkehler on the Guardian’s Commentisfree, responding to the article by Abbas Edalat, the founder of the Campaign Against Sanctions and Military Intervention in Iran. April 5th, 2007 | 19 comments - (Comments are closed)
“CCTV systems are sinister is that they are a constant reminder that trust is a rare social commodity – you cannot trust other passers-by because they may rob you, assault you or be wearing a bomb-shaped rucksack. Norms of altruistic and reciprocal behaviour simply are almost non-existant in big cities like London and New York. CCTV systems are sinister because their existence emphasises the unknown risks around you and thus your own vulnerability”. From the commenter “Mike”, pointing out that CCTV cameras in public streets with loudspeakers attached are not harmless adornments to our towns. April 4th, 2007 | 6 comments - (Comments are closed)
Following the release of the 15 British sailors from Iranian captivity, the Prime Minister Tony Blair has issued the following statement:
April 4th, 2007 | 43 comments - (Comments are closed)
“Stand still, citizen! Facial recognition software has identified you and made a cross-check with the national ‘Good Citizen’ data base.” “You have not denounced anyone for…thirty… days… please remember that community policing is a civic duty and reporting people is easy and fun! Just use your mobile phone and send a text SMS to Whitehall 1212 with the name, address and crime of a school mate, family member or co-worker!” “And remember, if you accumulate ten ‘Good Citizen’ points for denouncing smokers, homophobes, people eating high fat food, anyone making racist jokes in private, people making unauthorised D.I.Y. repairs to ‘their’ houses, anyone using illegal light bulbs, anyone questioning the unanimous and state approved scientific truth about global warming, home schoolers or people who buy banned war toys for ‘their’ children, you will get to appear on the Big Brother reality TV show by having your home’s internal CCTV footage broadcast live for seven days!” </child’s voice>  
From the linked article: “According to recent studies, Britain has 4.2million CCTV cameras – one for every 14 people in the country – which amounts to 20 per cent of the global camera total.” Welcome to modern Britain. April 4th, 2007 | 51 comments - (Comments are closed)
There is a sense of familiarity to all of this. Iran, hostages, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad… Perhaps Mahmoud has reached the point in his life where reality has diverged so far from his youthful dreams that he must resort to the reliving of fond memories. True, there was no easy way to collect a group of American diplomats for real fun, but hey, a bunch of young British sailors? Why not? Let us never forget who this man is and what he represents. Some American diplomats still remember his face from their long ordeal in Iran almost 30 years ago. One problem for Mahmy this time around is the lack of a Jimmy Carter. Jimmy certainly has to be in the running for the worst President the United States has ever had. I do not think Tony Blair, whatever else you may think of him, is an incompetent fool. Neither he nor heir apparent Gordon will deal with this blatant kidnapping in such a way as to damage their political prospects for the next election. Even if they manage to make a total bollocks of this hostage crisis and turn the public against them… David Cameron is no Ronald Reagan. April 4th, 2007 | 19 comments - (Comments are closed)
This story in the Telegraph is no doubt just crazy right-wing paranoia, and we have in fact no need to worry, get annoyed or even become the tiniest bit cheesed off. Oh no. Polly has explained it all for us. To be worried about the surveillance state is a middle-class thing, apparently. All true denizens of a socialist Britain should be proud to carry ID cards and be photographed constantly. If Polly Toynbee did not exist, we would have to invent her. Not even Ian Fleming could cook up a female villain as good as this woman. Henry Porter, meanwhile, has scathing remarks on his fellow Guardian columnist. Good for him. Of course, if CCTVs are installed in privately owned streets, shopping malls or other privately owned buildings, I do not have a problem so long as it is pretty clear that such cameras are installed. But that is not quite the issue. April 4th, 2007 | 25 comments - (Comments are closed)
On the one hand, she could be deliberately downplaying expectations:
But, and on the other hand, I am reluctant to give this woman credit for any degree of calculation that is not immediately connected to the furtherance of her own career. Let’s just say that nobody seems to have any idea as to how long our hijacked naval personnel will have to continue celebrating Iranian culture. That leaves us only with speculation. So, who thinks that the RN personnel will be released: A. Before the end of this month? April 4th, 2007 | 24 comments - (Comments are closed)
After the flight termination a week or two ago, I promised our commentariat I would post information on the problems which caused the second test flight to not reach orbit. A few days ago Elon Musk released this statement:
It turns out that as many of us suspected, there was a feedback between fuel slosh and the control equations:
There was indeed a contact of the first stage with the bell of the stage two motor at stage separation and it was indeed not a big thing:
The vehicle will be launching a satellite on its next flight:
This is all very good news to the new space industry. There is also supposed to be some more good news this month: Bob Bigelow of Bigelow Aerospace, maker of fine inflatable space stations, is supposed to make an important announcement. I suspect it has to do with a next launch date and he may announce he is skipping more intermediate tests or perhaps even an early anchor tenant for an operational station… if we were to speculate even more wildly. All of us in ‘the biz’ will be watching closing. April 3rd, 2007 | 3 comments - (Comments are closed)
They say that the western liberal cosmopolitan establishment is itself a fanatical, depraved belief system. I like it when they say this because it makes me feel as if I have a belief system. – Jon Ronson, in his preface to THEM: Adventures with extremists (2000) For those of us whose beliefs are defined negatively, by our skepticism, by what we do not think institutions are entitled to do to people, then it might sometimes be a comfort to be told this amounts to a system. I think I have a system of procedure, rather than fixed substantive beliefs, however. So I know what Ronson means (and I am developing a comradeship for liberal cosmopolitans of all sorts), I recognise the feeling of affirmation in being marked out as a fanatic by the enemies of civilisation – but I do not like it. The idea that I might have a ‘belief system’ categorically equivalent to that of the conspiracy theorists and theocrats makes me feel queasy. April 3rd, 2007 | 9 comments - (Comments are closed)
I am quite a fan of the fiction and some of the non-fiction of Ayn Rand, but I am the first to concede that some of the people who call themselves Objectivists are an assorted bunch, to put it politely. I have little time for some of the “official” Big-O Objectivists, like Leonard Peikoff, although I enjoy the writings of Tara Smith very much. The group of folk who liked Rand’s broad ideas but detested the narrow-mindedness and paranoia of some of the “official” group broke off, under the leadership of Dr. David Kelley, to form groups like The Objectivist Center. I like the TOC crowd and have corresponded with a few of them. I subscribe to The New Individualist, the monthly journal edited by the great Bob Bidinotto. What is so refreshing about it is that one does not get lots of shrilll lectures or dense philosophical treatises, but an engaging and assertive writing style coupled with an often impish sense of humour and enjoyment of the good things in life. It is a cracking read, in fact. Bob is also addicted to thriller novels, which puts him in the same bracket as me. Okay, enough creeping from me, now for the nasty part. In the April print edition – the web version does not appear to be up yet – there are two articles that struck some decidedly jarring notes. The first, by Roger Donway, argues that basically, the late Milton Friedman was not a good advocate of capitalism and individualism, and in fact he used arguments that play straight into the hands of socialists. (I am not making this up). The second article, by Bidinotto, includes a defence of the use of torture in ’emergency’ situations, although Bob does not define ’emergencies’ very clearly and leaves begging the question about who gets to decide such matters. But I have pretty much argued on this torture issue before and will not repeat myself here. So I will focus instead on what Roger Donway has to say about Friedman. To try to make this point, Donway argues that Friedman’s attack on the idea that firms have “social” responsibilities itself rests on a sort of utilitarian basis. Does it? → Continue reading: Sometimes, even a superb magazine gets it very wrong April 2nd, 2007 | 12 comments - (Comments are closed)
Over the weekend, news got out – thanks to the diligence of journalists at The Times (of London) that UK finance minister Gordon Brown was warned back in 1997 that removal of tax relief on pension funds’ equity dividends would create a massive future problem. It did. More than 5 billion pounds a year have been snatched from corporate pensions as part of Brown’s tax-and-spend binge over the past 10 years. Tens of billiions of pounds have been taken from pension schemes, forcing firms to shut down the final-salary pensions and significantly reduce the likely benefits people will get in retirement. Of course Brown cannot be entirely blamed for this. We live longer, and the fall in the stock market in 2000, and the sharp rise in the cost of bonds, hit pension funds hard. But Brown did a huge amount of damage. His tax raid aggravated the stock market losses, and by forcing firms to steer more money to schemes, hit investment and growth. He has not expressed one whit of regret, and now, exposed as the dogmatic man that he is, Brown’s lickspittles are now lying about the arguments put to them at the time by big business groups such as the CBI. Former CBI Director-General Adair Turner, a decent man, has called the government a bunch of liars. It appears that the CBI and other groups, supposedly charmed by the recent cuts to corporation tax, but also realising that smaller firms got clobbered by the March budget, are furious at the Treasury’s dissembling on the pension tax issue. Brown’s chances of becoming Prime Minister took a palpable hit this weekend. The gloomster may still be in 10 Downing Street by the end of this summer, but at least the British electorate have had another chance to see what a devious and foolish man Brown is. The broader implications of all this should be obvious to regular readers of this site. By undermining private sector pensions and long-terms savings, Brown and his supporters increase reliance on the state, much in the same way as David Lloyd George and others torpedoed the Friendly Societies in the first decade of the 20th Century by his pension and welfare changes. (There is some debate on whether Lloyd George was aware of the effects of his actions). Aneurin Bevan, that over-rated demagogue of the 1940s, deliberately shafted the independent, non-state medical services that had already began to serve Britons, including poor ones, before the Second World War. Wherever one looks, one sees evidence of socialists/so-called liberals acting to wreck patterns of private privision or non-state mutual support. It is shameful, and the consequences for civil society are immense. Just think of how, had the Friendly Societies and the rest been allowed to flourish. We would now have a broad and deep savings culture, enormously strong, and underpinning a culture of self reliance and personal responsibility. And people like Gordon Brown, never performing an hour of honest toil outside the halls of government, destroyed it. April 2nd, 2007 | 7 comments - (Comments are closed)
|
   |
||||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
Recent Comments